I wish to make this statement and point as clear as possible. On May 9, 2023 Dr. Frank Perkins committed perjury. On the same day Swayze Alford suborned that testimony. I will stand behind that statement.
On or about April 17th, Swayze Alford received notice of a bar complaint I had filed. It was justified. Swayze had violated a court order that caused my father to lose $60k and gave $500k of money to my father’s sitter. He did this on purpose. Swayze Alford refused to not comply with discovery procedures because to produce specific evidence I requested as it would lead to revealing a felony committed by Evelyn Stevens (sitter), and to that he violated a court order that lost my $60k and put $500k in the hands of the sitter. The reason the court order was put in place by my insistence was to prevent this from happening. I did get the money secured, after much hard work. A half a million dollar loss was avoided by my diligence to fight Swayze after forcing him to produce evidence that he was withholding, evidence of felony. I believe any attorney that would consciously do this should be disbarred.
On April 21st Swayze filed a motion for my father to execute a will. My father has completely lost concept of reality and is suffering from severe Alzheimer’s. His sitter, and Swayze control his life. My father does not have testamentary capacity and has not had a moment of testamentary capacity in 3 years. For the MS code used in the motion to execute allow my father to execute a will, he has to be in a conservatorship. He was not. It would be unusual to file a motion to execute a will before the conservatorship was in place, but he did. I contend Swayze did this out vindication for the bar complaint.
Also, it should be noted that in the motion, Swayze relied on his own expert opinion that my father has testamentary capacity. Swayze Alford does not have that expertise, nor he is independent as to be able to attest to my father’s testamentary capacity. I believe Swayze knew that was problem, but he could not control himself, and filed that motion as quickly as possible. He knew he needed a real expert, but worry about that later.
Swayze has the motion set to heard May 9th, the day a motion to put my father in a conservatorship was to be heard. Swayze was assuming the motion for a conservatorship would be granted, that I would not be appointed conservator, and that the Judge would allow his word to be expert testimony so that my Father be allowed to execute a new will. Highly unusual Swayze would make this move at this time. I will state, Swayze Alford made this risky, premature move as vindication for me filing the bar complaint.
On May 9th, Dr. Perkins makes an unannounced appearance at the hearing and is called to testify as to my father’s testementary capacity. At the time Dr. Perkins was a Rule 35 witness, a court appointed independent medical examiner appointed to determine if my father needed a conservatorship. There was no mention in Swayze’s motion that Dr. Perkins had examined my Father for testamentary capacity.
Per Rule 35 the examiner is to make all his findings known to all parties. Dr. Perkins did not state in his report that he examined my father for testamentary capacity, nor did he express an opinion on the matter. Why would he, as it was not part of the court order?
In the hearing of the motion to execute a will, Swayze called Dr. Perkins. Dr. Perkins stated he did examine my father for testamentary capacity on January 17th, and found that he did have testamentary capacity. We have to assume he just forgot to write that down as the AMA and Rule 35 require. Dr. Perkins stated that he examined my father just prior to the hearing, and found again he had testamentary capacity. No written report. No description of procedure. Where he examined him, I do not know. I am guessing that Dr. Perkins had to have left Jackson by 5am, else Swayze got him a hotel room.
It is a three hour drive from Jackson to Oxford. The hearing was at 9:30. I could never get Dr. Perkins to respond to any communication I attempted. When Dr. Perkins would not cooperate with a deposition, which I was entitled to. I gave Dr. Perkins all the advanced notice he wanted for a deposition, but cited work load as a reason to avoid the deposition. I was told I had to pay $4,000 in advance for a deposition in Madison where he is located. Not only that, Dr. Perkins refused to communicate with me at all. Swayze was able to Dr. Perkins to spend a day of work in Oxford on short notice to testify that my father had testamentary capacity. Does that make sense? How did Swazye know that Dr. Perkins in a impromptu exam right before court would find that my father had testamentary capacity? That would have been huge waste if Dr. Perkins found that my did not have testementary capacity.
I am certain that Dr. Perkins did not charge Swayze $600/hr to appear on short notice in Oxford. At this time Dr. Perkins was still a rule 35, independent, court appointed Dr. I should have gotten the same terms and cooperation from Dr. Perkins as Swayze got. I did not. No cooperation, and told I had to pay $4,000 up front. This tactic was used, because Dr. Perkins committed perjury and Swayze suborned testimony, and if I ever deposed Dr. Perkins it would put Swayze at risk of a 10 year jail sentence for suborning testimony.
Let’s summarize. Swayze did not know that Dr. Perkins examined my father for testamentary capacity, else he would had based his motion on Dr. Perkins’ opinion and not on his own. That finding was not in the report. Swayze did not state that an expert had examined my father for testamentary capacity on January 17th.
Did all of sudden Dr. Perkins remember that he had examined my father for testamentary capacity, and by chance call Swayze to tell him that between April 21st and May 9th? Did Swayze think, that he really needed expert testimony to win the motion, and called Dr. Perkins, and by chance learned that Dr. Perkins did examine my father for testamentary capacity, and was available for a quick day trip to Oxford? The answers to these questions is no.
Also, Swayze has put up a temendous fight to prevent me from deposing Dr. Perkins. You will have to read the docket. Swayze has also participated in a fraud upon the court by engaging Hale Freeland to be Dr. Perkins pretend lawyer. You have to expect him to fight hard, as 10 years in Parchman can be rough.
What happened was, Swayze was angry at me for filing a strong bar complaint against him. Swayze told me by phone as he tried to get me to retract the bar complaint that “this bar complaint will end my law practice”. I believe when I said I would not retract it, he decided to hit back hard. By the way, once a bar complaint is filed and accepted, it cannot be retracted. Swayze knew after filing an emotionally vindictive motivated motion to disinherit me, that he needed an expert testimony. He called Dr. Perkins and convinced him to commit perjury. I am sure Dr. Perkins did not do that as freebie.
Leave a Reply