Maurice Kirk

Maurice's Blog

Please sign our online petition: Fair Trials and Compensation instead of an effective remedy before national authorities, for Maurice and other victims of financial exploitation and legal oppression.

Breaking News:

Political asylum granted by France - to a British citizen - for the first time since the French Revolution... Key videos: We see Maurice being interviewed in Jersey in Dec 2010 and talking outside the Royal Courts of Justice, in June 2008. Here he introduces himself to a meeting of the Forum for Stable Currencies at the House of Lords, on March 9, 2010. In July 2010, Maurice speaks to the British Constitution Group in Stoke on Trent. For first-time visitors, a complementary and introductory blog offers also a one-page summary of his ordeals and battles.
  • In Jail Over WW1 Machine Gun

    Maurice Kirk wishes you to know that he is being held on remand in Cardiff Prison.

    He was arrested on Monday 22 June and taken to Port Talbot Police Station. He was charged on Tuesday late evening and appeared before magistrates on Wednesday. The magistrates decided to bail him, but on CPS appeal he was sent to Cardiff prison and appeared before a judge on Thurs am. He was remanded until his prelim hearing on 6 July.

    He is charged with possession of a firearm and offering it for sale. The firearm in question was a deactivated WW1 machine gun (no trigger, holes drilled into it) and made up of salvaged parts from other armaments for the sole purpose of looking good on the front of a replica DH2 aircraft.

    He wishes it to be known that his arrest and search of the family home occurred after the weekend following the day he was required to exchange documents with the solicitors defending South Wales Police in his case against them for harassment. He failed to serve documents on 19th June as required by court order as the solicitors would not accept them.

    Maurice has since been unable to telephone until he received money by postal order (ie after 6 days in prison). He has been visited and has said that he has no access to legal books etc.

    He has a case by Jury in two months. We'll keep you posted.

  • HRH Prince Charles and now is it John Smith MP to the Rescue? Will Captain Kirk Lose his Licence?

    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
    Highgrove House

    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.

    For example:

    • 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 .
    • 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.

    Yours truly,


    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. 

    Yours sincerely


    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.

    Dear Sir,

    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?

    Yours faithfully,

    Maurice J Kirk BVSc                               Marlpits, St Donats, Llantwit Major, Wales CF61 1ZB

    Copy to John Smith MP and


    Dolmans, solicitors,


    4th Jan 09 

    Kirk v South Wales Police 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            CF6141159-MC65, MC65,CF101741,   CF2041417, CF07345, 8CF02269

       Abuse of Process Application 

    Dear Sir,

    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.

    Yours faithfully,

    Maurice J Kirk BVSc

    Copy to John Smith MP      






    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


    Dear Dr,


    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,, 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.


    Yours sincerely,

    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


    Dear Sirs,

    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 & &  








  • US Presidential Pardon?

    President GW Bush





    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


    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


    Thanks for your time


    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."


  • Brittany to prepare Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons Court of Appeal Fiasco

    Filed under: ,

    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            20th 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



    • 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 29th 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, 19th 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 19th 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 1st Judicial Review Application conducted ex parte later for me to be told the 2nd application would le listed in 2005


    • 2. 6th 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 4th and 5th 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 27th 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 30th 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

    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. 



  • Battle Bus in London 10th December ECHR 60 years

    Bus arrives London Wed and Thursday for protest outside Royal Courts of Justice and House of Commons

    Ride the bus.....60 Years of Human Rights Convention

    ring 07966523940 or 02084288644

    We had a GRRRREAT DAY now who is coming with us to Paris afyter Christmas......will Cliff Richard sponsor the fuel bill?




     E-Mail from Paul:

    60th Anniversary of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights bus journey to Paris.


    1. The bus, an ex-London Routemaster all cleaned and refurbished, will be leaving London on the 6th of December. The ferry is booked for 9.45am from Dover, which means leaving London at 5.30am from the Embankment at Blackfriars, nearest tube station is Blackfriars on the Circle and District lines handy for all main line stations.


    2. It is 180 miles from Calais to Paris, the bus maximum speed is 40mph therefore the journey time is 4.5 hours depending on traffic. There will be at least 2 half hour stops.


    3. Arrangements are in hand to stay at Citea Magny le Hongre self catering apartments which have 3 bedrooms to sleep up to 8 people. These apartments are quite spacious with kitchen, living area etc and can be viewed on: Citea Magny Le Hongre . The price per person for 5 nights is £75.00 which is just £15 per night, and Disney Land is close by!


    4. There is rough accommodation on board the bus by way of camp beds for 3 to 4 on the upper deck (there are curtains for the windows). I have known people to sleep quite comfortably on the 2 long seats on the lower deck. So anyone wishing to sleep on the bus please let me know and bring a sleeping bag and some extra warm covers because it will be cold in Paris this time of year. The bus central heating only works when the engine is running so there will be no central heating when the bus is parked for the night.


    5. The bus will be parked near to the apartments so that all the usual services will be available for those sleeping on the bus. No snorers please.


    6. On the 7th December it is the actual 60th Anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights, we understand that there will be a very large crowd at Notre Dame, so we will be driving there for the day.


    7. The following day there is another big rally at the Eiffel Tower which we will be attending.


    8. On the 9th there will be a day when you can enjoy the sights, sounds and food of Paris, and to do some Christmas shopping.


    9. On the 10th. We all go to the Unesco building where selected delegates have a chance to speak to the General Council and to put points about the UK's  violations of those rights guaranteed by the Declaration.


    10. The bus returns on the 11th December to catch the 9.15pm ferry at Calais.


    11. The bus has facilities for charging mobile phones and running electric razors. There is also a small gas stove for making tea and coffee etc. Please do not use the gas stove while the bus is in motion.


    12. If there are any smokers please do not smoke on the bus, there are no ashtrays and I have spent many hours cleaning the inside of the bus, other non-smoking passengers may object.


    ring me to book ....a few seats left  MJK in France  07966523940

    or Paul direct on; 
    01572 811175

  • Yorkshire Ripper Enquiry & Barbara Wilding South Wales Police Similarity

    See 'Most Recent' download.

    This leaked HM Treasury Solicitor internal memo, one of many, may be an indication to the UK tax payer as to just what it costs while those in the UK judiciary continue to enjoy immunity to prosecution due to the 'Royal Prerogative'.

     HM Treasury Solicitor and Crown Prosecution Service have no fear, of course, over their appearance tomorrow to defend the HM Home Secretary in Cardiff Court hearing for my false imprisonments.

    Jack Straw, HM Minister of Justice, remember, arranged for Article One, the binding article, of the 1948 European Charter of Human Rights to be omitted from our 1998 Human Rights Act making it quite ineffective and a farce.

    While my parliamentary representative, John Smith MP and his colleagues continue to swear allegiance to the ‘Royal Prerogative' our journey to Paris on the 6th Dec, in an old red London double-decker bus, to join 60 years ECHR Celebration, will be all the more worthwhile.

    While The Yorkshire Ripper associated trials unfold it makes one wonder just how many other HM agents, such as those pulling the strings in the South Wales Police and RCVS, for example, are also given immunity and have behaved in a similar fashion to our current lot in London over the years?


    John Smith MP Esq.,

    House of Commons, Westminster.

    27th November 2008                                Your ref:  K/2002


    Dear Mr Smith,


    Abuse of Process Application-Cardiff County Court 25th November 2008

    Maurice Kirk v South Wales Police


    Further to my last letter of the 22nd November matters have turned somewhat for the better.

    A day in court on Tuesday eventually commenced an Abuse of Process Application causing the judge to order Barbara Wilding, Chief of the South Wales Police, to sign a sworn affidavit that there has been full disclosure in my 16 year on going action for damages.

    Remember, the police deny a court case took place involving 9 months of surveillance, the police broke into my surgery with a crow bar and they told a court they did not know who I was and had me locked up in Cardiff prison for 4 days until I was ‘identified'.

    Further, the police must reply to my requests concerning well over 39 incident reports currently withheld from me as they will undermine their defence for losing around 121 charges brought against me due to vindictive malfeasance.

    I will not be holding my breath......

    The Home Secretary has still failed to disclose in court today any of the investigation she has admitted has been going on for at least 5 years to have me certified as a vexatious litigant. My application under both the Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information Act is being side lined as the lawyer for Jacqui Smith now says I can only have what he has 'in his office'! 

    If you again examine the HM Treasury Solicitor internal memo I sent  you you will see all defendants, South Wales Police and Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, have been in close communication for years with the HM Attorney General's Department without my knowledge affecting the very process of my, almost daily, court decisions. Clearly an Abuse of Process.

    Now, do we have that meeting this year  or not?

    Yours sincerely,

    Maurice J Kirk BVSc


    See 'Most Recent' download.

  • Home Secretary Refuses to Disclose Sect 31 Evidence

    Whilst enjoying every second in Brittany, France, 'meticulously' flight planning [Please note Bristol CAA Flight Examiner] my Piper Cub flight to Cape Town, South Africa and ship to Argentina, possibly, I have to stop every thing, even put my fine glass of 'Cuvee de la Salette' down and write the following response, following  further plain wickedness  from the South Wales Police.

     The HM Home Sectretary, [Hearing 25th November in Cardiff], now, bless her, refuses to disclose even 'occurrence' numbered police logged details, even under the Data Protection Act or Freedom of Information Act.

     Documents affecting RCVS and South Wales Police cases from her 5 year running 'investigation' in Whitehall' to have me certified as a 'Vexatious Litigant' she is also withholding. So what's new , I say?

     Just what the RCVS achieved from the HM Information Commissioner following the South Wales Police invitation for the RCVS lawyers and lay staff to visit and examine police confidential records on me in Cardiff Central Police Station. [Contrary to 1987/45 HO Regulations]

     But just what does the web site reader make of this latest gem from the South Wales Police' published below causing me to write to Jaqui Smith?

    Further and better details on 'downloads'  and later this year (when I have the cash!) 



    The Specialist Listing Section

    Cardiff County Court/Mercantile Listing

    Civil Justice Centre

    2 Park Street



    URGENT - case management conference 25 / 26 November 2008


    Dear Sirs,



    NUMBER BS 614159 / ALSO CASE NUMBERS CF101741 / CF 204141


    We refer to previous correspondence in connection with the above matter and the case management conference listed before His Honour Judge Chambers QC on 25 and 26 November 2008.

    We also refer to the application issued by the Claimant listed for hearing on 19 November 2008 but which was not dealt with due to the failure of the claimant to attend the hearing.

    We have previously filed the witness statement of Adrian Paul Oliver for the Defendant for the consideration of His Honour Judge Chambers QC. We can confirm that we received a position statement from the claimant by e-mail at 10.02 am on 19 November 2008. We enclose a copy of the same for the benefit of His Honour Judge Chambers QC. We can confirm that  e-mail did not provide the enclosures referred to in that letter.

    We also note, at page 6 of this e-mail that there is a reference to the Home Secretary being represented in court on 25 November 2008.

     We would draw the court's attention to the fact that neither the application of19 November 2008, nor the proceedings which are the subject of the case management conference have any reference to the Home Office or the Home Secretary.

     Our enquiries indicate that the court has not listed any application in respect of the Home Office to be heard on 25 and 26 November and there is no standing of the Home Office or Home Secretary in these actions.

    [ NOW no Home Secretary hearing listed for 25th as Home Office say 'not ready']

     We have copied this letter to the claimant so that he might be under no illusion that the hearing next week should have any reference to any separate cause of action or proceedings in which he might be involved with another party. We would be grateful if a copy of this letter could be placed before His Honour Judge Chambers QC at the earliest opportunity.

    Yours faithfully,






    John Smith MP Esq,

    House of Commons, Westminster.

    22nd November 2008                                                                                                                  Your ref:  K/2002


    Dear Mr Smith,

    Abuse of Process Application-Cardiff County Court 25th November 2008


    Further to my last letter of the 2nd November matters have worsened.

    I enclose my letter to Home Secretary and 17th Dec 07 schematic flow chart for indicating the HM ‘Partnership' affecting both Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons [RCVS] and South Wales Police court cases.  I have exhausted all remedies available to me, other than you, my Parliamentary representative.

    • 1. On the 31st October 08 the HM Home Secretary's lawyer admitted, in Cardiff Court, there was still a ‘team of lawyers' in Whitehall {with all my court files, transcripts and tapes?} under the instructions of HM Attorney General to try and get me certified as a ‘Vexatious Litigant'. This will block ‘Disclosure' of the criminal conduct by not just lawyers. I have already a sample of leaked HM internal memos implicating several under the Home Office or Ministry of Justice.


    • 2. HM Home Secretary's lawyer also agreed to ‘disclose', the date now well passed, just what had been going on for 5 years with HM Treasury Solicitor that has so seriously prejudiced my actions for damages for false imprisonment and on the matter of failure to Sect 31 Disclosure rules by both the South Wales Police and Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, the latter stating that the Information Commissioner, for the Data Protection Act 1966, considered all interviews of my Barry, Vale of Glamorgan, veterinary clients by RCVS lawyers or lay staff were ‘privileged'!


    • 3. The RCVS even falsified witness statements they reluctantly served on me just before the 2002 trial, following complaints by the South Wales Police to have my name removed from the veterinary register for but one reason.


    • 4. On Tuesday His Honour Judge North's Order, to make the Home Secretary ‘disclose' anything relevant, will be ignored as have my previous applications under the DPA Act and Freedom of Information Act. No one seems to be accountable to anyone anymore, do they?


    Yours sincerely


    Maurice J Kirk BVSc

    Copy to





    HM Home Secretary,             Case number:  8CF02269


    22nd November 2008


    Re Judgment of £15,360 for False Imprisonment you owe me

    HM Partnership


    Dear Jacqui  Smith,

    You are due to appear on Tuesday in Cardiff court but there has been no ‘disclosure' as you promised His Honour Judge North, not even filed defences I require in rebuttal. You did not attend the 19th November 2008 hearing. Am I entitled to know why?

    I will do a financial deal with you if you ‘disclose', under CPR Sect 31 Rules, the following:

    • 1. Just what confidential records about me, held by the South Wales Police, were disclosed to Penningtons, solicitors, of Gutter Street and Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons lay staff, contrary to Home Office Regulations 45/1987, causing erroneous information and a fictitious conviction against me to go before the RCVS court to have me struck of the veterinary register?


    • 2. Just what caused the 5 year ongoing ‘investigation' by a team of HM lawyers to have me certified as a vexatious litigant in the first place and just who else is behind this vast expense to the tax payer hell bent on withholding evidence concerning my false imprisonments and 10 years of consolidated police harassment by the South Wales Police?

     If you do ‘disclose' then will withdraw my Court Order for your £15,360 on Tuesday and pay YOU a similar sum for your kindness. The law allows me this evidence.

     There appears to be both a Malfeasance and An Abuse of Process within the HM Partnership here in South Wales all dependent upon ‘Her Majesty's Prerogative' for immunity from prosecution.

    Yours faithfully,


    Maurice J Kirk BVsc  

    Enclosed: Schematic flow chart dated 17th Dec 2007.

    Copy to Mr John Smith MP, &







    In The Cardiff Court                  Claim Nos.    CF6141159‐MC65, CF101741, CF204141

                                                                      4th Action 7CF07345  5th Action  8CF02269


    Maurice Kirk v South Wales Police


    Claimant's Response to Defendant's Position Statement  17th November 2008

     I, Maurice Kirk, as an Englishman in Wales, make this statement in response to the Defendant's position statement dated 17th November 2008.


    •1.       Yet again I rely on the ‘balance of probabilities' in civil law, my human rights, my Abuse of Process Application, listed for the 25th/26th November 2008 and my countless Disclosure Applications, over more than 16 years now, due to the malicious failure for proper Sect 31 Disclosure etc by the Defendant when applied for either by my original lawyers, my own Applications in Magistrates, Crown, County Courts and/or direct, in writing, as ‘litigant in person' unable to obtain independent legal representation.


    •2.       This 4th Action needs, I say again, to be adjourned in order for the Particulars of Claim to be simplified following that Disclosure in all Actions to which I am entitled under the law.


    •3.       Denial by the Defendant that 1) welsh court cases ever took place, 2) 34 {35} times I had to produce valid motoring insurance 2) aeroplanes were burnt out, 3) there was sufficient evidence to prosecute when I was thrown down the stairs into hospital by a known criminal in front of her officer and my wife, 4) Cardiff police took a crow bar to break into my veterinary surgery to re house a police inspector's daughter and drug dealer and 5) she had me sent to prison on the pretext I could not be "identified", is an indication that there should be a halt to these legal proceedings and an independent enquiry as to why the Welsh Authorities have gone to such  lengths to cover up the criminal conduct of a handful of reject attorneys.


    •4.       The 5th Action is currently levelled at the HM Home Secretary only because of the 16 years of ‘treacle treatment' here in Wales while an Englishman is attempting ‘due process' of statute law for reasonable compensation for a string of false imprisonments and harassment by the very same defendant each time. It appears she ceased and  her ‘activity' on the very day, 29th May 2002, the Defendant, complainant to the RCVS, obtained my name from being removed from the veterinary register in order that I may no longer ‘practice veterinary surgery' and have an income.


    •5.       The 200 odd police incidents, touched on in the current 4th Action Particulars of Claim, lie almost exclusively in the 10 year period of intense harassment by the South Wales Police, 1992-2002, details of which are set out in the original 3 Actions for damages. Documentation between parties prior to October 2002 and what was said in the 31st October 2003 hearing further confirms there was an agreement to adjourn further proceedings being lodged as to have done so could have jeopardised my basic right to have a trial by jury. The unlawful way I was denied a jury trial is history but will be referred to at The Court of Appeal as yet another example of malfeasance by those in positions of privilege.


    •6.       The reason for The HM Home Secretary, now to be represented in Cardiff court on the 25th November, to face the Abuse of Process Application in the 5 Actions is to allow the Management judge to hear how both the South Wale Police and RCVS made secret complaint to the HM Attorney General in the early 2000s in order to have me certified as a Vexatious Litigant and so jeopardise my rights, in law, in their respective Actions as defendants.


    •7.       On 31st October 2008 and in writing the HM Home Secretary admitted, for the first time by any one, that there had, in effect, been an ‘Abuse of Process' due to the conduct of the South Wales Police and lawyers employed by the RCVS to have my name removed from the veterinary register so as to impede income and so my ability for a fair trial.


    •8.        2003/6 leaked HM memos, [samples served on this court], confirm the conspiracy and explains why my own barrister was refused ‘sight of' Cardiff Court files, relating to all these 5 claims because they were apparently ‘lost'! They were no more ‘lost' than I am a Freemason. They were in Whitehall with the HM Attorney General. Many of the 130 odd files are ‘lost' now along with the file marked "Maurice J Kirk -Potential Vexatious Litigant" shown to me by Cardiff court Staff full of numerous communications between the police, Royal College of Veterinary surgeons and Home Office agents.....ALL FOR ONE PURPOSE.


    •9.        Refusal by HM Court Service to produce it now further confirms why a huge team of tax payer paid Whitehall lawyers today continue to ‘beaver away' to block exposure of  the conspiracy.


    •10.   The Management Judge's 31st Oct 2007 Internal Memo [enclosed] further confirms my worst fears suggesting my Abuse of Process Application should first be heard in the Cardiff Court. But I have delivered the ‘meat on the bone' to numerous courts and police stations from about the land and no one will lift a finger because this despicable cancer is rife throughout the British Judicial System by being dominated by devil worshipping freemasons.   


    •11.   The HM Home Secretary, represented by the HM Treasury Solicitor has now admitted it, in Cardiff court , before HHJ North and gave ‘undertakings', following my Applications under the Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information Act to ‘Disclose' the tape and transcript of the 28th October 2002 hearing when the South Wales Police referred to the agreement for no further incidents of alleged ‘harassment or malfeasance' were to be served on the Defendant  for fear it would be ‘document heavy' for a civilian jury to ‘understand'. What utter rubbish.


    •12.   No Disclosure by HM Treasury Solicitor has occurred and entry to his RCJ offices was refused. Why is there my evidence, needed now, somewhere in London, God knows where?



    •13.   Most of the defendant's current statement is plain verbiage printed off from the last such statement with one purpose only push up the costs with little regard as to who pays.


    •14.    Exactly the same conduct of her co-conspirators, The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, who on each of my 10 monthly ‘de novo' applications for re instatement to the veterinary register, by simply pressing the repeat button on their computer £12,000 will again be granted, full costs, out of hand, when not even taxed or court papers read by the High Court judge. [See Royal Courts of Justice transcript and time sheets of Mr Justice McComb  in Kirk v RCVS July 2005 and witness statement of Mr Patrick Cullinane Esq. who saw it all]. It stinks doesn't it but who cares?


    •15.   I set a ‘test case' to show my web site readers, since my last application for Disclosure, to indicate just how widespread the incest and wickedness is, not just here in South Wales, should one become so unfortunately entangled with such an insular ‘authority'.


    •16.    In Oct 2008 I wrote to the Defendant and to my Parliamentary Representative, Mr John Smith MP, the latter having witnessed the very same scandal back in 2002 when Defendant admitted Christopher Ebbs was immune to prosecution. UK judges closed my web


    •17.    My 4th October letter was direct to the Barry police and a similar but a different 8th October letter was to Barbara Wilding, the Area Chief Officer, in response to Occurrence Numbers issued by South Wales Police following some random picked 40 odd incidents reported by me. I also wrote on the 16th October to the Defendant's lawyers for similarDisclosure'. Again, none responded with any ‘Disclosure' or as to what ‘progress' or lack of it [4th Action] had been made in the 40 odd incidents of complaint despite their original letters, each indicating they would.


    •18.   Further comment on the Defendant's 17th November 2008 position is futile in the absence of ‘Disclosure' of facts within her knowledge or by the HM Home Secretary and her agents. Failed access to ‘independent legal representation', to allow me to fairly present a ‘skeleton argument' and my claims for damages, is a further but far more widespread a conspiracy across the UK.


    •19.   Both Data Protection Act 1966 and The Human Rights Act 1998 are a farce and were written for one purpose only. The latter deliberately omits the most crucial paragraphs in the European Convention on Human Rights, ‘protection against malfeasance', conduct of the State, the main reason why it was signed in the first place, on 10th Dec 1948, 60 years ago.


    Signed:          Maurice J Kirk BVSc  18th Nov 2008


    Copy to John Smith MP &  &  Paris 10th Dec Protest... BE THERE

  • Lest We Forget


    Lest We Forget                                                                                         12th November 2008  Brittany, France

    It was five years ago, on a cold wet winter's night when I was en route through northern France to collect a bent Cessna 172 aircraft that had crashed in the Alps. I was later hit by a truck that set off the satellite beacon in her fuselage calling in a low flying military helicopter and ‘the rest' but that is a lighter story for some other time!

    Now I was nearing Lille city, on the Belgian border and with the aid of ‘cyber space' and the War Graves Commission had worked out just where father's brother's grave may be.

    I finally found the cemetery in the dead of night locked up like a fortress so a bedded down in the old car for the night. Light never really came. When someone turned up and unlocked the huge wrought iron gates it was still howling a gale with sheets of rain making it still quite dark- even at eight am.

     I decided to make a run for it, in all the wrong clothes and spent the next forty odd minutes getting drenched, dodging between the Yew trees, trying to locate the military section of this old town burial ground.

    Then there it was before me. First a large area of French soldiers, laid out in immaculate rows with an enormous Tricolour flag towering overhead fluttering and rumbling, making all the sounds of a sailing ship in a storm.

     Just to the left I recognised the British cemetery with their distinctive tomb stones boxed in by an immaculately kept low cut hedge with grass also cut to a standard fit for a billiard table.

    I had been dashing between points of shelter until now but this sight pulled me up abruptly and I was now almost creeping in anticipation as to what may be before me.

     I worked my way down the names  carved in the stones and had almost given up when, tucked in the corner was Uncle Maurice's grave with nineteen year old Private P O Winsor of the Pioneer Corps, killed on the day I was born, on one side and Brigadier TG Newberry MC, Lincolnshire Regiment, on the other.

    Even now I cannot start to put into words, now I have recovered, just what I felt when I first saw my own name carved on the tomb stone. I was now soaked through but stood there in the teaming rain clutching an equally wet camera with no intention what so ever of taking the photograph.

     Charles Dickens's book, ‘Christmas Carol' and the appearance of the ‘ghost to come', showing old Scrooge his future grave stone, came to mind but not just then. That only went through my mind much later, whilst driving home, my heavily laden trailer behind me as I headed for Calais and the English Channel.

    Dad was due to be there that same day as me with Celia, my little sister, en route from Holland to Brittany. Like me both father and Celia had not yet made this journey to Lille.

      I regret to this day my having been ‘unable' to wait for them that day as I had urgent appointments and a time table to keep. All quite pathetic, now I think back.

    Father had been with Maurice as veterinary students at the Royal Veterinary College, London graduating, eventually, in 1938.

      Together they caused, apparently, much fun and some havoc if I believe some of their fellow class mates' stories!

     Both Dame Olga and Mary Brancker had fond memories. The two boys had been in partnership running a country practice in Taunton, Somerset, when war broke out.

      Father tried for the Royal Air Force but was told he was more important working where he was but Uncle Maurice managed, much later, to be commissioned as Captain with the Royal Veterinary Corps in charge of a large number of horses and especially mules, needed to move munitions up to the front line.

    On the 3rd March Uncle Maurice died from poisoned food rations deliberately left behind by the retreating enemy and was buried in an open field with a few others struck down at the time.

    Yesterday on the 11th November I decided to return to the cemetery with the hope I could overcome my emotions this time and linger a while.

     I spent the evening before in town drinking with old war veterans and resistance fighters reminiscing the occupation, the sabourtage they had managed and the ridiculous price now of our drinks, Calva (Calvados, apple brandy)!

    At the cemetery I managed better constructive thought this time and with the sun, occasionally breaking thought the fast moving cloud, I managed to record for the family their great uncle's last resting place.

     I moved from tomb to tomb soon realising there had been death on French soil during specific periods of the war and every tomb stone had a story to tell about the human cost of war.

    First there were a few buried from the First World War tucked in a corner on their own. Second were the mid to late May1940 re guard losses, due to the chaotic retreat to Dunkerque and the incredible rescue by the ‘Armada' of small boats taking our soldiers back to ‘Blighty' to fight another day.

    Then I found a group of dead in their late teens and early twenties having died with Maurice in or around the spring of 1945 when both British and Commonweal servicemen and women returned to finish the business.

     A few Polish soldiers rested there also with the British having died of their wounds after V E Day, 8th May 1945.

    The next group really stirred me as if I was not already emotionally drained. I found small numbers, in twos and threes, Royal Air Force crew having clearly died together.

    The dates appeared random from between May 1940 to late 1944. A pilot, an air gunner and navigator no doubt boys together, not one over twenty five, victims of some night raid out of somewhere, in an Avro Lancaster bomber, may be?

    Then there was a Squadron Leader Kerry, just twenty one years old, on his own who perhaps, maybe, had been a Spitfire or Typhoon pilot also killed in that late summer of 1944.  

    I said goodbye and walked slowly through the cemetery gates only to be met by a sea of flowers. The locals with great bouquets of ever colour imaginable surged past me in order to honour their dead.

    I motored south, very quiet. It was coming up to eleven o'clock and the two minutes silence so I sought out a British grave yard called La Kreule near St Omer and Ypres, both places of terrible carnage and waste in World War One.

    This was, by description, a Commonwealth burial ground. I wandered through reading and thinking of their short lives, many from countries afar, ending in the deep mud of Flanders.

    Then, just after the silence, I espied a small white cross on the end of one of the lines of tomb stones. A French one I guessed, yes it was, the grave of an aviator. It read, RENAUL Henri Adjudant 2a Groupe  d'Aviation MORT POUR LA FRANCE le 08..05.1918 .

    "There must be some special story behind this burial", I thought. "He had been flying an Hispano- Suiza Vee inline engined 235 h.p. Spad or maybe a Niewport biplane?"

     My already fired up and fertile imagination was soon in overdrive.  "Au Revoir, Mon Vieux.", I stammered, turned and left for England.      

  • HM Deceit Since 1415, Denied 'Trial By Jury'

    HM Home Secretary’s Legal Defence Department,

     Campbell Street,


     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 &   


  • Home Secretary, South Wales Police and RCVS in Cardiff Court 25th November 10.30 All Invited

    In Cardiff Court, yesterday, I found a judge, at last, who appeared to 'grasp the nettle' and ordered HM to disclose the reasoning behind the 5 year, still ongoing enquiry, to certify me as a 'Vexatious Litigant'.

    The litigation was first ordered by HM Attorney General following information laid by both the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and South Wales Police, the latter being the original complainant to have me struck of the Veterinary Register and so lose income to fight them.

     I have been denied, ever since, any Section 31 Disclosure on this other than leaked HM ‘internal memos' between various Whitehall departments and HM Treasury Solicitor who, only yesterday, denied any knowledge of what was behind it all. I told the HM lawyer he was either mistaken or a blatant liar.

    All my court files and tapes of hearings in the past 10 years appear were with the HM Treasury Solicitor while HM Court Service denied all knowledge, knowing full well files were lost. HMCS even prevented my barrister being briefed with the ‘remaining court files' in order for him to address the Court of Appeal for me to have a Trial by Jury in my 15 year running South Wales Police Harassment Cases.

    Cardiff Court even say the critical October 2002 court tape, vital for 25th November 2008 Abuse of Process Application, is destroyed......utter nonsense.

    Both Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information Act served on the RCVS also proved a complete farce. SEE DOWNLOADS &

    Last week's 6th Refusal by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons to even allow me to make an Application to the college committee,to be re instated as a veterinary surgeon, contrary to the 1966 Veterinary Surgeons Act, may well now gel the previous confusion in this case experienced by so many web site readers from  around the world. We sincerely hope so. My family and I are now entering the 16th year of litigation and serious hardship. 

    As much as they will try RCVS lawyers will never be able to change the 'truth' of the original facts withheld from the 2002 Trial and their continuing reliance of 'Her Majesty's Prerogative' and 1967 RCVS Royal Charter will only further undermine the original purpose of 'due process of law' and the right of any British citizen to a fair trial.  

More Posts Previous page - Next page