Courtship Goes to Court

Flanked by dozens of supporters, 92-year-old Charles Barnes, facing jail for eloping with his 84-year-old sweetheart, stepped from court Monday and vowed, “Love will prevail.”

Barnes, who eloped with Constance Driscoll in September after a self-described nine-year romance, faces up to five days in jail and fines totaling more than $45,000 if he is found in violation of the court order barring anyone from moving Driscoll from the Northern California residential-care home where she had lived for the past year.

Barnes’ plight drew a squad of elderly boosters to Los Angeles County Superior Court in Glendale.

“I’m supporting their rights to be together,” said Neoma Squire, 83, a friend of the couple’s from church in Glendale. “They don’t have long to live, so they should be left alone and allowed to be together.”

The sentiments were echoed by the man who performed the marriage ceremony, Senior Pastor Jack Dabner of United Community Church in Glendale.

“I performed that ceremony because they love each other.” Dabner said. “The court assumes a person under a conservator doesn’t have a right to marry without permission of a conservator.

“But that’s just not true. They may be older, but they can still be in love.”

Driscoll, who has not appeared in court because of conservators’ orders requiring her to stay at home and under professional care, is now living at a residential-care facility in Pasadena.

Dabner said he attempted to visit Driscoll but was rebuffed by the home’s administrators.

While attorneys for both Barnes and conservators of Driscoll and her roughly $800,000 estate met with a judge for nearly 30 minutes in chambers, supporters of Barnes stretched into the aisles of the court.

“Connie has short-term memory loss, but so do I,” said Rachelle Ford, a friend of the couple who visited Driscoll at the Pasadena home two weeks ago. Driscoll, according to friends and lawyers, suffers from Alzheimer’s disease.

“When I asked her who she was, she said, ‘Mrs. Charles Barnes,’ ” Ford said. “She knows who he is; she knew who she married. She loves him. They’ve been lovers for nine years. This court thing is ridiculous.”

Others packed into the courtroom echoed Ford.

“She just wants to be with her husband. Let her,” said John Jones, 70. “They’re in love.”

Administrators at Driscoll’s Pasadena home said they could not let anyone speak with Driscoll without permission of the conservators, who have denied such permission to Driscoll’s long-time former caregiver and Barnes’ current caregiver as well as members of the press.

While attorneys working for Driscoll’s conservators said they want to protect their client’s money, Barnes said he is independently wealthy and is not after money.

“I love her,” he said, noting that he is worth nearly $1 million and merely wants to “be with Connie, not her money.”

Jarrett Anderson, a private attorney for the conservators of Driscoll, said he was trying “to protect my client’s privacy, to make sure her best interests are provided for and to preserve her dignity.” He declined further comment.

Driscoll had lived in a residential care home in Chico, abut 70 miles north of Sacramento, until Barnes brought her back south to her hometown of Glendale for the September nuptials. After the wedding, Barnes checked Driscoll into a new residential-care home in Glendale. Conservators, when interviewed last month, argued that Driscoll was not to be moved without their consent. Attorneys for the conservators are seeking fees from Barnes of roughly $46,000 to make up for the attorneys’ and conservators’ legal costs that they allege Barnes’ actions caused.

Barnes’ attorney said the fines are too steep, and inappropriate, and that the court order at issue prohibits conservators, not Barnes, from moving Driscoll without cause. Attorneys would not comment on a possible settlement.

“We asked that Judge [Charles W.] Stoll recuse himself based on his prior disclosures of a personal relationship with Charles Whitesell, the court-appointed attorney for the conservators of Connie Driscoll,” said Linda Paquette, Barnes’ attorney.

Stoll withdrew Monday, and explained his decision by noting the case would have been tied up in court for “months” if the request for recusal motion proceeded, forcing a judge from another county to decide on the issue, “causing more delays.”

Stoll sent the case to Superior Court Judge Charles C. Lee, who scheduled a hearing Dec. 11.