'HM' USURPERS ARE TAKING YOUR CHILDREN'S INHERITANCE, as you breathe.
At 12.55pm the judge will deal with my complaint concerning the HM Court Service, still refusing to process my application for judgement, against the Chief Constable. My, as yet, successful action for damages, was based on police refusing or deliberately delaying my application for my gun licence renewal and thus causing me to miss my annual 'Glorious 12th' proposed grouse shoot. Wheras the old trusty 'Lewis' had been an ideal weapon for a covey of partridge 'breaking the bonds of earth' flushed out by Mollie, my old spaniel. Father never had approved and thought it quite unsporting.
Knowing that the scrutiny surrounding my impeccable pedigree, to hold a fire arms certificate, in good stead for nearly twenty years and overseen just recently, now, by some of the the most senior of South Wales Police officers, on MAPPA, I knew a mere gun licence renewal would be a mere bagatelle.
I appear to have been proved wrong. But is it the fact that the police are frightend to challenge my legal remedy for damages I have chosen, as their detailed rebuttal would further support evidence currently unlawfully withheld, in both the 'machine gun trial' and essential for these civil proceedings, meaning it must be disclosed by the Defendant, Peter Vaughan, the current Chief Constable?
Dolmans Solicitors, Cardiff 20th September 2010
Kirk v South Wales Police CF101741 etc
Dear Sir,
POSITION STATEMENT
'Balance and Proportionality' ECHR Articles 1, 5, 6, 8, 13. and that which is Implicit in 1998 Human Rights Act
Police Failure to disclose Witnesses v 'Strike Out' due to 'No Cause of Action'
My £20,000 reward for names of police witnesses, for some hundred or so incidents, is starting to bear fruit owed primarily to my web site, you have failed, yet again, to have close down. You may recall, during the 'machine gun' trial the much frustrated judge was caught on tape asking had the web site been closed down and if not, why not? The web site plus a sane and sober jury got me out of prison, not the evidence.
Only this week-end I have traced others who were closely involved in incidents, my alleged smuggling of pigs in from Ireland, the two police helicopters involved in the dangerous 'tail chase' of my aircraft, low level, across South Wales, on that sunny Summer's evening, back in 2000.
Preservation of Police Evidence
I now have around sixty or so witnesses, meaning eighty plus, once they are examined or cross examined as 'hostile', identifying police that were with them, at the time but without witness statements unlike your client. Witness statements and/or identification from the South Wales Police Pension Fund, of course, given to your client, Barbara Wilding, the then Chief Constable, are yet to be disclosed to me.
She denied all this in her 25th February 2009 sworn affidavit, stating all relevant evidence had been preserved and disclosed. This lead to my need to be arrested, for 'trading in machine guns' and quietly locked away in some lunatic asylum, somewhere, out of harms way. Well, I am still breathing and here, this recent flurry of my arrests and custody,since my release and acquittal, only compounding the evidence of 'proximity', 'common duty of care' and HM officers' immunity to 'contempt of court'.
That conduct, in my submission to any appeal court, is tantamount for the need of our trial judge to adjourn but not without first ordering Barbara Wilding's witnesss summons, paid for by me, being effective. Her evidence tomorrow, alone, is sufficient to stop this trial 'dead in its tracks'.
'Fact Sensitive'
Her immediate evidence would be as to why Dolmans drafted and, effectively, signed her affidavit and then, personally, orchestrated my arrest and detention, for nearly eight months, with the MG 11 Dolmans' witness statements, needed to obtain my lawful custody, requiring the launch of police helicopter and the deployment of thirty odd, some armed, police officers, having still not been disclosed, desipite both Civil and Crown Court Orders.
You rely on the judge blocking this evidence, obviously, throughout the trial, as their names and addresses for service will pop up as I work through your eighty or so police officers, in the witness box, displaying their usual 'selective amnesia' trained tactics.
Many of my web site readers believe this and if not, surely you cannot carry on 'mumbling' irrelevancies, on irrelevant law, when your client's relevant evidence has not yet been disclosed and there is now still more proof that your client's withheld witnesses will tell any court much sensitive material has not been preserved despite my requests, at the time, knowing how damming it would be for the police, who instigated almost all of these incidents, showing, once again, 'proximity'.
Take the air traffic controller, for example, saying the video taken by police from one of the helicopters, over The Vale of Glamorgan, was horrifically close, being able to read the lettering on my tee thirt.
The Cardiff Air traffic controller had been told, apparently, by the defendant, I was not arrested for, 'flying my WW2 cub without a licence', following complaint from PFA/LAA organisers at the 2000 Cranfield Air Show, because someone failed to explain to the South Wales Police, frantically scrambling two helicopters, that the pilot, by law, of a J3L4 1943 built D-Day cub was to be flown, as in the following year, from the back seat, from West Wales to Australia.
I question the legality of this late application for a 'strike out' of all claims with the Defendant deliberately withholding the identities of the above and, for example, the police who used a sledge hammer and crow bar, on 6th June 1995, to break into my veterinary surgery, in broad day light, when I served such witness evidence, of the incident on the Defendant, as long as six years ago knowing the 'modus operandi' of deceitful tactics by those apparantly 'in charge', here in South Wales. --
Please forward to Trial judge as HM Court Service continue to refuse my service by e-mail.