Maurice's Blog

President GW Bush

Crawford,

Texas

USA                                           

Dear Sir,

General Patton's WW2 D-Day Piper Cub Reg. G-KIRK

A pilot in England must never admit to be suffering from depression or he may lose his licence. I know.

In February this year, about a hundred miles off Haiti, Caribbean, my US army 1943 Piper Cub experienced engine failure and ditched in the sea. For the next three hours I huddled, freezing in a leaky life raft, waist high in water, desperately trying to keep my satellite distress beacon up out of the water!

Just as the sun was going down, expecting to be breakfast for the sharks, I heard the magic drone of a ‘gurt' black and red US Coast Guard Jay Hawk helicopter, out of Greater Inagua US Air Base, piloted by Julie Kuck with her merry rescue team.

Safely on dry land I quickly bought another aging J3 Piper Cub in Daytona, Florida, in order to carry on my life's dream, a ‘flight around the world'. I had competed in the 2001 London to Sydney Air Race sponsored by a benevolent Arizonian who, having read my web site, laughed so much paid my $50,000 ticket! A world record from Norfolk Island to Brisbane, Australia for a J3 Cub and then engine failure with a spectacular crash, in Japan, are just a couple of stories in my travels.

Then things in Texas all went, may I suggest, somewhat ‘pear shaped'.

Whilst ‘test flying' the new (1946) little yellow Cub out of a field near Houston, Texas, before setting off for the Falkland Islands, South America, I decided to thank you, as C in C, for saving my life. The plans were to land near Crawford and walk/taxi into the P49 Restriction Zone and deliver a note, similar to this, at the gate of your Texas residence.

I have been, I believe, quite misunderstood and was arrested and deported back to UK with a suggestion from the US Embassy suggesting I will not be allowed to re enter the United States of America again. The Federal Aviation Authority [enclosed], however, telephoned me personally to assure me my flight, subject to paperwork, landing in farmer Hawkins's field, near Crawford, was no aviation offence.

I humbly request that I may be allowed to retrieve my little Cub in Houston and fly her direct across the Mexican border, one way, in order I may fulfil my dream of flying the Andes and to our British outpost.

Yours faithfully,

Maurice J Kirk BVSc and Family.                   PS 'gurt' is Somerset, West Country, language for ‘BIG'!        PPS Enclosed US Pilot's report and ‘Lest We Forget' memo

'Marlpits'

St Donats,

Llantwit Major

South Wales CF61 1ZB

To whom it may concern:

Brian Throop of the FAA in Washington D.C stated to me on 6/20/08 via telephone that as far as he knew there were no known airspace infractions or FAA violations made by Mr. Maurice Kirk.  I have also spoke with Mr. Throop on several occasions in regards to Mr. Kirk.  Tel: (202) 538-9013.

Also on 5/01/08 in taking Mr. Kirk back to his aircraft in Crawford, Texas. Mr. Arnold Theymeyer of the FAA in Ft. Worth Texas had a phone conversation with Mr. Kirk stating that he had committed no offenses, and was given authorization to fly his aircraft.  My wife, Kandy Howell was also present and spoke with Mr.  Arnold Theymeyer.

Alvin M. Howell

Private Pilot/Airframe and Power Plant Technician/Inspection Authorization with  36 years experience in the aviation industry. Have had a US private pilot’s license since 1974.   I also work for Standard Aero located at George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston as a QA inspector on corporate Business Jets.

My wife and I have a business that provides Safety Compliance Training to Aviation Maintenance Certified Repair Stations.

AMT Training Solutions

 http://www.amt-1.com

Thanks for your time

Sincerely

Alvin M. Howell

22715 Piper Rd

Needville, Tx. 77461

(979) 553-3040 home

(281) 974-6593 cell

Pehaps I should write to the 'new man' and offer my General Patton D-Day Piper Cub for the Smithsonian Museum?

I must  invite President Barck Obama to read an American's account of the 2001 London to Sydney Air Race, below:

from Air & Space / Smithsonian, June-July 2001)

"She's a very tired old girl," said Maurice Kirk of his 58-year-old Piper Cub, British registration G-KIRK, when they reached Sydney, Australia, last April. "She's lost a magneto, her fabric's coming off, and just about everything has broken that could." Kirk was tired too. The British veterinarian is only two years younger than his aircraft.

Their journey along the London-Sydney Air Race 2001 course took them halfway around the globe, nearly 14,000 miles. They flew 200 hours in 28 days, with only a single rest stop in Thailand, and that one given over to oil-sump repairs. G-KIRK was throwing oil, so Kirk doubled the sump's capacity by welding an extension to it. All the other sanctioned rest days were spent catching up with the race, which celebrated a century of Australian federation and re-created the "kangaroo route" air race of 1919. The winner was Spirit of Kai Tak, a state-of-the-art Piper Aerostar crewed by four Brits from Hong Kong. Thirty-seven teams left from Biggin Hill near London on March 11, and all but six were on hand for the triumphant fly-past of Sydney Harbor on April 8.

Which didn't include the gallant Piper Cub. G-KIRK was disqualified on the first day, when Kirk landed in a pasture west of Lyons, France, instead of Cannes, the official landing site, to the annoyance of police and race officials. "It was logistics," he later said. "They couldn't cope with the [60-knot] Cub. Or was it Maurice Kirk? I forget which." Nontheless, Kirk forged ahead, now just along for the ride.

When delivered to the U.S. Army Air Forces in 1943, G-KIRK had a 12-gallon fuselage tank and a range of 190 miles. That would hardly suffice for race days that averaged 500 miles and sometimes double that. Kirk learned that an American had once fitted his Cub with wing tanks from a Piper Colt; the modification had been approved by the Federal Aviation Administration and was therefore legal in Europe.

Now G-KIRK could carry 50 U.S. gallons. For a reserve, Kirk cached four plastic jugs in the cabin and snaked a tube through the window to the fuselage tank. In Calcutta, this rig actually put him ahead of the field: airport authorities neglected to send out a tanker of aviation gasoline, and deployed only one tanker the next day. The last contestant didn't get off the ground until 3 p.m. Kirk, meanwhile, refueled the night before with the help of a taxi, a nearby service station, and his jerry cans.

When Kirk set off from Biggin Hill, G-KIRK had sported a wind-vane generator between its landing struts, which powered a 12-volt fuel transfer pump. Alas, the generator failed in Saudi Arabia. Kirk thereafter relied on a hand wobble pump. This in turn failed while G-KIRK was flying across "some sea," as his wife Kirstie, coping with hoof-and-mouth disease at a veterinary hospital in Wales, described it on their Web site.

The sea was the Bay of Bengal, and Kirk managed to glide down to a Burmese beach for repairs. "They were all in skirts and treated me royally," he reported. "They fed me. It was fantastic."

G-KIRK also made unauthorized landings in Egypt, India, Thailand, Indonesia, and Australia, further alienating Kirk from officialdom while making him a hero to everyone else. He broke the monotony by occasionally cutting the engine, skimming down to 20 feet above the ground, and shouting to woodcutters or fishermen: "Hi! I'm on my way to Australia!"

Race rules required Kirk to carry a radio and a GPS receiver, which could fix his position by satellite. He preferred his old school atlas, plotting his course between "the pink bits" that once marked the far-flung British Empire.

The East Timor Sea, from Bali to Darwin, was the most difficult crossing: 500 miles, with the wind against him. Kirk got a head start by skipping to the island of Sumba, where he jettisoned his blind-flying gear, spare clothes, and the gifts he'd accumulated along the way.

"Just as the sun began to show itself, I took off against 10 mph headwinds," Kirk rhapsodized by cell phone from Sydney. To minimize the effects of the headwind, he flew 20 feet above the water, which led to a close encounter with two whales. He says he landed at Darwin with 15 minutes of fuel remaining and half an inch of oil on the dipstick.

On the final leg, to Coolangatta, G-KIRK threw two of the six bolts that secured its wooden propeller, which cracked. Happily, Lyle Campbell of Arizona had volunteered to carry a spare prop in his Grumman Albatross, the second oldest airplane in the race. Campbell had also underwritten Kirk's $25,000 entry fee, and he and other contestants ferried Kirk's daughter Belinda to Australia after race officials threw her off the dignitaries' aircraft in the Mideast.

At journey's end, Kirk's principal regret was that police helicopters kept him away from the Sydney Harbor Bridge. (G-KIRK was of course banned from the fly-past. It wasn't officially a contestant, and anyhow it didn't have a radio adequate for formation flying.) "No one has ever looped that bridge," he marveled. "Can you believe it?"

--Daniel Ford

Glamorgan Gem Newspaper 9th May 2008

Flying vet saga takes a new twist after the US authority‘s deportation threat

Friday, 09 May 2008

THE Vale's ‘Flying Vet' Maurice Kirk, is again behind bars in America - and is claiming that he was arrested in a swoop by the US ‘Secret Service'. Maurice Kirk's American troubles started when he landed his plane near the Texas ranch owned by US President George Bush. He was arrested by security officials - who doubted Mr Kirk's explanation that he wanted to deliver a personal ‘thank you' to the President after the US Coastguard rescued him earlier this year, when he was forced to ditch in the sea. Since the Flying Vet's problems in Texas began, his blog has been up-dated by his wife Kirsty. In her latest entry, she has reported that he has been arrested by the "secret service" and is now being held in the deportation unit. Mrs Kirk said that he had been invited to a restaurant for a beer (probably last Thursday, May 1) and was sitting outside on a bench with local residents when he was picked up by the police. Mrs Kirk said the reason given was that "he had been seen wandering around town aimlessly with a gas can". She continued: "M (Maurice) believes that the secret service traced him to this location by him using his credit card, and the public intoxication charge was used to hold him until the secret service arrived." Mrs Kirk then went on to say that an immigration official had told Maurice his original act of landing his plane near the President's ranch, was "a criminal activity which endangers public safety" - and that that would be the reason for his deportation. She said that he was offered a deal, whereby he would be driven to the airport to board a flight to London - and would not be deported. However, Mrs Kirk said that her husband refused to have "charges on his record for offences he did not commit". She added: "When he refused, they shackled him in hand and ankle cuffs, and he was taken to the deportation centre in Houston."

Having now just about recovered from standing in twenty queues, in my jaunt around Paris and Disneyland for 4 days with Genevieve, I am now back in St Vran to run a 'Vide Grenier', sale of virtually anything while attempting to sell/rent the properties. Run by JC and Caty actually while I enjoy oysters again at 4 Euros per dozen, fresh off the Breton beach, instead of those offered in Paris last week at 32 Euros for just 6!   But first, while I still have a clear head, I must summarise one of the outstsning court cases back in England to an intersted new 3rd party only picked up by the power this blog site.

Draft  50% complete                                 Brief for Court of Appeal            20^th December 2008

Maurice Kirk v Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons

I have been refused re instatement to ‘practice veterinary surgery' six times contrary to Articles 1, 6, 8 and 10  of The European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

    Summary

• 1. 1967 RCVS Royal Charter and HM Judge's Oath to Her Majesty demands favouritism to RCVS and their agents and is a breach of Human Rights Act 1998 and this has been admitted by RCVS.

• 2. 2002 Original RCVS Tribunal Hearing following a complaint by the South Wales Police.

Charge 1.  11 convictions over 10 years. 5 minor motoring, 3 common assaults and 3 of public order.

Common Assault Convictions:

1994. Catching a thief by the arm in my own house with medical evidence, relied on originally to prosecute but following cross examination of their only witness, the claimant for monetary compensation, the evidence mysteriously became ‘unavailable'.

1997. Evidence from Christopher Paul Ebbs, alone, a compulsive liar with extended mental health and criminal history.

1997. Despite prosecution barrister informing the RCVS case should never have come to court, Mr Kirk having been first struck across the face by a recently retired South Wales Police inspector, Howard Davis and then knocked to the ground by a security guard bigger than himself.

Verdict:     Name removed from veterinary register.

Charge 2.  ‘Unprofessional Conduct'.

Incident involved 2 dogs purportedly fallen over a cliff. In reality the police had failed to call me for 90 + minutes my arriving at the scene within 17 minutes of the call to witness, in my clinical opinion, criminal negligence by others, all later identified, when presented with a dying dog having a neglected suppurating and bleeding tumour, almost the size of a cricket ball, in the angle of her mouth. The RCVS took the view my refusal to divulge confidential client/criminal information to the gathering crowd, as I tried to struggle carry a large dog across the stones of the beach to my veterinary hospital, was unprofessional.

Verdict:    6 month suspension.

Throughout the trial, ending on 29^th May 2002:

a. I was refused ‘witnesses of fact', including any investigating police, investigating RCVS staff or external lawyers, complainants or eye witnesses of any of the convictions being considered.

b. I was refused any information on how evidence was gathered, by whom and why?

c. I have been refused any of the ‘contemporaneous record' of that enquiry (even evidence gathered from my own veterinary hospital clients). The South Wales Police was the complainant in 2001, to have my name removed from the veterinary register, having just lost 121 criminal prosecutions against me exposing their widespread perjury and perversion of justice with not a finger raised by the series of judges in the welsh courts.

d. Favourable witness statements were withheld and some altered and served on me as originals.

e. Witnesses tendered by the RCVS had fictitious addresses and could therefore not be contacted for the trial.

f. The RCVS ‘cherry picked' a van full of hostile policemen to be my ‘defence' witnesses my only to being informed of their presence in the building as they were due to enter the witness box! The Court of Appeal had already refused them the right to give evidence following my failed appeal to serve any witness summonses.

g. The QC, Alison Foster, for the prosecution repeatedly lied or deceived the court on facts she and I knew were otherwise.

h. The Legal Assessor, Sir John Wood, was clearly medically unfit to conduct his responsibilities in ensuring the trial was conducted in a lawful manner.

i. The Legal Assessor demanded I disclose to the prosecution team the full content of my proposed defence evidence by identifying my witnesses and their information even before the defence case was opened. He then refused any of them to give evidence even those not requiring witness summonses or hade not indicated they would attend voluntarily.

Privy Council Appeal, 19^th January 2004, Verdict:  Dismissed with costs exceeding £66,000.

•a.      The first 4 hearings from January 2003 onwards were my applications for disclosure of witness evidence. Each time the college QC informed their Lordships all relevant evidence had been disclosed prior to the trial. This was again proved incorrect in that later, in 2003, witness statements in my favour, one from a magistrate and significantly different to the one served on me before the trial, were ‘disclosed' but far too late for the politics in all this scandal to prevail. It further proved there must have been interviews and notes taken when my clients were gathered up by the RCVS in various buildings around Cardiff, several times in 2001.

•b.       Since the appeal the RCVS now admit there are contemporaneous records  of potential and used witnesses interviewed by the RCVS staff and external lawyers but they are deemed as ‘privileged' between their client , the South Wales Police, and my own veterinary clients now, apparently, clients for the college! Where are all the Law Society Contracts for all this?

•c.       The PC Judgment is particularly significant in that my veterinary expertise was never considered in doubt and that their Lordships indicated their ‘hope' I would be re instated to the register by November of the very same year.  So why was I not just supended?

The RCVS maintain I was rendered ‘unfit to practice veterinary surgery for each conviction' while the Judicial Committee ruled, in June 2004, I had been struck off for the ‘cumulative effect of all the convictions'.

In January 2008 Magistrates quashed one of the convictions relied on by the RCVS following wrong information from my confidential police files shown to the RCVS investigation team when records. Police knew they were knowingly incorrect.

The November 08 Disclosure Order on the South Wales Police, following  my 10 years attempting an ‘Abuse of Process Application', currently being heard in Cardiff Civil Court, will disclose, if not blocked again by HM Attorney General, further information relating to the unlawful conduct of the respective defendants.

[5 Civil Actions for harassment damages against the South Wales Police, the first lodged 16 years ago, following 121 charges lost by the police, numerous imprisonments after countless court cases and involving some 100 + other incidents of alleged harassment ‘too document heavy' for a trial by jury.

• 3. I am refused any information on how evidence was gathered, by whom and for why? No ‘contemporaneous record' of that enquiry, for the charges (even from my own veterinary hospital clients) have been disclosed. [South Wales Police was complainant to have my name removed from the veterinary register having just lost 121 criminal prosecutions suggesting unlawful conduct, hence the HM Partnership conspiracy to prevent disclosure ‘at all costs'.
• 4. HM Privy Council 19^th Jan 2004 Judgment, in my appeal, is a breach of ECHR Article 8 re ‘private life' when Lord Hoffman stated, in effect, I had ‘special responsibilities' in society even in my private life. This abuse may apply to all professions. RCVS rely on this abuse today refusing me re instatement.
• 5. My Abuse of Process Application is being blocked, re ‘Vexatious Litigant' Enquiry by HM Attorney General and HM Home Secretary's department, admitted in court by Government on 31st Oct 08 to be ongoing.

• 6. I am refused a ‘Trial by Jury' at Court of Appeal in South Wales Police 16 year ongoing case compensation. Police disclosed wrong confidential police records to college staff and their outside lawyers, contrary to Home Office Regulations 45/1987.

• 7. Ever since the RCVS have refused 'Disclosure' of their gathered evidence despite assurances in court, time and time again, that it would. Apparently disclosure will occur once I am re instated. Police, in Nov 08, now ordered to swear affidavit they have fully disclosed evidence relevant to 3 of the 5 Civil Actions lodged for police harassment.

 Reinstatement to practice veterinary surgery An Application can only be repeated every 10 months. There have been 6 refusals so far with a different procedure each time, almost the same jury each time and specific demands to which I must agree, if I am ever to be allowed membership, never metered out before.  

• 1. Oct/Nov 04 Application was refused without a tribunal decision leading to 1^st Judicial Review Application conducted ex parte later for me to be told the 2^nd application would le listed in 2005

• 2. 6^th January 05 Application Hearing was before the tribunal with a decision that, although all requirements for re instatement had been complied with, due to my apparent recent change in attitude re instatement was refused. April JR application led to9 both 4^th and 5^th application refusals JR applications on paper being heard in open court in July 2005 with £12,000 costs awarded ,not even questioned or taxed as to how it had arisen. The Judge admitted he had not and did not need to read the lodged papers of both parties for both JRs.

• 3. Nov 05 Application Hearing refused led to a 27^th Jan 06 JR Application when an Extended Civil Restraint Order was handed down following an application by the RCVS. This ECRO blocked outstanding disclosure applications needed for each Re instatement Application.

• 4. October 06 Application Hearing was refused following refusal of an adjournment to call character witnesses blocked by a telephone call to the Cardiff judge by the RCVS to block the issuing of witness summonses. RCVS used the excuse the ECRO prevented the issuing of witness summonses despite the court being told the office lawyer in the Royal Courts of Justice could possibly arrange the temporary lifting of the ECRO in order that evidence could be available.

• 5. September 07 Application was refused by the chairman of the tribunal alone and without legal advice, removing my name from the court list ,for the following week , stating that as I had raised irrelevant issues, my application to call character witnesses, there was little likely hood of my being successful. This led to a JR Application that was refused. It is currently lodged with the Court of Appeal for leave.

• 6. October 08 Application was refused by the chairman alone with a letter of legal advice from the current Legal Assessor. I was given until the 30^th September 08 to tender information in my application I was supposed to second guess in order for the same chairman as the year before may be minded to list the application for a hearing before the tribunal. A JR Application is currently being prepared.

Suggested Extra Reading

• 1. Original transcript
• 2. Privy Council Judgment(s) [ 7 hearings, 4 for failed disclosure and 2 for taxing of costs]
• 3. 6 RCVS files/demands and their submissions on each re instatement application
• 4. 6 JR Orders and transcripts/directions
• 5. Leaked HM Attorney General etc. internal memos.
• 6. Disclosure obtained from 8 currently running cases in civil courts.
• 7. Disclosure obtained from pending criminal court.

The ‘Balance of Probabilities'

Whilst we all know both the RCVS and South Wales Police will succeed in failing to reveal proper disclosure, contrary to law, due to the current politics of our UK judicial system, it is just how they have managed between them to have me struck of the veterinary register in such unique circumstances and continue to prevent my re instatement, contrary to their Lordship's apparent wishes, needs to be made public across the world.

 Based on the ‘balance of probabilities' if we are allowed to examine what they have done, in past disciplinary hearings before my May 2002 departure from my profession and since, with other applicants, I am confident in  the outcome. Alas, the RCVS Registrar refuses to disclose any such material.

The reason behind the RCVS in not allowing reinstatement is nothing whatever to do with my apparent demeanour as court record alone will confirm. I have complied to their ever changing demands, following each JR Application,  It has been admitted by college members that should I be re instated as a member of the profession again then their HM joint ability to continue in refusing disclosure will undoubtedly become  less effective. ............

Further, legal advice suggests the RCVS are immune, in any event, to any liability to financial compensation. So much for the HM Partnership.

50% completed..........................................

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

 CONTACT  Tel +441446792109 Mobile 07966523940 maurice@kirkflyingvet.com  http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/

but I have some legal nonsence to put down in order to brie an intersyed party on the old chestnut of HM Partnership and how it affects justice in aour courts, that man made concept which ,in reality , is a myth.