Legal Battles

The Clerk of the Court,

The Crown Court,

Cathays Park,

Cardiff,

South Wales CF10 3PG.            01 FEB 10

Dear Sir/Madam,

Ref: Regina –v- Mr.Maurice J. Kirk.

As a witness in court on Wednesday 27th January 2010 in the above case, I wish to

make the following complaint and to have this complaint logged in the court file for

future reference.

1. While sitting in the court I was aware of a contradiction made by the

prosecution counsel Mr.Twomlow. In the forenoon Mr. Kirk told the court that

if he could have his computer returned to him it would aid his defence and

reduce the courts time for it contained his own defence statements among

other things. I and other members of the public in court heard, as part of the

'stated case', Mr Twomlow contradict himself with respect to Mr. Kirk's

laptop computer, for Mr. Twomlow told the court that the computer could not

be returned because it was being held as evidence.

In the afternoon, when again the question of the laptop computer was raised

and the judge asked of Mr. Twomlow the whereabouts of said computer,

Mr. Twomlow declared that it was in the possession of Mrs Kirsty Kirk, and

had been in her custody for some time.

2. The witness who wished to remain anonymous and to be referred to as "Foxy"

gave evidence on oath. This witness was clearly of the male gender, and my

observation of this fact is confirmed by the reporter for The Glamorgan GEM

one AJ Sicluna on Moday the 1st of February 2010, quote "Foxy telephoned

Mr Kirk, said HE was interested in the gun,---". How is it possible that a male

can sit in the witness box giving evidence when the prosecution have

previously released a document titled "Case Summary" where in paragraph 22

of said summary refers to "Foxy" as SHE and in the possessive as HER and

HERS?

In both of these incidents there is perjury under Section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911.

In my opinion, the judge should have picked up on these points at the time lest the

errors be compounded further on in the hearing. However, that may be

presumptuous of me, the judge may be going to bring it up in his address to the

jury.

I would also question the validity of the witness statement by the witness "Foxy"

as this is classed as entrapment and is therefore inadmissible in a court of law.

In addition to these two items above I wish to make further complaint about the

way in which I was treated in the court and the manner in which Mr. Kirk, a

prisoner on remand and unconvicted, was manhandled in the court. Mr Kirk

complained that he had a headache and that he had been denied his regular

medication. He asked his sister and myself if we had any aspirins. The court

session had closed, so there was no court in session and therefore no dock. When I

tried to pass aspirin to Mr. Kirk, he was set upon by at least 8 Reliance security

guards who dragged Mr. Kirk from the court and in so doing hit the side of his

body hard against the sharp corner of the dock. One of the gang shouted to one of

the ushers to call the judge back into the court. I was then questioned by the judge

and told that I was now banned from the court and that if I should try to get back

into the court I would be arrested. It is my supposition that the withdrawal of

medication from Mr. Kirk is intended to leave him at a distinct disadvantage in

dealing with all that goes on in a court of law, and I suggest that this is in fact a

breach of his basic human rights under the law where he is entitled to a fair trial

before a tribunal within a reasonable time and to be treated in a humane manner.

We are not in Zimbabwe..

I was in court both as a Mackenzie friend and as witness to the authenticity of the

alleged weapon in question. For my qualifications I have an honours degree in

Computer Aided Product and Engineering design; I was a serving officer in the

Royal Air Force, a member of the Middlesex and Sussex shooting club, a member

of the Public Schools Rifle Meeting Association etc. I have experience of

handling Lee Enfield .303 calibre rifles, Bren Light Machine Gun, Sten gun,

Sterling machine gun, various types of rifles both single shot and semi-automatic,

shotguns, hand guns both revolvers and automatic weapons.

Should I not be called back to court as a witness, I hope and trust that Mr. Kirk

will receive a fair trial and that what appears to be a farcical charade will be

brought to a speedy end.

Yours faithfully,

P. Talbot-Jenkins.

Further to my letter to the Cardiff Crown Court of Feb 1st which I wrote part way through typing up my shorthand notes of the day, I realised that it was not Mr.Twomlow who said that the computer was retained as prosecution evidence, but it was HH Judge Thomas who told the court that the computer was prosecution evidence, when in fact the computer had been returned to Mrs.Kirk. Are judges allowed to make false statements in court?