HM Home Secretary’s Legal Defence Department,
Campbell Street,
London.
Case Number 8CF02269
17th November 2008
Dear Sir,
Maurice John Kirk – Potential Vexatious Litigant
Judgment by Default for False Imprisonment £15,360
I question the wording of the judgment of 31st Oct 2008. It states ‘defendant [HM Home Secretary] shall file defences or issue an Application to strike out.....To strike out my claim of false imprisonment was your application last time was it not? It was not struck out. Instead you were ordered to Disclose?
I would suspect, in Cardiff, the judge has had a ‘communication’ [not unusual] with your HM department, since the hearing, to block any Disclosure surrounding as to who and why there has been 5 years of an ongoing 'investigation' employing a team of HM lawyers in Whitehall to block my applications of Disclosure.
Who is paying?
Disclosure in my police harassment Actions for damages and my demands for Disclosure from the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons as to just how they can withhold ALL ‘contemporaneous record’ of the original enquiry to get me struck off, instigated by your client, the South Wales Police, using the excuse it is all ‘privileged’ information will be pursued to the death.
Yours and mine.
Just how did the South Wales Police ‘invite’ the RCVS lawyers and lay staff to come down to Cardiff Central Police Station to examine confidential police records about me, my family and veterinary hospital, in the autumn of 2001?
Your HM department has clearly given immunity to prosecution, hasn’t it? All contrary to Home Office Regulations 45/1987, is it not?
On the 31st October I served a sample of HM Treasury Solicitor department’s ‘internal memos’ leaked my way to support my action for Abuse of Process Application shortly be shredded on 25th November.
You can stuff your £15,360 where appropriate as I told the judge; I want Section 31 Disclosure, under the law.
Disclose and we have a deal.
Yours truly, Maurice J Kirk BVSc
Cc John Smith Esq. MP
www.kirkflyingvet.com & www.wacl.org.uk