Dear Representative/Senator Bill Sutton and Tom Holland,

I am writing to you as a constituent in Baldwin City regarding an urgent and deeply personal matter involving Kansas’s Slayer Statute, K.S.A. 59‑513, and its 2023 amendment commonly referred to as Karen’s Law.

Recently, I just learned of a tragedy in which their brother killed their mother. At the time of her death, he was listed as the beneficiary on certain non‑probate assets, including her investment account and her vehicle. Under K.S.A. 59‑513(a), he is barred from inheriting due to his actions. However, in reviewing the statute and its amendments, I discovered a significant gap that has profound implications not only for her family, but for any Kansas family affected by homicide involving a beneficiary.

Kansas law currently prevents the killer from inheriting, but it does not prevent the killer’s heirs from inheriting in his place. 

This means that if a spouse murders their partner, and that spouse is the named beneficiary on the victim’s assets, the murderer’s children—or other blood relatives—may legally step into their parent’s place and inherit the victim’s property. In such a scenario, the victim’s own children could be entirely disinherited, while the killer’s bloodline receives the assets.

This outcome is not only morally troubling, but it contradicts the clear intent of the Slayer Statute: to prevent a person who kills another from benefiting from their death. Allowing the killer’s heirs to inherit indirectly still results in the killer’s family line receiving the victim’s assets, which is fundamentally unjust.

I respectfully request that the Legislature consider an amendment to K.S.A. 59‑513 to close this loophole. Specifically, I ask that you explore statutory language that:

1. Bars the killer’s heirs from inheriting any asset or interest that the killer would have received, whether by will, intestate succession, beneficiary designation, joint tenancy, trust, or any other mechanism;

2. Ensures that the victim’s heirs or designated beneficiaries retain priority, preventing the killer’s bloodline from receiving assets solely due to the killer’s prior beneficiary status;

3. Clarifies that the disqualification applies to both probate and non‑probate transfers, including accounts, vehicles, insurance, and other beneficiary‑driven assets.

This amendment would align Kansas law with the moral intent of the Slayer Statute and protect families from secondary harm after already experiencing unimaginable loss.

Thank you for your time, your service, and your consideration of this important matter.

Sincerely,

Concerned Citizen