Yall are not going to even believe this poop. This really, actually happened in a court of law in the United States. But again, it was in Mississippi, and even better yet, in Judge Whitwell’s court room where you might as well throw the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure out the window, because they ain’t no good his courtroom.
It is obvious that Dr. Perkins lied on the stand on May 9, 2023 when he testified that not only did he examine SR for testamentary capacity but he had testamentary capacity. When a witness lies on the stand it is called perjury, and when induced to lie by counsel, then counsel is guilty of suborning testimony.
- Not only did SR just happen to say at his examination by Dr. Perkins for a conservatorship that he wanted to change his will, Dr. Perkins then examined him for testamentary capacity, and concluded he had testamentary capacity. By the way, not part of the agreed agenda of the examination.
- Not only did Dr. Perkins conclude SR had testamentary capacity, but he forgot to mention it in his report.
- Just by chance in Dr. Perkins’ report, Dr. Perkins qualified his opinion that SR needed a conservator, but he needed an independent one.
- Just by chance the Mississippi GAP act states that it does not rely on the opinion of an independent medical examiner to determine who shall be conservator. The code does have a section dedicated for ‘who shall be conservator’ but nowhere states that the judge shall rely on either of the IME’s opinion.
- Just so happens, Swayze was dead set on me not be the conservator. That would have spelled big trouble for Swayze and the malpractice he has committed against my father.
- Just so happens after reading the highly irregular qualification that the conservator should be independent, that I tried to depose Dr. Perkins to find out how he came to the highly unusual for an IME conclusion that SR needed an ‘independent’ conservator.
- Just so happens that Dr. Perkins was a court appointed “Rule 35” witness. This means I am entitled to depose him. Here is Rule 35.
- Just so happens that Dr. Perkins evaded every attempt of my communication with him. Seems to me that Perkins per the court order is ‘independent’ and he should contact me just as easily as he would contact Swayze. Seems Swayze is only person that can have communication with the court appointed independent medical examiner. Since I was actually trying to contact Dr. Perkins by various means, one would think he would have responded to me, but he didn’t. I am stating that Dr. Perkins by his own actions negated his independence. Wonder if that is why he just happened to qualify his opinion to satisfy Swayze. If that is why he signed the report 10 days after he actually did the procedures. Seems every medical opinion I have read, the Dr signed off on it that day or the next. Wonder if Swayze read the an original report and asked Dr. Perkins to add the ‘independent’ qualifier to the opinion, then Dr. Perkins agreed, and that is why it took 10 days to ‘finalize’ report as Dr. Perkins testified to.
- Just happens, although I was entitled to depose Dr. Perkins per Rule 35, and I tried very hard, that I never was able to depose him. One would think that Swayze gave Dr. Perkins strict instructions not to talk to me because Swayze did not want me to depose him.
- The section of MS Code that gives credence to the Judge allowing SR to execute a new will can only be exercised after a conservatorship has been put in place. Strange that Swayze will file that motion before there is even conservatorship in place, or even a hearing set. Seems that he could not wait to an extra week to wait on the conservatorship to be enacted. For that matter, Swayze did not even know for sure there would be conservatorship established when he filed the motion to execute a will, or did he?
- Just so happens, that Swayze set the hearing to hear the motion to execute a will on the same day the Judge was to hear a motion to appoint a conservator. Also, strange that there really wasn’t a hearing as prescribed by MS Code, the Judge just ordered a conservatorship without hearing the motion. Guess the Judge did not want me to argue against the conservatorship as I had a right to do. It might have fouled up Swayze’s change the will plan.
- Seems like what caused Swayze to be all a sudden anxious to get the will changed, was that just a few days before, he found out that I filed a bar complaint against him.
- Even weirder is that Dr. Perkins showed up for the hearing unannounced and just happened to examine SR for testamentary capacity moments before court commenced and found that once again SR had testamentary capacity.
- Even weirder that Swayze does not mention Perkins in his motion. I would conclude that if Swayze was aware Dr Perkins examined SR for testamentary capacity then he would stated in his motion that SR had testamentary capacity because Dr. Perkins examined him for it and found that he had testamentary capacity.
- Its really weird that not only did Dr. Perkins examine SR for TC and found that he he did have TC and forgot to mention in his report, but that Swayze was to file a motion that stated SR had testementary capacity, and did not even now Dr. Perkins had examined him for that. Good thing for Swayze that just by chnace Dr. Perkins did examine SR for testamentary capacity on January 17th. Good thing Swayze learned of this happenchance in the short time between the filing of the motion and the hearing of the motion. Especially since Dr. Perkins will not return one mode of communication with me. Good thing Dr. Perkins was free that day to drive 3 hours to Oxford on short notice. Good thing Swayze was able to pay the $4,000 up front fee Dr. Perkins requires to do any ‘expert’ work. Hold on, should have been more then $4,000 since Perkins had to drive 6 hours both ways. I know this because the minimum charge for Dr. Perkins to do ‘expert’ work is $4,000 and that does not inlclude travel. Even more lucky for Swayze, that after having Dr Perkins drive up 3 hours from Jackson at a cost of least $4,000, is that the conservatorship was granted, and that SR had testementary capacity during Dr. Perkins pre-hearing exam. What would have happened if the consevatorship was not granted, or if SR did not pass his testementary capacity exam. That would have been a waste of $4,000. Oh yeah, one more lucky wierd thing, that is SR had already had an attorney prepare a new will before the motion was even ruled on. What is the probability of all that coming together for Swayze? I bet its one in a one hundred million probibility. On May 9th 2023, Swayze Alford was the luckiest man in the United States. Swayze bet $4,000 on a 1 in 100,000,000 long shot and it came through. I bet that has NEVER happened in the whole history of the world.
- Dr. Perkins stated this in testimony on page 16:26. I conclude that Dr. Perkins meant SR would not have testamentary capacity if “[his] reasoning [was] outside of reality.”
Just prior to me cross examining my father, my father stated he wanted to ch00ange his will because I stole money from him (transcript 38:14 – 39:10). Swayze knows this is not true, and knows my father is mentally incapacitated. Also Swayze knows, that he can only profit if my father believes I stole money from him, wants to sue me and change his will. Swayze knows my father has lost his concept of reality and does not have testamentary capacity. Swayze knows that I just filed a bar complaint against him, and according to Swayze ‘will end [his] law practice’. I believe Swayze is doing this to be vindictive against me. Pure evil and spite.
Then when I cross-examined my father a few moments later, I asked my father to explain more about how I stole his money. His response was far from reality, but what Evelyn and Swayze have convinced my father happened. If that is not sick, deviant, narcissistic, and psychopathic behavior, then I don’t know what is. You may read his testimony here (42:3-48:24). I will summarize it. My father believes that he alone was given the proceeds of the house sale, and that he alone deposited the funds in his individual Batesville Regions account. That 6 weeks before he absconded with the $230k, he had revoked my POA. He believes he told Regions to not let anybody but take any money out. He believes I then went to the Regions branch in Batesville and ‘stole his money.’
This is why he is suing me. A lie that Evelyn and Swayze have convinced him, so Swayze can sue me.
Reality is that we both were at the house closing. The attorney gave me the check, that was made out to us jointly. Together we drove to the Regions branch on Jackson Avenue in Oxford. We both endorsed the check, and deposited into our joint account. Evelyn would convince my father that I was stealing money from him, and that he needed withdraw the money from the joint account before I stole any more. A few days later (May 19th) he would go to the Regions branch in Batesville and withdraw $230,000 from our joint account and deposit into a newly opened money market account. Then on May 20th, the next day, Evelyn would drive him to an attorney to revoke my POA, not six weeks earlier, as Evelyn and Swayze let him believe.
I could have crossed examined my father for 40 hours, and he would have given non-stop testimony that proves he does not have a concept of reality. He does not even have ‘luicid intervals’ of reality. For example on June 22, 2023 my father wanted me to get him a $190 money card from Walgreens (with my money) so he could give it to someone that was driving up from Jackson to give him 8 million dollars (2nd Admissions ¶23-25). I have a hundred of these anecdotes. In the last 5 years SR has not one ‘lucid interval’ where he had a concept of reality well enough to classified as having testamentary capacity.
I proved beyond a reasonable doubt that on the day of the hearing my father did not have a concept of reality or testamentary capacity. I will state for the record that Dr. Perkins did not examine my father for testamentary capacity on the January 17, 2023 or on the morning of May 9, 2023 a few minutes before the hearing, as he testified under oath that he did. I will state for the record that Dr. Perkins knowingly lied under oath when he stated my father had testamentary capacity on those 2 days. I really hope Dr. Perkins sues me for defamation of character, but I know he will not, because Dr. Perkins knows he lied too.
- Would you believe Dr. Perkins refused to be deposed again? Wonder why he does not want me to depose him? Maybe I will force him to admit he lied under oath. This time I tried to cooperate with Dr. Perkins again, but he did speak to Swayze that he had received a subpoena. Swayze has just as much or more to lose then Dr. Perkins, if I depose him, so Swayze sent me this email showing his displeasure with my attempt at deposing Perkins.
- Moments later Swayze engages Hale Freeland (read the last email that was accidently sent to me) to pretend to be Perkins’ attorney and Hale agrees to squash the subpoena just as a favor to Swayze and without a scintilla of facts of what was going. He stated he was going to quash it without even seeing it, or speaking to Dr. Perkins. Like he had some sort of superpower to quash subpoenas in a single bound.
- Hale sent a weird, incoherent emails to me in attempt to scare me. It did not work, and I thought Hale was quite the goofball after reading the email. Then he wanted $4,000 up front for me to depose Dr. Perkins. I doubted if Dr. Perkins charged Swayze $4,000 for a short notice, early morning appearance in Oxford. If Dr. Perkins was really independent, then I should get the same terms as Swayze.
When I agreed to Dr. Perkins to examine my father for the conservatorship, I agreed that he would be a court appointed, independent medical examiner that was going to determine if my father could manage his own affairs. The Judge signed off on the same agreement that I signed. Although, Dr. Perkins found that my father could not manage his own affairs and needed a conservator, he concluded SR had the capacity to responsibly change his will. - Now this even gets weirder. At the hearing to quash, Dr. Perkins was called a court appointed independent medical examiner whose sole purpose was to examine SR for his ability to manage his own affairs. Perkins was also named a defendant so Hale could legitimately be there. Then the Judge Ruled that Dr. Perkins mysteriously changed from a Rule 35 witness to a Rule 26 witness in the middle of the prior night. That means the Judge was voiding his earlier order that made Dr. Perkins a Rule 35 ‘independent court appointed’ and rule he was now a Rule 26 witness, which means he is Swayze’s expert, and I have to go thru Swayze to depose him.
This causes a huge problem or CF. A problem that clearly shows Judge Whitwell is too incompetent to be allowed to run a court room. First, Swayze had to disclose the testimony of Perkins prior to the hearing to execute a will, but he did not. Dr. Perkins had to be available to be deposed. Swayze violated both of those. The catastrophic SNAFU is that the GAP Act says there has to be two independent medical exams for there to a conservatorship. The law is explicitly clear and unambiguous that there has to be two. No if ands or buts about it. Now, we only have one. Now, we no longer have a legal conservatorship, if it was ever legal to start with. The order allowing SR to execute a will is no longer valid either. Now, due to his own decisions and malpractice Dr. Perkins has absolutely no reason to be a party to this case.
I have never heard of bigger CF caused by a Judge in the history of US Jurisprudence
Leave a Reply