Motion to Amend Pleading

Adding more fuel to the Fire

              IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                     WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
                           SOUTHERN DISTRICT


Marc Perkel - pro se              )
                                  )
vs.                               )  No. 96-3383-CV-S-AE
                                  )
Commissioner Scott Tinsley        )
Greene County Circuit Court       )
William A. Wear Jr.               )
James R. Sharp                    )
The Lawfirm of Wear and Sharp     )
Vicki Stringfellow                )


                       MOTION TO AMEND PLEADING
                       ========================

COMES NOW, Plaintiff Marc Perkel and asks the Court for leave to amend
his pleading.

                              Discussion
                              ----------

On November 18th 1996 Judge Paul McGhee entered his final decision in
the divorce of Plaintiff Marc Perkel and Defendant Vicki Stringfellow.
In his decision Plaintiff Marc Perkel is under order to pay a sum of
money that is well in excess of 100% of everything he owns. In making
this decision Judge McGhee relied on information provided by Defendants
Sharp, Wear, and Stringfellow that was fraudulent and intending to
mislead Judge McGhee as to the assets and income of the Plaintiff -- and
they were successful.


Although lawyers have a responsibility to be an advocate for their
client, a lawyer is not allowed to knowingly mislead the Court with
documentation he know has been falsified for the purpose of obtaining a
favorable judgement by fraudulent means.


Any act of fraud is reprehensible, however when an officer of the court
commits fraud, his fraud reflects on the justice system itself. And
since the justice system is self regulating, it is up to the courts to
maintain the public trust by strictly scrutinizing allegations against
one of their own. A lawyer must not be allowed to profit by using the
family court system to defraud the public.


Plaintiff had intended to make this pleading eventually, however since a
Motion for Reconsideration was pending Plaintiff withheld until the
decision was final with hopes that such a pleading wouldn't be
necessary. Because Judge McGhee decided to rely on the Defendants
fraudulent information, the Plaintiff needs to amend his pleading at
this time. Now that Judge McGhee's decision is final, this pleading
amendment has become ripe and Plaintiff requests the Court to grant his
request to add the following to his pleading.


1) Defendant Stringfellow produced a fraudulent inventory list of assets
   owned by Plaintiff's software company Computer Tyme Inc. In this
   document Defendant Stringfellow listed the value of several items as
   high as 10-20 times their real value. That the Defendant knew that
   the inventory list was fraudulent listing items the Defendant knew
   the Plaintiff did not have and that the Defendant knew the real value
   of the items listed and deliberately lied to the Court so as to
   deliberately and intentionally mislead Judge McGhee into thinking the
   Plaintiff's net worth was in excess of one million dollars.


2) Defendant Stringfellow produced fraudulent documentation to the Court
   indicating that Plaintiff's income was significantly higher than the
   amount shown on his tax returns. Defendant knew the information
   presented to the court was false and misleading and used this
   information to obtain an unfair judgement against the Plaintiff in
   the amount of about $150,000 in cash and property.


3) That Defendants Wear and Sharp, knowing that the documents were
   falsified, on behalf of their client, Vicki Stringfellow, conspired
   to perpetrate this fraud on the Court and successfully convinced
   Judge McGhee that the Plaintiff was many times wealthier than they
   knew he really was. Based on their misrepresentations the Court
   ordered the Plaintiff to pay Defendants Wear and Sharp a total of
   $15,000 in attorneys fees.


4) In final arguments in front of Judge Winston Davis at a hearing for
   temporary maintenance, Defendant Wear told the Court that the
   Plaintiff's income was three times higher than he knew it really was.
   That Wear stated to the Court that the Plaintiff "clears $10,000 a
   month" when in fact he knew the real figure was less than one third
   of that amount. Because of Defendant Wear's statement Judge Winston
   Davis assigned excessive Temporary Maintenance for Defendant
   Stringfellow and Attorneys fees for Defendants Wear and Sharp.


5) That even though Judge McGhee knew to some extent that the Defendants
   were not telling the truth, because the magnitude of the deception
   was so great that they only needed to convince Judge McGhee that only
   25% of their fraudulent information presented to the court was true
   in order to get a ruling in excess of 100% of everything.


   So even though Defendant's may claim that because of lack of
   believability that what they testified to in Court wasn't fraud.
   However, Defendants only needed to be slightly believable in order to
   tip the decisions strongly in their favor.


WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays the Court to allow Plaintiff to amend his
pleadings as stated above and allow these new complaints to be added.



-------------------------------------------
Marc Perkel * Plaintiff