Ugly Judge

Elinor Frerichs


Elinor Frerichs is held at Lakeside Park in Oakland, CA

Elinor Frerichs’ civil rights are in danger. Elder advocates addressed the September 9, 2014 meeting of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. The Board called for an investigation. See video.

Conservator Scott Phipps petitioned Alameda County Probate Court to strip Elinor of her right to have contact with family and friends. Elinor (age 91) could spend her remaining years isolated in a locked facility. No visitors, no phone calls, and no mail.

•Phipps and prior conservators kept Elinor isolated for two years.
•Phipps placed Elinor in a locked dementia facility, Lakeside Park in Oakland, although Elinor was not diagnosed with dementia.
•Phipps annulled Elinor’s marriage, although Elinor stated she loves her husband and wanted to remain married to him.
•Phipps voided Elinor’s will, although psychologists determined that Elinor had capacity to execute her 2012 will.
•On September 12, 2014, Phipps will ask the court to permanently take away Elinor’s right to visitation, phone calls, and mail.

Elinor has a right to ask the judge to replace Phipps as her conservator. She has the right to ask the judge to end the conservatorship. But Elinor can only secure those rights if Phipps allows her to attend her court hearing on September 12. The Supervisors expressed their concern about Elinor’s rights being denied.

On September 9, after the Supervisors meeting, advocates went to visit Elinor and tell her that her case was being investigated. Elinor was no longer at Lakeside Park, the facility designated in her court file. It appears that Phipps moved Elinor without court permission to prevent advocates contacting her.

•Elinor’s location is unknown.
•Elinor’s condition is unknown.
•Phipps’ intentions are unknown.
Readers may contact Scott Phipps to express their concerns for Elinor’s safety and Phipps’ violations of Elinor’s rights.
scottphipps.phisco@gmail.com

Readers may contact the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to express their concerns about unbridled elder abuse and flagrant violation of rights within their jurisdiction.
District 1: Scott.Haggerty@acgov.org
District 2: Richard.Valle@acgov.org
District 3: Wilma.Chan@acgov.org
District 4: district4@acgov.org
District 5: Keith.carson@acgov.org

Source
Note: Conservator Scott Phipps denied Elinor her right to attend her September 12, 2014 court hearing. By keeping Elinor confined and isolated on the day of her hearing, Phipps denied Elinor her right to ask the judge to have Phipps replaced as conservator. Phipps denied Elinor her right to ask the judge to end the conservatorship.

The court did not have the benefit of Elinor’s wishes at a hearing to determine Elinor’s future. As a result of Phipps violating Elinor’s right to attend that crucial hearing, Elinor may spend the remainder of her years isolated in a locked dementia facility.

On May 16, 2018, Elinor Frerichs turned 95 years old. Human rights advocates gathered at Oakland assisted living facility Lakeside Park to celebrate Elinor’s life.

Elinor was not allowed to join the celebration.  Elinor’s husband was not allowed to join the celebration.  County Supervisor Nate Miley was invited, but he did not attend.

Advocates were not allowed to enter Elinor’s facility.  A private security guard stood at the Lakeside Park front entrance.  Two uniformed Oakland Police Department officers were stationed nearby, observing the facility entrance during the four-hour gathering.

When an advocate inadvertently stepped past the white line at the curb, police sirens wailed.  Officers’ quickly ordered the advocate away from the facility.

One visitor approached the private security guard at the facility entrance.  She asked the guard to accept Elinor’s birthday cake and carry the cake inside for Elinor.  The guard refused.

The security guard allowed the visitor to approach the facility entrance and call through the locked front door for a staff person to accept Elinor’s birthday cake.  A heated discussion ensued. Facility staff refused to unlock the front door, and they refused to accept Elinor’s birthday cake.  Staff instructed the visitor to leave Elinor’s cake outside.

Another visitor, Laura Holmes of Point Richmond, brought a pair of gaily decorated slippers as a birthday gift for Elinor.  The birthday gift received the same response as the birthday cake.  Staff refused to unlock the front door.  Staff refused to accept Elinor’s birthday gift.  Staff instructed Laura to leave the slippers outside the facility entrance.

Dr. Nancy Hoffman Objected to Elinor’s African-American Husband

Advocates Tanya Dennis and Venus Gist explained that Elinor (a wealthy white woman) was placed under conservatorship six weeks after she married her African American friend and neighbor, Kennett Taylor.  The conservator isolates Elinor from the outside world.  Oakland Police Department turn a blind eye to the conservator’s crimes.

The conservatorship was initiated when psychologist Dr. Nancy Hoffman (License Number 20516) took exception to Elinor marrying an African American man.  Dr. Hoffman stated in her report:

I am very concerned about [Elinor’s] physical safety and I do feel that [Kennett] or his friends are capable of hurting her.  I do not believe he would respect a restraining order and I think she needs to be moved out of her current home and into a safe location where he is not able to have any access to her at all.

[Kennett] is very tall and imposing and she would be no match for him in any kind of physical encounter. 

She needs to be protected by a conservator for person and for her estate and moved to a location where [Kennett] cannot have any access to her.  It is my professional opinion that [Elinor] will be in danger if [Kennett] is allowed access to her once her realizes he is not able to take full control over her considerable estate.  It is my great hope that the court will act quickly to ensure her safety by removing her from her home and putting her in a location where [Kennett] cannot find her.

The court followed Dr. Hoffman’s recommendations.  In 2012, the court placed Elinor under conservatorship.  Within months, ELinor was  removed from her home and hidden from her husband in an assisted living facility.

When Elinor tried to escape her first placement, she was diagnosed with dementia and moved to Lakeside Park, a locked dementia facility.  The front door is locked at all times.  No one gets in or out of the facility unless staff release the locks on the door.

Conservator Scott Phipps Isolates Elinor

The court appointed Licensed Professional Fiduciary Scott Phipps (License Number 11) as conservator over Elinor.  Phipps appeared to completely disregard the Notice of Conservatee’s Rights, which is required to be filed by all conservators.

Phipps annulled Elinor’s marriage to Kennett.  Phipps revoked Elinor’s will in favor of Kennett.  Phipps obtained a permanent restraining order preventing Kennett approaching within 300 feet of Lakeside Park.

The Probate Code specifies that conservatees have a right to visitors and phone calls.  Probate Code 2351(a) states:

This control shall not extend to personal rights retained by the conservatee, including, but not limited to, the right to receive visitors, telephone calls, and personal mail, unless specifically limited by court order.

To “legitimize” his imprisonment and isolation of Elinor, Phipps petitioned the court for an order “limiting” Elinor’s right to visitation and phone calls.  Phipps’ petition, signed under penalty of perjury, informed the court that Phipps violated Elinor’s rights in many ways.

On September 12, 2014, Judge Sandra Bean received Phipps’ petition establishing that Phipps allowed Elinor fewer privileges that a convicted felon.  With no due process and no regard for equal protection of the laws, Judge Sandra Bean stripped Elinor of her right to visitors and phone calls.  Judge Bean essentially granted Phipps ownership of another human being.

Apathy from Oakland Police Department

Following Elinor’s birthday party, advocates approached Oakland Police Department officers assigned to prevent advocates requesting visitation with Elinor.  Officer D. Rodgers (Badge Number 9559) and Officer D. Fulmore (Badge Number 9575) were willing to engage in conversation.

Advocates told the officers they wished to file a crime report based on Phipps’ imprisonment and isolation of Elinor.  The officers refused to take a report.  Just as Oakland Police Department refused to take a report in 2016.  And just as Oakland Police Department refused to take a report in 2014.

The officers explained:

It’s tricky.  It’s really tricky.  Penal Code 368 has elements.  You have to be able to prove there is neglect or abuse.

Penal Code 368(c) states:

Any person who … willfully causes or permits any elder or dependent adult to suffer, or inflicts thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering … is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Advocates explained that Phipps’ keeping Elinor imprisoned and isolated causes Elinor to suffer.  Phipps actions cause Elinor unjustifiable mental suffering.  The officers were unconcerned.
Advocates offered to provide the officers with documents showing that Phipps committed elder abuse and violated court orders.  The officers would not make arrangements to accept the evidentiary documents.
After extended cajoling, the officers agreed to enter the Lakeside Park and conduct a welfare check on Elinor.  When the officers returned, they reported that Elinor was not present.  Phipps moved Elinor to an undisclosed location.
Advocate Laura Holmes was adamant that a welfare check requires officers to actually see the person in question, to speak with her and observe her condition.  The officers said they did not have time.  They were going off shift.

Throughout California, law enforcement routinely disregards crimes against elderly and disabled victims.  When families seek help for abused loved ones, officers often refuse to help.  A standard law enforcement response is:
That’s a civil matter.
In some cases, law enforcement response is particularly offensive.
We don’t have time for this.  We have real crime to take care of.

Oakland Police Department:  Ignored Elder Abuse by Conservator Scott Phipps

In 2012, Kennett Taylor reported crimes perpetrated against his wife, Elinor Frerichs.  (Conservatorship of Elinor Frerichs, Case Number RP12615698).  Oakland Police Department gave the standard response.

That’s a civil matter.  You’ll have to get an attorney.

In 2014, human rights advocates reported that Elinor was imprisoned and isolated since 2012.  Advocates reported that Licensed Professional Fiduciary (professional conservator) Scott Phipps used Elinor’s own assets to perpetrate abuse.  Oakland Police Department’s Officer Vierra refused to take a report.

In 2016, advocates reported that Elinor was still imprisoned and isolated.  Advocates reported that Phipps continued to use Elinor’s assets to perpetrate abuse.  Oakland Police Department again refused to take a report.  But for the first time, an officer conducted a welfare check on Elinor.

The officer spoke with Cheryl Martin, Executive Director of Lakeside Park, the locked dementia facility where Elinor is imprisoned.  Martin told the officer that Elinor was out of the facility at a salon having her hair done.  The officer left without seeing Elinor.  The officer ignored that Lakeside Park has a salon on site.  The officer ignored reports that Elinor was denied visitors and phone calls since 2012.

After escalating demands from human rights advocates, Oakland Police Department assigned Officer Ken Bui to discuss Elinor’s situation.  Officer Bui did not open a criminal investigation.  He would not disclose who he interviewed or what he discovered.  Advocates asked Officer Bui:

Can you put me in touch with anyone who has actually had contact with Elinor?

Officer Bui replied:

That is personal information that I am unable to share.

Advocates asked Officer Bui:

What is the appropriate avenue for advocates to establish contact with Elinor and assure ourselves of her welfare?

Officer Bui replied:

Contact Lakeside Park assisted living facility.

Following Officer Bui’s instructions, advocates contacted Lakeside Park.  The Executive Director responded:

As you are well aware, a court has granted to Mr. Phipps (the conservator for Ms. Frerichs) the sole authority to determine who may and who may not visit or call Ms. Frerichs.   … If you wish to arrange a visit with Ms. Frerichs, you will need to obtain permission from Mr. Phipps.   Please do not attempt to visit Mr. Frerichs without such permission.

 In the future, I will not respond to your emails. Your communication is with Mr. Phipps.

Sincerely,
Cheryl Martin

In 2018, Elinor remains imprisoned and isolated at Lakeside Park.  In six years, Phipps and a cadre of attorneys depleted Elinor’s estate from around six million dollars to a few hundred thousand dollars.  There is little hope of Elinor regaining her freedom until her entire estate is depleted.  When the money is gone, Phipps and his attorneys will have no further interest in Elinor.

SB 1191:  Seeks to Educate Law Enforcement on Elder Abuse

Legislative analysis for California Senate Bill 1191 conveyed a typical scenario when a family reports abuse of a vulnerable loved one.

Law enforcement officials typically lack policy on how to handle cases of the most common forms of elder and/or dependent adult abuse, which are isolation and/or false imprisonment, that are currently taking place throughout California. When families, friends, associates, and/or advocates report abuse of elders and/or dependent adults, law enforcement often incorrectly responds that the abuse is a civil matter. Law enforcement’s frequently response is “Sorry ma’am, this is a civil matter. You will have to hire an attorney and go to court.”

SB 1191 analysis defined a root cause of law enforcement agencies ignoring laws on elder abuse.

This issue arises as a result of the frequent outsourcing of the task of writing officer policy manuals to private organizations such as Lexipol, LLC; that are contracted by law enforcement to draft training policies and manuals. Often these private organizations omit the above mentioned California Penal Codes entirely from law enforcement training and policy manuals; these omissions undermine the legislature’s intent.  (Emphasis added)

SB 1191 could finally provide protection of the laws for elderly and disabled victims of crime.

Senate Bill 1191 mandates that all law enforcement training and policy manuals include references to California Penal Codes 368 and 368.5 in order to help ensure that law enforcement jurisdictions enforce existing elder abuse laws. This would allow officers to better identify instances of elder abuse as crimes.

False Imprisonment:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

SB 1191 would require law enforcement policies to inform officers that false imprisonment is a crime.

That any person who commits the false imprisonment of an elder or a dependent adult by the use of violence, menace, fraud, or deceit is punishable by imprisonment for two, three, or four years pursuant to Penal Code section 368, subdivision (f)…  (Emphasis added)

In legal terms, isolation is an act to prevent an elder or dependent adult receiving visitors or phone calls.  Isolation includes false imprisonment.  Penal Code 236 defines false imprisonment.

False imprisonment is the unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another.  (Emphasis added)

In September 2014, Community Care Licensing required Lakeside Park to allow visitors for three days.  Elinor emphatically stated her desire to leave Lakeside Park.

Yes, that’s kidnapping, you realize that’s against the law and they got by with it.
I don’t want to sit there and rot there just looking at four walls, I want to go home and live there…
And I will get out of this damn place eventually.
Get me out of this booby trap.

Phipps stated:

[Elinor’s] not leaving the facility.

Phipps submitted a petition to the court, signed under penalty of perjury, that contained fraud and deceit.

The conservatorship was established to protect [Elinor] from acts of financial abuse and neglect by Kennett Taylor.  The abuse spanned several years prior to the conservatorship and culminated in the marriage of [Elinor] to Kennett in December 2012.

Documents show that Elinor was a victim of elder abuse perpetrated by the Caucasian Robert Wolfe, not by Kennett Taylor who is African American.

Phipps’ perjury was fraud upon the court in that it influenced Judge Sandra Bean to deny Elinor due process of law and to strip Elinor of her right to visitation.  Elinor’s court appointed attorney (Scott Jordan) and guardian ad litem (James Treggiari of Legal Assistance for Seniors) failed to inform the court of Phipps’ fraud and deceit.  Rather, Jordan and Treggiari supported Phipps’ perjury.  Treggiari submitted a declaration in favor of Phipps.

In 2014:

  • Officer Vierra was present when Elinor spoke of being kidnapped.
  • He did not take a report.

In 2016:

  • Officer Bui had access to documents establishing Phipps’ fraud and deceit in his false imprisonment of Elinor.
  • He did not open a criminal investigation.

Isolation Abuse:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

SB 1191 would require law enforcement policies to incorporate California’s Department of Justice (DOJ) definition of abuse.  That DOJ policy informs officers that isolation and other acts that cause mental suffering are forms of abuse.   The legislative analysis stated:

The Department of Justice’s definition of elder and dependent adult abuse: “Physical abuse, neglect, financial abuse, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering; or the deprivation by a care custodian of goods or services that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental suffering.”  (Emphasis added)

Phipps’ 2014 petition filed with the court described numerous probate code violations and abusive acts that Phipps perpetrated upon Elinor.  Phipps signed his petition under penalty of perjury.

The Probate Code requires that conservators must disclose the address of the conservatee to the court and to the conservatee’s relatives.   Phipps wrote in his petition:
[Phipps], upon appointment in September 2013 as Successor Conservator, moved [Elinor] to an undisclosed location for [Elinor’s] continued safety and protection.

The Notice of Conservatee’s Rights and Probate Code 2351(a) state that a conservatee has a right to visitation.  Phipps wrote in his petition:

Shortly thereafter, various people began attempting to visit [Elinor] at [Lakeside Park] facility.  On June 16, 2012, Sheila Hope, who is known to be associated with Kennett Taylor, called [Lakeside Park] facility and demanded to speak to [Elinor].  [Phipps] returned her call, denied her access…

On June 1, 2014, two men, Tye Roberts and Marke Robert Taylor, entered [Lakeside Park] facility and attempted to visit the conservatee.  [Lakeside Park] staff denied the visitors’ access to [Elinor].

Due to Kennett’s intention to vacate the Restraining Order and terminate the conservatorship, [Phipps’] attorney advised [Phipps] to error on the side of caution and deny access to [Elinor] by those individuals known to be associated with Kennett.

On September 3, 2014, Community Care Licensing required Lakeside Park to allow Elinor to have visitors.  Lakeside Park could have lost their license to operate if they continue to violate Elinor’s rights as a resident.  Human rights advocates audio recorded the visit and commissioned a transcript of the recording.  Elinor stated:

[W]hen they took me, my civil rights, my civil rights when they took me from court to the first locked up facility for two weeks, then they took me to San Pablo for 8 months then they transferred me here…
I was isolated and that’s not fair to me.
I’ve been isolated for two years. Oh I’m so glad that you finally got to talk to me.
I want to see you [Kennett].

In 2014:

  • Officer Vierra was present when Elinor spoke of being imprisoned and isolated by Phipps.
  • Officer Vierra heard Elinor speak of wishing to have visitors.
  • He did not take a report.

In 2016:

  • Officer Bui had knowledge that Phipps continued to imprison and isolate Elinor, causing her mental suffering.
  • He did not open a criminal investigation.

Dental Care:  Denied by Conservator Scott Phipps

SB 1191 would require law enforcement policies to incorporate Penal Code 368(c), which prohibits physical and mental abuse.

That any person who knows that a person is an elder or dependent adult and who willfully causes or permit any elder or dependent adult to suffer, or inflicts unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A second or subsequent violation of this subdivision is punishable by a fine not to exceed $2,000 or imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or both that fine and imprisonment pursuant to Penal Code section 368, subdivision (c). (Emphasis added)

During Elinor’s September 2014 visit with Kennett, Elinor stated:

[Phipps] wouldn’t get me a dentist when I had a toothache … 4 days with me with a toothache, and I wasn’t sleeping at night … there is money that, my god there is all kinds of money, I mean and people do need to have their teeth taken care of, and he didn’t call the dentist.

In 2014:

  • Officer Vierra was present when Elinor spoke of Phipps denying dental care and causing Elinor unjustifiable physical pain.
  • Officer Vierra did not take a report.

Violation of Right to Marry:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

The Notice of Conservatee’s rights states that a conservatee has the right to marry.  Elinor and Kennett married before Elinor was placed under conservatorship.  They both stated they wished to remain married.

Phipps wrote in his September 12, 2014 petition to the court:
[Phipps] immediately retained the firm of Aaron, Reichart, Caropol & Riffle to commence a nullity [marriage annulment] proceeding on behalf of [Elinor]. … The Alameda County Superior Court (Case# AF13696962) granted the Judgement of Nullity on March 24, 2014.

During their September 3, 2014 visit, Elinor expressed her wish to remain married to Kennett.  Elinor stated:

I did not want an annulment, I mean [Phipps] can do, [Phipps] can sign [Phipps] name he went to court, I didn’t go to court, I didn’t get to tell the judge I don’t want [Phipps], [Phipps is] not on my side…
And I didn’t want an annulment…
Yeah, and we are married and they annulled it and I didn’t want an annulment.
Yeah, because you are so romantic, that’s what I like about you.
And we get along better than any man I’ve ever been around, so we are good even though you’re younger.
Better than anybody I’ve ever had taken care of me and I’m happier with you than I’ve ever been with any man. Really and truly I’m telling the truth, yeah that’s I way I feel about you.
I’m still wearing, I’m wearing two wedding rings, there is yours and there is my husband’s before that died. See I’ve got two of them.

In 2014:

  • Officer Vierra was present when Elinor stated that she opposed Phipps annulling her marriage.
  • Officer Vierra had knowledge that Phipps’ annulment of Elinor’s marriage caused Elinor mental suffering.
  • He did not take a report.

In 2016:

  • Officer Bui had knowledge that Phipps annulled Elinor’s marriage against her wishes.
  • He did not open a criminal investigation.

Violation of Right to Address the Court:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

The Notice of Conservatee’s Rights states the conservatee has the right to address the court.  Conservatees have the right to ask the judge to terminate the conservatorship or to remove the conservator.  Phipps denied Elinor’s right to attend crucial hearings on her rights.  Phipps denied Elinor’s right to obtain legal counsel to represent her interested in court.

On September 3, 2014, Elinor spoke to Phipps about not wanting him to be her conservator.   Elinor stated:

You are a bastard if I ever met one. Somehow, I’m going to get rid of you somehow.
I said illegal or legal doesn’t make any difference.
Elinor spoke to Kennett about wanting to go to court and speak to the judge.  Elinor stated:
A bastard. … That’s what [Phipps] is. I tell the truth you know other people are afraid to say it, I am not.
I didn’t go to court, I didn’t get to tell the judge I don’t want [Phipps], [Phipps is] not on my side…
So, therefore I want to tell the judge that, [Phipps] is not on my side…
I want to go to court.
I told [Phipps] that and [Phipps] kind of ignored me, I said I want to go to court.
But anyway, what you’re doing is the correct thing because we need attorneys to go to the new judge and you know get this settled, because this is ridiculous, I’m not going to sit there and rot and die in that damn room.
Yes, and I do want to replace [Phipps].

During Elinor’s September 5, 2014 visit with human rights advocates Dr. Robert Fettgather and Linda Kincaid, Elinor asked for help retaining a lawyer to oppose Phipps and to have him removed from being her conservator.

In 2014:

  • Officer Vierra was present when Elinor stated that she opposed Phipps as her conservator.
  • Officer Vierra was present when Elinor stated that she wished to address the court.
  • He did not take a report.

In 2016:

  • Officer Bui had knowledge that Phipps denied Elinor her right to address the court.
  • He did not open a criminal investigation.

Denial of Due Process:  By Judge Sandra Bean

On September 12, 2014, Phipps brought a petition to strip Elinor of her right to visitation.  Phipps falsely alleged that Kennett Taylor perpetrated abuse against Elinor.  Phipps denied Elinor her right to attend the court hearing.  Phipps denied Elinor her right to retain legal counsel.  Phipps used Elinor’s own funds to commit perjury and to perpetrate fraud upon the court.

Judge Sandra Bean gave the following order.
[Elinor’s] personal right to receive visitors is limited.
[Phipps] is authorized to prohibit visitations as follows:

All visitors must seek pre-approval from [Phipps] 72 hours in advance of the visitation.  [Phipps] has the right to allow the visitation, decline the visitation, or allow a supervised visitation…

In 2014:

  • Judge Bean denied Elinor due process of law.
  • Judge Bean denied Elinor equal protection of the laws.
  • With no evidence and no testimony, Judge Bean stripped Elinor of her right to associate with individuals of her choice.

Financial Abuse:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

Phipps’ February 2017 declaration itemizes Phipps’ billings from September 16, 2014 through August 31, 2016.

9/16/2014   0:24   Emails from visitor requests, relies and fwd to attorneys
9/16/2014   0:12   Fwd list of not approved visitors to Lakeside Park
9/17/2014   0:12   Rcd email request for visit & call from another stranger, request denied
10/1/2014   0:12   Email from / to Kincaid Fettgather noting prev denial to visit, seeking visitation again
10/2/2014   0:12   Email from Kennett Taylor demanding to see Elinor, request denied due to new court order
10/6/2014   0:18   Emails from 3 people associated with Kennett Taylor requesting visits – denied
10/9/2014   0:12   Email to/from and Elder Advocates associate requesting visit with Elinor
3/10/2016   0:06   Call from atty re Linda Kincaid & poss [restraining order] against her to stop emails & web info re Elinor

Exhibit 1 to Phipps’ declaration contains entries of over one hundred requests for visits with Elinor.  To our knowledge, Phipps denied the first few requests.  Then he ignored all subsequent requests.

Phipps charged Elinor’s estate $125/hour for each email or phone call asking to visit Elinor.  At one point, Phipps charged Elinor’s estate to consult with attorneys about a restraining order to prevent human to requests for contact with Elinor.

In 2018:

  • Advocates are bypassing Oakland Police Department.
  • Advocates are submitting evidence directly to the Alameda County District Attorney.

Violation of Court Order:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

When Judge Bean stripped Elinor of her right to visitation, Judge Bean gave Phipps the accompanying order.

If [Phipps] declines the visitation, he must inform [Elinor’s] attorney and guardian ad litem of the circumstances.

Attorney Scott Jordan was Elinor’s court appointed attorney from 2012 forward.  In December 2017, Jordan submitted a petition for fees to be paid from Elinor’s estate.  Jordan’s billing contained only one entry related to requests for visitation with Elinor.

5/28/2015   2.5   Review email from Linda Kincaid, review Kincaid website

Jordan billed $250/hour.  Elinor’s estate paid Jordan $625 to read an email and review a website.

According to Jordan’s billing, Phipps only once informed Jordan that Phipps declined a visitation request.  That single contact took place after Phipps denied visitation for many months.  Those documents show that Phipps violated Judge Bean’s order to inform Elinor’s attorney when he declined a visit.

In 2018:

  • Advocates are bypassing Oakland Police Department.
  • Advocates are submitting evidence directly to the Alameda County District Attorney.

Additional Financial Abuse:  Perpetrated by Conservator Scott Phipps

Phipps used Elinor’s estate to fund over $15,000 in legal costs to annul Elinor’s marriage, revoke Elinor’s will that named Kennett as her beneficiary, and create a trust that established Phipps as trustee of Elinor’s remaining assets.  Future articles will address Phipps’ depletion of Elinor’s estate to fund the vendetta against Kennett.

NEWS STORIES REGARDING CONSERVATORSHIP ELINOR FRERICHS

Conservator Scott Phipps Denied 95th Birthday Party for Elder Abuse Victim

Oakland Police Department Ignores Conservator’s Crimes

“Civil Death” of Elinor Frerichs

VIDEOS REGARDING CONSERVATORSHIP ELINOR FRERICHS

Elinor Frerichs: Allowed One Hour Visit in Seven Years

Alameda County Board of Supervisors 6/5/2018

Ruth Nedderman – Interview by Tanya Dennis 4/15/2018

Elder Abuse by Conservator Scott Phipps in Oakland, CA

Exit mobile version
Skip to toolbar