Legal Battles

Position Statement 27th September 2010

On Sunday, 26th September 2010, the Claimant traced a scrap dealer previously reported for stealing a veterinary practice car back in 1996. (4th Action, para 11)

The following information is just part of what the scrap dealer told the Claimant relating to a number of incidents identified in the 4th Action:

The Barry police visited his Barry scrap yard where the car was identified as the one stolen. Police were informed the Vale Council, a Mr David Button, had authorised its collection from behind the Claimant's veterinary hospital as it was considered abandoned. The police then told him "we hate Kirk's guts". "I want you to take it immediately to Penarth police station, on your lorry, where I will later inform Kirk it has been traced". "I will have the greatest of pleasure in booking Kirk when he comes to collect it and drives it away without tax, MOT or insurance ".

One of the police then jumped up into the scrap dealer's cab and was driven all the way out to Penarth leaving the other police officer to drive the police car away on other business. The police officer never informed the Claimant nor ,on 3rd May 1996, did the Defendant explain the circumstances for it being in Penarth

Jackie Seal issued various instructions in the matter following the scrap dealer being arrested for theft, interviewed under caution, tape recorded, all at Barry police station. She was also aware that the Claimant had lodged numerous other complaints to the police before the police visited the scrap yard. Police records will disclose each police officer involved by the crime reference number (incident/occurrence numbers). Since receipt of the 4th Action for damages the Defendant has refused to disclose Crime Reference numbers identified in all the above seven Actions.

The reason for the delay in the Claimant being informed of the car's whereabouts and as to why it had been taken out of Barry will be on both South Wales Police and Crown Prosecution records.

The Claimant has already obtained partial disclosure, before Nicholas Chambers QC, despite PII rebuttal, further revealing the somewhat exessive interest the Crown Prosecution Service has had, during the relevant period, in the Claimant's apparent welfare.

At 12.30 am, after hours of hanging around Barry public houses and buying the target too many pints for information, the Claimant scored by finding a few more witnesses relating to police misconduct.

He found the retired ex-RAF 80 year old, retired military police officer, buying his Sunday papers and swerved up onto the pavement in order not to lose him. The Claimant had been looking for him for months, once it became clear identity of police Crime Reference numbers was the Barry police's 'Achilles heel', in all Actions.

The witness had been an usher in the Barry court, for eight years, in the mid 70s and remembered a number of Action incidents within the building.

This led to his successor also being traced, that afternoon, in the Barry docks area. The second usher remembered, vividly, my arresting CPS prosecutor, Stan Stoffa, in Court Room 1, taking him by the scruff of his neck and not releasing him until , eventually , when the finally police arrived and had agreed to secure the CPS prosecution file from under the prisoner's arm.

The retired usher recalled the driver, in the alleged motoring incident had been someone else, not the Claimant, driving the vehicle, caught on camera

in a St Nicholas village radar trap.

Barbara Wilding 25th February 09 sworn affidavit denied knowledge of the court proceedings.

The usher also remembered the magistrates adjourning for an hour, in another case brought by the same police, in order to

allow the Claimant to calve a cow his veterinary assistant was having trouble over somewhere in the Vale of Glamorgan.

At around 6.30pm, on the same day, the Claimant returned, as arranged, to a Barry public house where monies offered for information again appeared to bare fruit. One, possibly two more, have been traced who , in the 90s, would listen on their radio scanners to the nocturnal activity of Barry police outside the Claimant's veterinary hospital , examining his practice vehicles.

Today, HMCourt Service continues to block the Claimant's attempt to process legal papers for all the above proceedings.

Adjourned hearing of 24th September 2010 due to Claimant's ill health continues to be protracted by the failure of either Cardiff Crown Cown or Civil Court ordering the Defendant, the South Wales Police, the NHS, Dr Tegwyn Williams or Crown Prosecution Service in disclosing the medical evidence used on the 2nd December 2009, before His Honour Judge Bidder QC, with court tape recorder firmly switched off and the Claimant denied access to his own court.

Pain and suffering has affected the progress of his damages claim against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons when lawyers for the college obtain, contrary to home Office regulations, from the South Wales Police, the complainant in 2001/2, confidentual police files and covert surveillance information on the Claimant detrimental to all named Defendants, in the above named Actions but never disclosed to the Claimant.

The Claimant's action against the RCVS has been struck out, for want of evidence served despite applications by the Claimant to adjourn both HM Prison and RCVS current cases until the Claimant is medically fit. The Claimant seeks to 'set aside' the 24th September 2010 RCVS judgment and further pursue his right of disclosure of relevant evidence in the control of RCVS lawyers, police, CPS and prison.

Barry Magistrates accepted medical evidence, this month, to postpone a criminal matter while the Trial judge ruled, also this month, following the production of four medoical reports, that the Claimant was considered not fit to conduct a prosecution in the current proceedings.

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

In The Cardiff Court

Application

The Claimant applies for an Order,

1. that the Crime Reference Numbers for each incident relating to the Applicant, in the above named Actions, be identified and that the the participants and their contemporaneous record in each incident be also identified and disclosed.

2. that the minutes of MAPPA meetings, chaired by the Defendant, relating to the Claimant between June and December 2009 be disclosed.

3. that the Crown Prosecution Service disclose evidence not already disclosed in the crime referenced incidents identified in the above named Actions.

4. That the 4th Action, persuant to the permission granted by HHJ Nicholas Chambers QC for the Claimant to re apply, be joined with the first three Actions in the current proceedings.

HM Court Service to accept the court fee .