Maurice's Blog : RCVS

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

Maurice Kirk — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:00:00 GMT

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
Tetbury
Gloucestershire
England

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 http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ .
5. This has meant my applications for HM Judicial Review, fifty or more, have been prejudiced from the start with perfunctory nanoseconds set aside for the purpose. I recall one of many before their Lordships, a Mr Justice Scott-Baker, coming to the Cardiff court clearly without the London lodged papers and rabbiting on about the wrong case.
6. This has meant my complaint of the conspiracy by RCVS lawyers, falsifying witness statements and deliberately misleading courts on the availability of witness evidence, enjoying immunity to prosecution by the 1967 RCVS Royal Charter, has become the best ‘Whitehall farce' to date.
7. This meant all court transcripts and tapes, now needed to prosecute, were copied to HM but the Cardiff court deny it, having destroyed originals before my case has even left the traps!

I ask, Your Highness, for your urgent intervention in the interests of justice and the Welsh community.

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 1^st 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 23^rd July 2003 internal memo.[ see downloads]

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, WaterLane, Wilmslow Cheshire

17^th 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 5^th December 2009 letter, my 1^st 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 23^rd 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 http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/

Dolmans, solicitors,

Cardiff,

4th Jan 09

Kirk v South Wales Police

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

Abuse of Process Application

Dear Sir,

Re your 30^th 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 http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ http://www.wacl.org.uk/

JR Part 8 Facts For well over ten years now, in South Wales, I have suffered racial discrimination while asking successive courts to entertain my mounting evidence of Abuse of Process and general malfeasance by many employed by the tax payer supposedly to administer justice.

The sequence of documents below, pages 9 to 56, is but a sample disclosing relevant facts as to the scale of intrigue to which they stooped in order to prevent disclosure of favourable evidence in my cases. Disclosure was withheld by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and by their complainant, the South Wales Police, in order to have my name removed from the veterinary register.

Leaked HM Treasury Solicitor internal memos [p.11], CAA Legal Dept. [p.56] and my damages action led to HM 30^thSept 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 30^th Dec 2008

FAO CAA Medical Examiner,

11^th 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 23^rd July 2003 memo, enclosed, reveals the CAA have also been made by the HM Attorney General to communicate, as Defendant, with the HM team of Whitehall lawyers, in their joint attempts to have me certified.

May I suggest you ask for disclosure of those CAA documents when considering whether I am to be certified to fly or not?

Both the Royal college of Veterinary Surgeons and South Wales Police refuse to disclose anything on the matter of this 7 year HM Attorney General investigation.

My Abuse of Process Application, citing the damage it has done to my veterinary, flying and family life, is repeatedly swept under the carpet by successive judges because I hold the proof of misfeasance and criminal conduct by lawyers.

It may not surprise you to know my FOA and Data Protection Act Applications, to make CAA's Mr Stephen Williams disclose this HM Partnership interference, bore no fruit, yet.

So just whom am I expected to believe, bearing in mind it was the CAA that had me put in prison in 1980, destroying my aviation career, on trumped up evidence, sending bully boy retired police officers around to witnesses at the dead of night saying, "if you do not give evidence against Kirk we will take your licence instead"? I had been neither the pilot, registered owner nor drunk, contrary to the way the CAA lawyers put it to the ‘bemused' in Bournemouth Crown court.

I have sent you some fax material and an e-mail earlier this morning concerning my licence suspension in May 2008, pending enquiry, following my encounter with the US Department of Homeland Security, Texas, with subsequent deportation.

I have now found the document you need, enclosed. I made the doctor in Texas State Lunatic Asylum, Austin, write out and sign, witnessed before me, before I would agree to leave the hospital building to pursue my rights in court convened upon my insistence. The British Consulate clearly kicked up a fuss and I thank them for it.

US Authorities arrested me while I was on a country stroll in Texas, trying to get a photograph of a scissor bird. While in chains I saw neither the President's Men ,FBI, The Sherriff nor his many deputies make any written record at all of my incarceration other than the details from my passport and home address. They ALL refused to write down my detailed statement of explanation. The FAA told me,witnessed by others, I had committed no aviation offence in landing in the farmer's field many miles from Mr Bush's ranch.

My demand for a ‘Habeus Corpus document', where I had been and that I was still alive, was because no ‘audit trail', to date, appeared to have been created during my detention, as far as I could see, either at road side, 11 police vehicles, in Waco Prison, Waco hospital or in various police cars and now, in State Lunatic Asylum . Not dissimilar to my experiences with the RCVS, refusing to disclose any contemporaneous notes of their enquiry. I do not frighten easily but what I witnessed in Texas, up until US guards let go of me at Gatwick Airport, is a stark warning to the world. My web site on downloads, http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/, publishes the local paper saying the police state I was not even arrested!

I demanded such a document, as I do for all custody records, be created by my captors for I have found so often, without such record, RCVS, police and now the CAA, rarely believe a word I say and will spend a small fortune to prevent me enjoying respective ‘privileges' my qualifications were supposed to guarantee. No police escorted me to my aircraft in the cow field, as the doctor's note portrays, they were seen gathered under the trees, half a mile away, with surveillance gadgets and a ‘surface to air' missile, no doubt.

I went with witnesses to the court hearing in the Texas hospital only to be told by a lawyer there, again witnessed by Alvin Howell, the case had, as the attorney put it, "air- brushed out"! Court officials refused to let me get access to any public record of its existence. Good ‘Old Uncle Sam' and so called human rights.

I chased over 50 JR Applications in that ridiculous building, the Royal Courts of Justice, London, knowing full well the lawyers in the RCVS would use those trivial motoring convictions to have me struck off. I believe HM intervention was originally to investigate the South Wales Police conduct following my complaints but everybody is keeping their traps shut.

It was encouraging to see the way the June 08 CAA memo described these minor South Wales convictions. A pity someone in the CAA could not back me on that point against the RCVS, refusing my right to practice veterinary surgery.

It is therefore of interest to me that the HM Attorney General instigated, both in 2003 and last year, an enquiry with the CAA to get information from their Legal Department to get me certified. I must start new applications concerning failed CAA disclosure.

To be certified as a vexatious litigant does have its advantages. I could not think of anything more enjoyable as to never ever having to enter such sewers of depravity, UK court rooms, each in there trying to outdo the other by their level of deceit.

Please pass this e-mail on to the CAA department withholding the information I feel you require.

Yours sincerely,

Maurice J Kirk. BVSc

Copy to John Smith MP

FAO

Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, HM Attorney -General and South Wales Police

Pre Action Protocol

Judicial Review Application 19^th 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 & http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ & http://www.wacl.org.uk/

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

Maurice Kirk — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 11:15:00 GMT

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

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

Maurice Kirk v Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons

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

Summary

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

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

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

Common Assault Convictions:

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

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

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

Verdict: Name removed from veterinary register.

Charge 2. ‘Unprofessional Conduct'.

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

Verdict: 6 month suspension.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suggested Extra Reading

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

The ‘Balance of Probabilities'

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

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

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

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

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

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

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

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

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

Maurice Kirk — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:54:00 GMT

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 25^th 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 www.kirkflyingvet.com & www.wacl.org.uk

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.

Brittany Break from RCVS Debacle

Maurice Kirk — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 03:29:00 GMT

A few days in Brittany while the RCVS appear to continue to delay my 6th application to be allowed to practice veterinary surgery. Having sorted out holiday makers in the cottages we are then off to the coast for a swim and collect oysters and boulot? off the beach. Then it was on to Lamballe to the spectacular horse show in the pouring rain. The resident comic was towed at speed in Cossack dress behind a very fast pony on his skis while the chariots of yester year sprayed us with mud in their flurry around the arena pulled by beatifully tacked out horses. The dancing horse on the piano and 5 Bretons on a string will never be forgotten.

Then, to incredible live music in the town square, the usual meal of local moule followed by wild boar, off the spit, washed down with Breton cider and a little Calva.

Next day, following a quiet word in the village auberge, while out on the ‘61 Enfield morcycle, we track down, deep in the country lanes, the ultimate transport for the district, a ‘61 Citroen Deux Cheveaux. She was all covered in dust in the barn with the chickens, she having not seen the road for at least a decade......all we need now is a name for her?

Tomorrow I fly with the CAA .....but that is another story

Member of Parliament Puts His Head Above The Parapet

Maurice Kirk — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:14:00 GMT

FAO Maurice Kellett

Maurice 2 to Maurice 1

Dear Maurice,

Meeting at the House of Commons 22^nd July 2008

The meeting with Dr Vincent Cable MP at the House of Commons appeared most constructive but as I heard a few mutter afterwards..."been here before"... and now, followed by your apt reminder of the ‘real world', makes me remember the ‘licks and promises' by politicians I have personally aggravated, over the years, leading to precisely nothing.

No, Maurice 1, it is not all is ‘gloom and doom'. That meeting, yesterday, had some fifteen far more injured speakers than me, from all walks of life, tell a proper listening MP, the root of the problem. Like myself, most of them had also ‘exhausted local remedies', what a joke, ridiculed by Whitehall's own agenda , all part of the self perpetuating ‘jobs worth' mentality.

My own few words at the meeting used the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons conduct, just as an example, those lawyers relying on the 1967 Royal Charter, contravening the 1998 Human Rights Act but protected by the ‘Royal Prerogative' from prosecution, just to emphasize the cancer we are faced with and just why the police continue to refuse to investigate any complaint. An issue the MP appeared to have difficulty with accepting the police can just REFUSE TO INVESTIGATE, when there is clear information of day by day crime by a bunch, some frilly nickered, lawyers bringing their own profession into disrepute. A profession that must be protected.

It is all about ‘accountability' for acts of criminal conduct by those exploiting their privilege within the UK judicial system.

Remember, Maurice ,the photo, I sprayed across the front wall of my surgery with a gentian violet antibiotic spray in incestuous Guernsey, back in the 80s, a belief that definitely still stands:

"The law is only as good as those entrusted to administer it"

While the ‘Royal Prerogative' is sustained by those on the ‘gravy train', to hide behind and the ‘Memorandum of Understanding', giving immunity to prosecution to police and lawyers in our courts, we and our children all have a grim future.

It is now time to hit harder at our own MPS on this issue and stage protests, stunts, web sites, before our local courts, however daft to the un informed they appear, to wake up the typical ignorant tax payer like I was until I was also swindled by lawyers and also watched, time and time again, police and agents of the Crown walk away from the witness box, when perjury had been proved.

It was unfortunate that the, almost, last speaker from the audience raised the other real incestuous problem within the UK judiciary, that of devil worship. Let us hope Dr Cable can rise above all these pressures in his work place and produce the ‘goods'.

Best regards,

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

Wales against crooked lawyers

http://www.wacl.org.uk/

Got home in sleepy South Wales at 2am....Patrick's megaphone still ringing in my ears, good night

House of Commons Demonstration Tuesday 22nd July 2008

Maurice Kirk — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 03:13:00 GMT

To be addressed by Dr Vincent Cable MP, Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer and other MPs

22 July 2008 at 09.00

Demonstration starts 9.00 am on the 22nd July outside the Central London County Court and at 9.00 am at Brentford County Court. The group at Brentford County Court will join those at the Central London County Court at 11.00am. We will go on to the Royal Courts of Justice and The Law Society.

Between 2- 4pm MPs will address the demonstration in Committee Room 6 in Parliament. Enter through the main visitor entrance, which is at Cromwell Green, just off Parliament Square

42 Augustine Road

Harrow Weald, London

HM Partnership/RCVS/South Wales Police/Civil Aviation Authority

Dear Patrick, 19^th July 2008

CAA Thursday Meeting to consider Revoking all my Pilots Licences.

Thank you, kind sir, for attending yet again another example of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and now, the Civil Aviation Authority, apparent joint determination to prevent me from having income to fight the corruption in the South Wales Police and British Law Courts, dominated by crooked lawyers.

Remember the police were the original complainants to have me struck off the veterinary register following their loss of 121 criminal charges out of around 130 laid against me in the barbaric environment of a UK ‘HM' controlled court room. There is still no apparent ‘accountability', after 10 years of harassment and false imprisonments, for almost daily nefarious conduct including their failed ‘disclosure', ‘perjury' and general ‘perversion of justice'.

The Civil Aviation Authority removed my licences upon ‘communication' from Texas, USA, that they now accept was utter nonsense. I did not land my aging Piper Cub ‘on the road outside President Bush's ranch' nor was I ‘engaged in criminal activity and endangering the general public,' as the US Department of Homeland Security hurriedly stated to justify jailing me and then having me deported like some common criminal. The FAA confirmed, at the time, I HAD COMMITTED NO OFFENCE.

The CAA have now chosen to bring up ‘old matters', just like the RCVS did when the South Wales Police complaint collapsed, in order to justify not just removing my veterinary licence but giving it back. Meanwhile, my Royal Courts of Justice Judicial Review Applications are being deliberately buried by the usual HM Masonic cabal that currently dominates the UK judiciary.

The RCVS relied on, remember, a string of ‘trivial' motoring convictions obtaining the HM Privy Council outrageous quote that, in effect, all professions must now make their members conduct their private lives as if ‘acting in a professional capacity'! [See para 33 KIRK v RCVS 19^th Jan 2004 Privy Council Judgment]. That, Patrick, indicates just how serious the state our courts are really in and why the CAA can also act with impunity under ‘Her Majesty's Prerogative'.

The CAA's continuing refusal to return my licences is, you witnessed, based on five points:

1. I negligently or deliberately engaged the aircraft in a thunder storm whilst landing in a field five miles from the US President's ranch. Landing in order to deliver, personally, my letter of thanks for the US Coast Guard saving my life. I would never have made breakfast, except for the sharks!

CAA evidence was based only on what was written on http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/ about inclement weather.

2. I had ditched my ‘Liberty Girl' in the Caribbean, one hundred miles off the Dominican Republic.
3. I had landed her on a street of Kanazawa City, Japan, three years ago, destroying her with myself finishing up in hospital.

Apparently, you heard, the CAA takes the view that a single engined aircraft should neither cross water beyond gliding distance to land nor, in the case of the Japanese incident, fly over mountainous terrain despite being generally designed for the purpose. The mere fact my engine failed more than ten miles from the Japanese city was apparently irrelevant but the fact the mountain range had nothing, not even for a cub to land in and live, meant I should not have been there in the first place!

4. Four years ago emergency services were alerted following a call by a member of public that my Taylorcraft was experiencing engine trouble over the Bristol Channel.

The fact I made no such assumption to request help but landed at Bristol instead of nearby Chivenor, Devon, is now also being held against me.

5. Record keeping omissions of biannual flight test instructor/examiner requirement.

Having spent the money to employ these professionals it appeared, correctly I must say, I had failed to properly record the purpose of the exercise...flight safety. The fact a string off pilots, purported to be qualified, took my money both here in the UK and the USA, did not appear to concern them. I hope I was mistaken. Since the hearing I have found out one such professional later refused to sign up my books as his wife was killed in the very same aircraft shortly after my two hours of instruction with him.

Patrick, the Home Secretary still refuses to hand over the £15,000 awarded by the court for one of the fourteen South Wales false imprisonments so I think it is time to cause just a little more trouble in London, on Tuesday, than what they might expect of a man ‘wishing to conduct his private life in accordance with their lordships' wishes' in order he may ‘practice veterinary surgery' before he dies.

Yours sincerely,

Maurice 2

T-Shirt from 'Down Under'

Maurice Kirk — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 02:14:00 GMT

Last Monday in the Royal Courts of Justice the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons won the case having prevented me from going before the jury of the college in an application to 'practice veterinary surgery'. The chairman alone stated, in effect, if I accept the college and South Wales Police did no wrong I can go before the disciplinary committee with my application to work. Without that public apology you get nothing. Brian Jennings, Privy Council agent, failed to refer to the fact Her Majesty's Privy Council has the power under the 1966 Act to intervene when immunity to prosecution, under the college's Royal Charter, appears to be 'excessive' but I am not holding my breath.

Leaving the special aroma of that court building and with the judgment of Mr Justice Lloyd Jones still ringing in my ears, yet another Welshman, incidentally, refusing the right of a jury [ Lord Justice Thomas had only lately refused me a jury to sit on the 15 year running case of police harassment in Old South Wales] I recieve a missive from New South Wales. Dear John Wilson, the Aussie exponent of jury trials, is sending me a T-shirt suitably worded !

Now Magna Carter Day, the almost origin of a jury concept, was on Sunday and demonstration in Whitehall on the 22nd July is taking a bus load of supporters from Cardiff wearing, I hope, John's T-Shirt.

Monday also had me in Kingsway, around the corner at CAA House, badgering the legal department on the 'facts', relied on from the US, that caused them to have my 'wings clipped', while I struggle with the french language to obtain a Gallic 'brevet de pilotage'. The Emergency Judicial Review lodged against the CAA will, no doubt, be shredded by now.

Monday night is part spent having a chinese supper with Alex, youngest son at Uni, on the River Thames in Kingston, before bedding down on a bench at Heathrow for 8 am flight to Detroit, the home of 'Motown' music.

Tuesday was fascinating ....watching the huge Department of Homeland Security sausage machine again at work exporting vistors from the US, except with me, apparently, irrespective of cost, rhyme nor reason. All worth it though for the interrogation by Angel, a vivacious afro-caribbean, suggesting to me the 'need to know basis', no 'audit trail' and 'the system' of visa disposal having a whole new meaning to a very naive Englishman. The UK should consider their system and save the tax payer a fortune.

Wednesday back at the Royal Courts of Justice to lodge the appeal from the RCVS nonsense and u tube video, for the lazy reader! Itseems to me, looking at more leaked memos it is rare for any file, lodged, to be opened, yet alone read in that building!

Wednesday night by train and home to St Donats and Genevieve is out on her new pony. Must get Baldrick in, tack up and slim down [the horse] for the fox hunting this Autumn. If I cannot fly in UK Airspace and have to fight the CAA again through the courts for the next two years I might as well hunt, buy a bigger bike and write to Mr Bush, before he leaves office, for the 'US Presidential Pardon'.

Meanwhile, the US cub is patiently waiting, hidden away in a small strip in Texas, for that dash across the Rio Grande to South America and the Falklands as my french 1943 L4 cub is about to leave the nest in Hampshire and my UK 1943 L4 cub is hidden in the West country, without Kirstie knowing, awaiting the outcome of the CAA's deliberations as to whether her UK registration is to be changed to a Z- , may be, or an F- to assist my circumnavigation of Africa on a foriegn licence or not?

The Ultimate Whitehall Farce Monday 16th June

Maurice Kirk — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:02:00 GMT

I have to go to London on Monday to argue my corner as to how the RCVS have hurriedly pushed through legislation in the 20.7 rule of the 2004 Court Procedures to prevent me ever practicing again as a veterinary surgeon. I need to lodge it at the Court of Appeal after the hearing but need to know just how to do it?

I have to walk round the corner to Kingsway and CAA House for, what I hope will be, a cosy chat with their legal department on outstanding matters..

I also have to find out why the Royal Courts are sitting on my Emergency Application against the Civil Aviation Authority preventing me to fly on to Africa next month in my 1943 WW2 Piper Cub? President Bush's men confirmed I committed no aviation offence when I landed in a farmer's field 5 miles from his Texan Ranch but the CAA cannot get, it appears, CIA, FBI, Secret Service, FAA, DHS, ICE, State Police or a few other organisations to confirm my belief mainly because the United States avoids any paper trail of custody records of a prisoner when ever possible unlike the UK. My unlawful detention in Houston Prison and Texas's State Lunatic Asylum is 'small beer' compared to the relevance of malfeasance of UK Government Departments exposed in the court papers for Monday .

Lunch is on me.

I then need to stroll down to the House of Lords in the afternoon to find out procedure to overturn the judgment by Lord justice Thomas refusing me a lawyer to act on my behalf and my legal right a jury for my harassment case against the South Wales police, the original complainants to get me struck off.

Tuesday may be a lot more fun, again exposing what the media refuse to print..... the real state of our judiciary See downloads

RCVS Fight For Justice

Maurice Kirk — Thu, 29 May 2008 08:58:00 GMT

I continue my fight in London, on the 16th June for my right to 'practice veterinary surgery' against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.

I'm fighting this battle because I have been struck off as a vet for seven years, today, on the argument that my attitude towards authority reflects on my professional ability to care for sick animals. No veterinary surgeon has ever been put before a court on such an argument when no evidence was tendered by the prosecution suggesting malpractice. To the contrary, Their Lordships at the Privy Council Appeal, on the 19th January 2004 made the point that my record as a veterinary surgeon was exemplary.

The RCVS demand that I except the convictions obtained by the South Wales Police were correct before I can be reinstated as a veterinary surgeon. But since I did not commit the offences submitted to the court by the police it would be dishonest just to placate the politics behind this.

For those who would like to follow the details of the case at this point in time please download the file here.

Maurice