I decided to deliver my urgent letter to HRH Prince Charles, personally, but was thwarted by two burly policemen at the entrance to Highgrove House, Tetbury, Gloucestershire.
I was originally going to deliver it by 1943 Piper Cub, registration G-KURK and land her just outside the prohibited zone to walk the short distance to his Royal Highness's residence. Kirstie suggested that that was not such a good idea, bearing in mind my recent protracted stay in Texas State Lunatic Asylum, in Austin and subsequent deportation. This followed my failed attempt just to leave a 'thank you letter' at the front gate of President Bush's Crawford ranch, for saving my life. [US Coast Guard helicopter after my ditching in Caribbean near Haiti].
The police and I left on the best of terms but with their parting suggestion that I could always take the letter to the Post Office in Tetbury town raised the problem as who would be paying for it, if it were to be posted without a stamp bearing Her Majesty's portrait?
Anyway, I did not leave empty handed. There on the ground was a fine *** bird for the pot most likely one of the household's birds not picked up after the recent pheasant shoot!
It was then a drive down to Hampshire to continue work on the Cub for the flight to Cape Town or Mount Everest?
HRH Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales
1st January 2009
Your Royal Highness,
HM Partnership and the state of our Welsh Courts
Twenty-one times the Guernsey Authorities locked me up in prison, invariably but for a few days, before charges were dropped. Generally they were of a trivial nature, created for but one purpose, to disrupt my single handed veterinary practice and to bankrupt me.
My sick partner had already left the island, almost penniless, for me to attempt redress through the local courts. He also had suffered under the feudal system, by his premises and our business and personalty having been fraudulently obtained by another veterinary surgeon, Alistair Macrae, only achieved by the unlawful conduct of lawyers waived through their incestuous system by HM de Vic Carey, the then current HM Procureur. Both Nicholas and I were denied United Kingdom legal representation.
De Vic Cary later, in 1987, gave evidence against me before the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, but his evidence was disproved causing the case against me to collapse. De Vic's grandfather, incidentally, during the Nazi occupation identified to the enemy young Jewish girls working in the hospital and on farms guaranteeing their fate in the gas chambers. Sir Winston Churchill wanted the man hanged but, with a change in government, he instead was knighted. I published copies of his collaboration papers and other evidence as to just why the Channel Islands were never to be trusted for the D-Day landings.
I left Guernsey abruptly after my life was threatened by the in-house freemasons, there being an ever increasing number of us now exposing to the world the appalling state of so called ‘British law and order' in both Jersey and Guernsey with their exploiting ‘insider dealing' and the drug trade.
Therefore, Your Highness, when I settled in the Principality of Wales and bought a veterinary practice in the Vale of Glamorgan, I expected some semblance of order and sanity. Instead over thirty law firms refused to act for me against the South Wales Police, once their ten years of harassment commenced.
Racial discrimination was palpable. This police harassment originated from Guernsey, as ‘disclosure' of documents later revealed. By way of example I was made to produce my perfectly valid driving documents well over thirty times and spent many days in police cells only to have cases repeatedly laughed out of court, while surveillance teams broke into my surgery and communicated with Guernsey where I had had my telephone tapped continuously (loud speaker in police station) for over two years.
In 1993 I had been dehorning beef cattle on Your Highness's farm at Boverton, Llantwit Major, only to find myself, within hours, locked up in some Cardiff police cell before prison for days on the pretext I was in possession of a ‘stolen motor cycle', a ‘garrote type instrument' and ‘could not be identified'! I had been bundled into a police car, in handcuffs, from the steps of my very own surgery with one old lady, I remember, clutching her sick Pekinese in her arms saying, "What are you doing with our vet?"
Fifteen years later, with all charges dropped and still no facts before any proper enquiry, the HM Home Secretary's lawyer now admits, in a Cardiff Court, that there is an ongoing six year investigation in Whitehall as to whether I am to be certified as a ‘vexatious litigant' or not.
HM Court Service, HM Treasury Solicitor and others have been made to confirm that at every major stage in my litigation, to obtain damages for over one hundred and twenty failed criminal charges and police conspiracy with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, to have my name removed from the register, HM Partnership was ordered to intervene, informing all parties but me.
- 1. HM Attorney-General, in around 2003, ordered all my civil and criminal cases, past and ongoing, be collected up from around the country and sent to his team of HM lawyers in Whitehall.
- 2. This meant my Appeal to the Court of Appeal for a Trial by Jury, a basic civil right, against the South Wales Police, was delayed for seventeen months with no explanation or apology.
- 3. This meant that when I employed a barrister, to brief him on the Cardiff court files, they were not there but more to the point no one would admit some are now lost or with HM lawyers.
- 4. This meant both Mr Justice Kay and later, Lord Thomas, stated my appeal from Swansea court was ‘hopelessly out of time'. The Court of Appeal stamp on my lodged papers clearly indicates in my favour, stamped but a few days from the Swansea Abuse of Process. These court papers were never before Mr Justice Kay or neither judges bothered to read them having already been told I was marked down as ‘vexatious in all fields' by Mr Justice Andrew Collins, in 2003, as so clearly indicated in HM Treasury Solicitor internal memos on http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ .
- 5. This has meant my applications for HM Judicial Review, fifty or more, have been prejudiced from the start with perfunctory nanoseconds set aside for the purpose. I recall one of many before their Lordships, a Mr Justice Scott-Baker, coming to the Cardiff court clearly without the London lodged papers and rabbiting on about the wrong case.
- 6. This has meant my complaint of the conspiracy by RCVS lawyers, falsifying witness statements and deliberately misleading courts on the availability of witness evidence, enjoying immunity to prosecution by the 1967 RCVS Royal Charter, has become the best ‘Whitehall farce' to date.
- 7. This meant all court transcripts and tapes, now needed to prosecute, were copied to HM but the Cardiff court deny it, having destroyed originals before my case has even left the traps!
I ask, Your Highness, for your urgent intervention in the interests of justice and the Welsh community.
Maurice J Kirk BVSc, APO Rtd. Marlpits, St Donats, Llantwit Major, South Wales CF61 1ZB
Now, would you believe, John Smith MP, our representitive in HM Government, has arranged for us to go up to see him next week in the Houses of Parliament and discuss a 'few issues' about the current state of our judiciary.
The local newspaper has also printed an article about my visit to the Prince of Wales's Residence.
Not exactly the same outcome, is it, as to my impromptu visit to President Bush in Texas? Ah, but what is this, printed below?
What do you make of this Home Office memo to a local doctor if it is not another round with the CAA? No. I will write to our Prince again and see if His Royal Highness can help me retain my licence?
I remember flying back from an airshow, some years back, with Genevieve asleep in the 1940 Taylorcraft, when I experienced serious engine trouble over Highgrove House. Fortunately I had enough height to glide to His Grace the Duke of Beaufort's air strip at Badmington. The temporary disappearance of his new Range Rover and tea at The House is a far, far funnier story for me to tell and will be one for the daughter to recite one day.
Dear Dr .********Please find attached details for your information. I spoke to one of your partners in April 2008 regarding Mr Kirk landing his light aircraft near the ranch of President Bush, when he was apprehended by US security services and received a psychiatric evaluation before being deported to the UK.
Mr Kirk has come to the attention of FTAC on 06/01/2008 when he attended Highgrove House where he attempted to hand in a letter to Prince Charles. I understand the letter was an account of his grievances against South Wales Police, against whom he has made 121 complaints.After leaving HIGHGROVE he went to TETBURY Tourist Information and enquired if there was a rear entrance to HIGHGROVE (not given any info)
The purpose of my enquiry is to share this information with you and ascertain whether Mr Kirk's mental health might be an issue in these matters.Can you please call me on *******........ to discuss.
Buckingham Gate London SW1 (just a few doors down from the HM Attorney General)
Well Mum, you can blame Taunton School for a learning of my favourate quote:
"There is a pleasure sure in being
mad that none but madmen know"
Dryden Poet Laureate Circa 1700
His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, Highgrove House, Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England.
13th January 2009
Your Royal Highness,
Since my humble petition of 1st January, explaining HM Court Service's refusal to disclose the whereabouts of court file, marked, Maurice John Kirk - Potential Vexatious Litigant, HM Home Secretary has now obtained a court injunction to protect all four defendants, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, South Wales Police, HM Attorney General and herself from disclosing evidence or on any communications between them about me. They enter their seventh year, using HM Whitehall lawyers, in their attempt to have me certified as a ‘vexatious litigant' to block disclosure of malfeasance.
Each defendant has successfully claimed Section 42 Legal Professional Privilege, not to disclose evidence, in their joint investigations relating to removing my name from the veterinary register, prosecuting me in countless ridiculous Crown Courts and more recently, to having me unlawfully gaoled.
When I produced proof of HM Attorney General, employing the HM Treasury Solicitor and Mr Justice Andrew Collins, all identified on HM documents, the judge had to explain that the Attorney General may not have ‘legal professional privilege', as ‘an independent body' from judiciary and executive but when asked as to just how I had obtained so many confidential documents I felt obliged to offer many more memos between HM departments revealing their own respective agenda, all reflecting nefarious conduct.
I will appeal to the Court of Appeal and a fat lot of good that will do while HM judges continue to swear oath of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen, giving agents of RCVS Royal Charter preferential treatment. These very same judges, identified in my fifty odd Judicial Review Applications, for disclosure, have clarified my complaint to have sufficient merit for some alternative intervention, lawful or otherwise.
Now my own doctor, today, has received a request from an HM government department, not a stone's throw from HM Attorney General's offices, purportedly following ‘complaint' from police, to consider as to whether I am mentally fit to fly my various aircraft and should I not immediately be sectioned?
I have few options left, in the pursuit of justice, other than to plead the notorious ‘Royal Prerogative'.
I remain, Your Highness,
Your obedient Englishman, whilst living in the Principality of Wales,
Maurice J Kirk BVSc Marlpits, St Donats, Llantwit Major, South Wales CF61 1ZB
Copy to John Smith MP Encl. HM Treasury Solicitor 23rd July 2003 internal memo.[ see downloads]
Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, WaterLane, Wilmslow Cheshire
17th January, 2009
Complaint against HM Home Secretary, HM Attorney General, South Wales Police & RCVS.
Further to my complaint against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' refusal to disclose any ‘contemporaneous notes' of their investigation to have me struck off I cite further parties refusing to disclose very much related evidence, contrary to your 1966 Data Protection Act.
I enclose HM Attorney General's private law team, HM Treasury Solicitor's 5th December 2009 letter, my 1st and 13th January 2009 letters to the Prince of Wales and Abuse of Process Application details re South Wales Police's failure to disclose, referred to in JR Section 8,The Facts, by way of a summary leading to the obvious question.....How on Earth can all these claim Section 42 Legal Professional Privilege?
- 1. RCVS never disclosed to you their ‘notes' or identify their client(s) or lawyers did they?
- 2. South Wales Police deny police recorded incidents ever happened to avoid your DP Act!
- 3. Attorney General and his ‘private law team', when you examine HM 23rd July 2003 internal memo, enclosed, has no legal right to withhold details of their communications with my defendants, RCVS and South Wales Police, have they? Communication and exchange of evidence was without my knowledge and refusing to disclose is not just an Abuse of Process it is contrary to Data Protection Act1966, isn't it?
- 4. Similarly, the Home Secretary's refusal to disclose information about me, [my complaint police disclosed confidential records to RCVS,] to have me certified, in the manner it was collected, affecting my ongoing litigation would also be unlawful if disclosure continues to be denied, wouldn't it? But what has HM Partnership told you to do about it?
Where on Earth is the evidence of ‘confidential client/lawyer communications' if they are not unlawful undermining my damages claims currently before the law courts around the UK? Just who are the clients and lawyers and where are the compulsory Law Society contracts?
Maurice J Kirk BVSc Marlpits, St Donats, Llantwit Major, Wales CF61 1ZB
Copy to John Smith MP and http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/
4th Jan 09
Kirk v South Wales Police
CF6141159-MC65, MC65,CF101741, CF2041417, CF07345, 8CF02269
Abuse of Process Application
Re your 30th Dec 08 Court Application Refusing 17 years of Disclosure of Police/Crown Prosecution Service ‘Abuse of Process' by tomorrow
HM urchins in Guernsey, it appears, put me in good stead for my dealing with the obvious filth I have now been subjected to whilst here in South Wales and with those influencing the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons with their plotting with CPS and HM Partnership to deprive me of my livelihood.
I enclose 18th Dec 2002 letter [see recent downloads] to a Welsh Crown Court as a sample from of over 200 applications for disclosure of the usual police contemporaneous record in some 300 odd incidents, many leading to my unlawful incarceration. I asked at the scene, taped in custody, by letter the following day or in the 300 days or so of farcical Magistrate and Crown Courts not forgetting the most insulting of all, the 50 odd Judicial Review Applications before HM High Court judges fast asleep in the Royal Courts of Justice.
Leaked HM internal memos clearly indicate these judges were influenced by the HM Attorney General's personal intervention to block any further disclosure of the ‘conspiracy to pervert the course of justice' by the above mentioned. He failed miserably to have me certified as a vexatious litigant and so HM Partnership has stepped back into the fray to ‘*** up' any remaining legal process to which I am entitled as a British citizen currently living, but not for long, in the United Kingdom.
The incident before the 2002 Crown Court was used by the RCVS lawyers to have me struck off as a veterinary surgeon for life still refusing me, just as your client and CPS do, the identity of witnesses and copy of ‘contemporaneous notes' of their official enquiries. There is nothing new under the sun.
I disclosed to you 70 odd leaver arch files, ‘under my control', of my record of 10 years of harassment. I now have a similar amount since released from lawyers ‘not then under my control'. Do you need them?
You disclose the full record of the South Wales Police communicating with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, in order to prevent me practicing veterinary surgery and I will withdraw all current civil actions against your client, Barbara Wilding of the Chief of South Wales Police.
Maurice J Kirk BVSc
Copy to John Smith MP http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ http://www.wacl.org.uk/
JR Part 8 Facts For well over ten years now, in South Wales, I have suffered racial discrimination while asking successive courts to entertain my mounting evidence of Abuse of Process and general malfeasance by many employed by the tax payer supposedly to administer justice.
The sequence of documents below, pages 9 to 56, is but a sample disclosing relevant facts as to the scale of intrigue to which they stooped in order to prevent disclosure of favourable evidence in my cases. Disclosure was withheld by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and by their complainant, the South Wales Police, in order to have my name removed from the veterinary register.
Leaked HM Treasury Solicitor internal memos [p.11], CAA Legal Dept. [p.56] and my damages action led to HM 30thSept 08 Application Notice to reveal there had been a six year ongoing investigation by HM Attorney General, attempting to have me certified as a vexatious litigant and for what purpose?
Documents below will disclose these three defendants have been aware of this investigation for years and have been consulted by other government officials, without my knowledge, as to the scale of disruption it is doing to all three court proceedings, disclosing evidence to the Ministry of Justice and Home Office(3rd defendant) the fact that the South Wales Police originally, having lost their 120 criminal charges, 35 times demanding to see valid driving documents, invited the RCVS to Cardiff Central Police Station to take away copies of confidential police records, contrary to Home Office Regulations 45/1987, some of which were incorrect. This falsified evidence by the RCVS lawyers remains unpunished.
Even the Information Commissioner, following my DPA and FOI Act Applications for the RCVS to disclose their contemporaneous notes of their interviewing my clients, deemed this evidence as ‘lawyer /client privileged'! There is little evidence that interviews were even conducted by a lawyer, to the contrary.
The RCVS and Commissioner's department refuse to disclose what ‘client information' was purportedly put before him to indicate my veterinary clients and the investigating police were neither competent nor compellable for the witness stand. My clients and a local magistrate and a teacher were but a few interviewed by outside agents and identified staff from the college. ‘Lists' served on the RCVS of when, where, why and by whom evidence was gathered, following the Legal Assessor, Mr Flather QC, laying down terms of reference in open court for RCVS to DISCLOSE, continue to be ignored because the RCVS is protected from contempt of court legislation under the 1967 and 1844 RCVS Royal Charters.
No contemporaneous record of the investigation relating to prosecution evidence used in court has ever been disclosed, contrary to Article 6 of ECHR 1948 or Human Rights Act 1998. HM Treasury Solicitor has supported it in his submissions in Cardiff County Court, only this month, saying the vexatious litigant enquiry is ‘confidential' while he, the police and the RCVS have all been consulting each other while many of my current and past court files have been gathered up from around the country's courts and lost. These ongoing cases, HMCS have just admitted, have had their court tapes destroyed before any substantive hearing has even started and while my appeals are ongoing on in the Court of Appeal.
Malfeasance by blackmail is not uncommon. In 2001 I was denied any witnesses of fact by the RCVS to counter the evidence by police called as prosecution witnesses. HM Treasury Solicitor's office, confiding with my witnesses [see enclosed 23rd July 2003 HM Treasury Solicitor internal memo, page 11], threatened me with a bill of £6000+ should I persist in serving witness summonses on the very HM lawyer needed to attend the RCVS hearing with the evidence I needed to prove most of the above.
Just why, after seventeen years of litigation, this started in 1992 and six years with a team of Whitehall HM lawyers, is this same enquiry still going on in secret and just who is paying for it all?
This JR Application is to reveal to a competent court evidence that the defendants, RCVS, South Wales Police and now Home Secretary are in ‘harmony', refusing my right to be a member of the profession simply so I cannot get access to the college records to clear my family's name.
This so far undisclosed reason by the RCVS for failed disclosure is disproportionate to my refused right to practice veterinary surgery and is an Abuse of Process and requires criminal investigation.
The manner in which all three enquiries against me were conducted was an Abuse of Process.
Failed disclosure by the South Wales Police, denying incidents such as police breaking into my surgery with a crow bar and sledge hammers, locking me up in Cardiff prison saying "he cannot be identified" and denying court cases ever happened, can only be sorted in a criminal court, not some Welsh civil court behind closed doors denied a civilian jury.
Whilst lawyers continue to bury evidence of this once simple case of police harassment, with their tactics to delay ‘due process' at every turn, this never ending game of gutter warfare, purely to fuel the ‘gravy train', will soon make Charles Dickens's ‘Jarndyce and Jarndyce', as an example of avaricious attorneys, looking more like a mediocre mélange of a teddy bear's picnic crossed with Lewis Carol's Mad Hatter's tea party. But who out there really cares that the culprits, clear criminals, always get paid?
Extract from Shedule7 of 1998 Data Protection Act
Legal professional privilege
10. Personal data are exempt from the subject information provisions if the data consist of information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege or, in Scotland, to confidentiality as between client and professional legal adviser, could be maintained in legal proceedings.
This interpretation of law, upon which all three defendants purport to rely, is yet another abuse. ‘The Royal Prerogative' allows each, in turn, to refuse disclosure of relevant evidence gathered by their respective investigation teams to prosecute Maurice John Kirk because each judge in turn has been made to swear allegiance to the Queen instead of the citizens who are paying for the ‘gravy train'.
It stinks, doesn't it?
Maurice J Kirk BVSc 30th Dec 2008
FAO CAA Medical Examiner,
11th Jan 09
HM Treasury Solicitor- 7 year Vexatious Litigant Enquiry
Refused Medical Certificate to Fly Aircraft, pending further Information
Leaked HM Treasury Solicitor 23rd July 2003 memo, enclosed, reveals the CAA have also been made by the HM Attorney General to communicate, as Defendant, with the HM team of Whitehall lawyers, in their joint attempts to have me certified.
May I suggest you ask for disclosure of those CAA documents when considering whether I am to be certified to fly or not?
Both the Royal college of Veterinary Surgeons and South Wales Police refuse to disclose anything on the matter of this 7 year HM Attorney General investigation.
My Abuse of Process Application, citing the damage it has done to my veterinary, flying and family life, is repeatedly swept under the carpet by successive judges because I hold the proof of misfeasance and criminal conduct by lawyers.
It may not surprise you to know my FOA and Data Protection Act Applications, to make CAA's Mr Stephen Williams disclose this HM Partnership interference, bore no fruit, yet.
So just whom am I expected to believe, bearing in mind it was the CAA that had me put in prison in 1980, destroying my aviation career, on trumped up evidence, sending bully boy retired police officers around to witnesses at the dead of night saying, "if you do not give evidence against Kirk we will take your licence instead"? I had been neither the pilot, registered owner nor drunk, contrary to the way the CAA lawyers put it to the ‘bemused' in Bournemouth Crown court.
I have sent you some fax material and an e-mail earlier this morning concerning my licence suspension in May 2008, pending enquiry, following my encounter with the US Department of Homeland Security, Texas, with subsequent deportation.
I have now found the document you need, enclosed. I made the doctor in Texas State Lunatic Asylum, Austin, write out and sign, witnessed before me, before I would agree to leave the hospital building to pursue my rights in court convened upon my insistence. The British Consulate clearly kicked up a fuss and I thank them for it.
US Authorities arrested me while I was on a country stroll in Texas, trying to get a photograph of a scissor bird. While in chains I saw neither the President's Men ,FBI, The Sherriff nor his many deputies make any written record at all of my incarceration other than the details from my passport and home address. They ALL refused to write down my detailed statement of explanation. The FAA told me,witnessed by others, I had committed no aviation offence in landing in the farmer's field many miles from Mr Bush's ranch.
My demand for a ‘Habeus Corpus document', where I had been and that I was still alive, was because no ‘audit trail', to date, appeared to have been created during my detention, as far as I could see, either at road side, 11 police vehicles, in Waco Prison, Waco hospital or in various police cars and now, in State Lunatic Asylum . Not dissimilar to my experiences with the RCVS, refusing to disclose any contemporaneous notes of their enquiry. I do not frighten easily but what I witnessed in Texas, up until US guards let go of me at Gatwick Airport, is a stark warning to the world. My web site on downloads, http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/, publishes the local paper saying the police state I was not even arrested!
I demanded such a document, as I do for all custody records, be created by my captors for I have found so often, without such record, RCVS, police and now the CAA, rarely believe a word I say and will spend a small fortune to prevent me enjoying respective ‘privileges' my qualifications were supposed to guarantee. No police escorted me to my aircraft in the cow field, as the doctor's note portrays, they were seen gathered under the trees, half a mile away, with surveillance gadgets and a ‘surface to air' missile, no doubt.
I went with witnesses to the court hearing in the Texas hospital only to be told by a lawyer there, again witnessed by Alvin Howell, the case had, as the attorney put it, "air- brushed out"! Court officials refused to let me get access to any public record of its existence. Good ‘Old Uncle Sam' and so called human rights.
I chased over 50 JR Applications in that ridiculous building, the Royal Courts of Justice, London, knowing full well the lawyers in the RCVS would use those trivial motoring convictions to have me struck off. I believe HM intervention was originally to investigate the South Wales Police conduct following my complaints but everybody is keeping their traps shut.
It was encouraging to see the way the June 08 CAA memo described these minor South Wales convictions. A pity someone in the CAA could not back me on that point against the RCVS, refusing my right to practice veterinary surgery.
It is therefore of interest to me that the HM Attorney General instigated, both in 2003 and last year, an enquiry with the CAA to get information from their Legal Department to get me certified. I must start new applications concerning failed CAA disclosure.
To be certified as a vexatious litigant does have its advantages. I could not think of anything more enjoyable as to never ever having to enter such sewers of depravity, UK court rooms, each in there trying to outdo the other by their level of deceit.
Please pass this e-mail on to the CAA department withholding the information I feel you require.
Maurice J Kirk. BVSc
Copy to John Smith MP
Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, HM Attorney -General and South Wales Police
Pre Action Protocol
Judicial Review Application 19th January 2009 C0/397/2009
Abuse of Process
I have been forced to lodged a Judicial Review Application for my family and worldwide web site readers in order to inform those expressing concern about your apparent ‘cosy relationship,' in the HM Partnership, in ongoing litigation in UK courts against fellow ‘litigants in person', unable to obtain independent legal representation.
All three of you refuse to disclose evidence gathered during your respective investigations in order to have me punished, struck off or jailed.
All three of you, in court, have relied on Section 42, ‘legal profession privilege'.
The RCVS and HM Treasury Solicitor have been challenged under the 1966 Data Protection Act to reveal your communications about me.
The Information Commissioner has interpreted the purpose of the Act by stating the RCVS ‘need not disclose the evidence', gathered from my own clients, by lay staff of the college, not even to him. His communications with the RCVS, supporting this argument also, of course, remains ‘privileged'!
The HM Treasury Solicitor, in court last week, on behalf of the HM Home Secretary again refuses to disclose anything concerning the 7 year investigation on me where the HM Attorney General' ordered all three of you defendants to communicate with each other and disclose the undisclosed evidence, in respective ongoing court cases, without my knowledge and contrary to law.
Supply evidence, to which I am entitled and I will withdraw most Actions currently before courts.
Maurice J Kirk BVSc
Copy to John Smith MP & http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ & http://www.wacl.org.uk/