Janet Phelan

How to win in court: Judge hearing case also representing both sides

Papers leaked to this reporter in a secret conservatorship matter reveal that a judge pro tem appointed to hear a San Bernardino county conservatorship case was a member of the same law firm which also represented both the conservator and the conservatee.

Walter Moore, an attorney with Hartnell, Lister and Moore (HLM), was appointed by sitting probate judge James Michael Welch on March 16, 2012 to hear the conservatorship of Charles Castle.

Mr. Moore recently joined the firm of Brown, White and Newhouse. He responded to a telephone query as to the date he left HLM and joined Brown, White and Newhouse by hanging up on this reporter.

In a brazen violation of ethics, attorney Bryan Hartnell represented both the conservator Melodie Scott (http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/02/13/the-probate-murders-part-two/) and also the conservatee, Mr. Castle. In September, after Hartnell's conflict of interest was reported (http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/another-mental-health-kidnapping-in-san.html), Hartnell stepped down from the case and Judge Welch appointed Redlands attorney Mark Flory.

But the judicial hanky- panky did not start or stop with the appointment of a HLM attorney to hear a HLM case. On October 7, 2011, Judge Welch also appointed Redlands attorney J. David Horspool to hear the case as a judge pro tem. There is some concern that Horspool, a former partner of Hartnell’s, may also have represented one of the parties in this matter, however. The file leaked to this reporter also contained a letter from attorney Flory to attorney Horspool, dated October 16, 2012, in which Flory wrote: “It is my understanding from you that you represent Melodie Scott as Conservator of Charles Castle.”

Documentation on the Castle case is considered secret and is not open to public oversight, due to the fact that Charles Castle is under a mental health conservatorship and therefore all information about his case is protected by federal law under HIPPA. After Castle filed a writ of habeas corpus in late August with the help of some local activists, conservator Melodie Scott attempted to block him from all contact with the outside world, directing the locked facility in which she had placed him, Braswell's Desert Manor, to refuse him phone calls and visits. The right to phone calls and visits for psychiatric detainees is assured by both federal and state law. The California Department of Public Health subsequently cited Desert Manor for this violation and Castle was then permitted to make phone calls.

Castle's writ of habeas corpus alleges that he was subject to inadequate representation by counsel and cites the conflict of interest wherein Bryan Hartnell represented both sides of the case. The writ also alleged that the conservatorship is now void due to the court’s failure to conform to legal requirements. Mental health conservatorships must be reviewed and renewed annually and Castle maintains he was never served with notice of such a rehearing.

Charles Castle has been locked up for a year and a half and is currently being incarcerated in Community Convalescent Care in Yucaipa, California. Castle alleges he has never been brought in front of a judge throughout the longevity of this matter.

Under California law, a decision must be tendered on a writ of habeas corpus within sixty days. At the time of going to press, over seventy-five days have elapsed and Charles Castle, who has been shuffled from facility to facility four times by conservator Melodie Scott since the filing of his writ, states he has not received a reply from the court.

Serious concerns have been raised about civil rights violations and theft of assets by conservators for the elderly and disabled. A number of grassroots groups, such as elderabuseexposed.com in California and www.guardianshipreform.org/ in Texas, have sprung up to address the growing perception that conservators are abusing and stealing from their wards.

Judge Welch will be retiring from the bench on November 21. A local attorney, speaking on conditions of anonymity, stated that Welch is attempting to escape the “taint” relating to his actions as probate judge in San Bernardino County. A farewell party for Welch will be held on November 27 at Redlands Country Club, hosted by the San Bernardino County Bar Association.

Is Another Murder Now Taking Place in San Bernardino County?

Actually, in the doublespeak of conservatorship lingo, the conservator doesn’t actually “kill” or “murder” the conservatee.  What she does is make an “end of life decision” for her ward.

Such a decision may involve the disallowal of medicine for a ward who is ill with a treatable disease. When Elizabeth Fairbanks fell ill with pneumonia, conservator Melodie Scott (http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/02/13/the-probate-murders-part-two/) made an “end of life decision” and ordered the withholding of antibiotics and, just to give that little extra push into the grave, okayed that the elderly woman be dosed with morphine. Morphine retards respiration and may, in fact, stop breathing.

Helpless and without legal standing to intervene, Fairbanks’ children watched in horror as their mother struggled to breathe, then stopped breathing forever.

Fairbanks’ last breath was drawn at a Braswell’s facility.  The Braswell’s homes (http://www.braswellshealth.com/) are scattered throughout San Bernardino County and many of Melodie Scott’s wards have drawn their final breath at one of Braswell’s facilities.

After her attempt to anonymously admit conservatee Charlie Castle

(http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/another-mental-health-kidnapping-in-san.html) into San Gabriel Valley Medical Center was derailed (his whereabouts were discovered and a line of contact with him was established, thereby overriding the anonymity of the admit), Melodie Scott appears to have made one of those “special” decisions about where Charlie’s ride would end and on August 5 she admitted him into Braswell’s Desert Manor in Yucca Valley.

Immediately, the first step in the “Isolate-Medicate-Euthanize” protocol was invoked. Charlie’s legal right to make and receive phone calls, guaranteed under C.F.R. 483.10 (k) and California Welfare and Institutions Code 5325 (d), was terminated “on the order of the conservator,” according to Megan at Braswell’s.  In a case such as Charlie Castle’s, these phone calls may constitute a life-line.