Informed consumers can be a powerful antidote to bad news about advisors who do wrong by their clients.
Timeline in the Glenn A. Neasham case. Here is a link to the full article.
Feb. 1, 2008 – Fran Schuber, then 83, and her boyfriend, Louis Jochim, make an unsolicited visit to Neasham Insurance Agency in Lakeport, Calif. Jochim tells producer Glenn A. Neasham that Schuber has a CD maturing that month and wanted to talk about an annuity similar to the Allianz indexed annuity that he had. Neasham takes information and gives the couple material on the Allianz MasterDex 10.
Feb. 4 – Neasham spends an hour and a half on his presentation and the application. In addition to considering what to do with $239,000 from a CD, they looked at Schuber’s entire financial picture. They decided to leave $100,000 in CDs and bank accounts, allowing for a monthly income, and to purchase a $175,000 MasterDex 10. In a questionnaire, Schuber says she was in good health and Neasham does not observe signs of dementia.
Feb. 5 – Neasham calls Schuber’s son Ted to discuss Fran Schuber’s annuity and her choice of Jochim as beneficiary and Jochim’s daughter as contingent. The next day, Ted Schuber meets with Neasham about the annuity. Ted Schuber would later say in court that they spoke that summer, but Neasham said he has it in his meeting planner and the point of the discussion was Fran Schuber’s choice of beneficiary.
Feb. 13 – During policy delivery, Neasham has Schuber and Jochim sign letter verifying Schuber’s choice of Jochim as beneficiary.
March – Lake County District Attorney’s Elder Abuse unit gets case after a notice from the bank that holds CD indicating the bank manager’s concern about Jochim’s possible undue influence over Schuber.
April 1 – Lake County District Attorney investigator interviews Schuber and Jochim. Schuber says she is happy with the investment but investigator notices signs of dementia. The session is audiotaped but prosecutors would not reveal the existence of the tape for three and a half years, just before closing arguments in Neasham’s trial.
May – District attorney’s office refers case to California Department of Insurance.
Dec. 3 – Department of Insurance investigator interviews Schuber and Jochim.
September 2009 – Neasham has annual review with Schuber. Neasham nor his assistant notice any signs of dementia.
Dec. 8, 2010 – A criminal complaint was filed against Neasham and he was arrested Dec. 14. Neasham is charged with theft from an elder, a felony, and two special allegations, one of which stipulates that the theft exceeded $100,000.
March 2011 – During a three-day preliminary hearing In March 2011, Deputy District Attorney Rachel Abelson said she had records showing that doctors had diagnosed Schuber with “Alzheimer's-type dementia” in 2003. Superior Court Judge Richard Martin allows charges but says the prosecution met the standard by the “thinnest of lines.”
Oct. 21, 2011 – Jury finds Neasham guilty of the theft but not the two special allegations. During the trial, Neasham’s lawyer argues that there was never a theft and that Schuber still had the annuity, which had gained more than $40,000 in annuitization value, and she had not taken a penalty-free, 10 percent annual withdrawal.
Feb. 29, 2012 – Judge Martin rejects Neasham’s request for a new trial and sentences him to the 300 days in jail, which he reduced to 60 days. Neasham plans to appeal to a higher court. If a new trial is granted, Neasham says he will not be able to afford his lawyer and will need a public defender, which he qualifies for, along with food stamps.
March 20, 2012 – Judge grants Neasham $20,000 bail, allowing him to stay out of jail pending appeal. Neasham posts bond.
Oct. 8, 2013 -- California First District Appellate Court, Division Three, files decision to reverse the conviction.