Cardiff Crown Court staff, ‘express an unease' to their being cross examined by the Appellant, the Crown Prosecution Service told a Bristol court today. One being an ex South Wales Police officer, a Derrick Hassan, now a court official who once supplied false forensic history to a doctor during a previous custody period reliant only on a section 36 of the 1983 Mental Health Act.
This was the continuing saga on how the HM Court Service (Wales), over these past twenty years, are determined to block my appeals, in either civil or criminal proceedings, from ever being aired in an English court room.
In this particular case, before Bristol Crown, was, you may think, the simple delivery of appeal documents at Cardiff Crown Court over a ‘Contempt of Court' conviction, now two years ago, my having already served its prison sentence. Procedure dictated that it was to be forwarded by Cardiff Crown Court to the Criminal Court of Appeal, in the Royal Courts of Justice, London. It was a dispute over Cardiff's Recorder, His Honour Judge Nicholas Cooke QC and his pointless Court Order in that it would ‘obtain' the medical evidence I so needed in order to stop severe pain by getting a long overdue total hip replacement operation.
Well, today, the appeal against ‘common assault conviction' was adjourned, in order I find a ‘defence lawyer'. If that failed it was for HM Partnership, including the worried Cardiff Crown Court staff, to apply for a Section 36 and so chose one of their own to be ‘cross examined' by!
Incestuous isn't it when you think that this very same Cardiff court officer, who had originally refused to accept my Criminal Court of Appeal papers, by pushing me down the stairs, causing the re breaking of my leg, may also now be protected, again, from my long awaited cross examination should this English court also succumb to contagion or infection.
This is a further indictment of the true state of our legal system, in Wales, with the English judge noting the alleged ‘common assault', on appeal, was committed as far back as July 2009. The conviction was obtained by trickery, in my absence, in November 2010 and was only finally completed in December 2011, by District Judge John Charles having milked its consequences to extreme, with a ‘no penalty'.
So, how do they keep doing it?
Easy, by ‘carte blanche' application of Section 36 of the Youth and Justice Criminal Evidence Act 1999, in order to protect their ‘Cardiff Cabal' and their ‘gravy train', anything to stop the basic right of a defendant cross examining the prosecution witnesses to obtain the truth.
By August 2010 District Judge John Charles openly started this, their latest scam of denying all witnesses.
It had been implemented, quietly, for many years on LiPs in Wales and spectacularly, of late, applied part way through the January 2010 ‘WW1 machine gun' trial, with the jury's mind made up by the end of the first day. Judge Nicholas Cooke QC, that June, during the ‘Contempt of Court' debacle, had also denied me eye witnesses, access to my own medical records, anything to black mail me to employ one of their own.
By Charles instructing a lawyer from Newport to cross examine, using nana seconds of court time, he obtained the criminal conviction they all wanted. Well, not quite as it sounds, maybe, as I was not even there but Ihad been excused by court order, later backed by still more specialist medical reports, from both France and England.
The Newport lawyer did attend but cross examined no one, as was the case with the District Judge.
Wow, they thought, what a great new way to stitch up Maurice from now on!
We must do this more often. Four cases ‘out of the blue', on the same theme, promptly followed.
By September 2011 Charles had applied this 2nd November 2010 summary conviction to lock me up for three months, pending still further conspiracies by South Wales Police, anything to prejudice my long outstanding civil damages claims.
Incidentally, this District Judge stated I had failed to attend that previous year's hearing there by compounding yet another conviction, one of failure to attend' he preferring to ignore his original reasoning for a Section 36.
A conveniently placed ‘Harassment' conviction, on the old theme, was again under his control, carrying the statutory sentence of 18 weeks, by statute, again equal to my remand time to the day of conviction. Oh how convenient. So who was surprised in that after the barrister, David Gareth Evans, had slipped in, at the very last moment, the needed extra ‘posted letter' incident to comply with statute to obtain a prison term in the first place!
My throwing this 7th allegation, served on the day of trial, on the floor of the court had its desired effect. It was noted in the official court record and even The Glamorgan Gem newspaper, for the already drafted appeal.
And abuse of Section 35 in this next case? Yes, you guessed it; Charles refused me any cross examination again but this time by employing a lawyer from Swansea not forgetting, this time, the man was only answerable to the court and NOT to the Defendant.
He was therefore ordered to at least ‘go through the motions' of ‘cross examining'.
He asked both irrelevant questions and avoided the obvious ones. He, in fact, challenged no prosecution evidence what so ever, clearly caught on tape, the transcript of which is being published later. This lawyer was last seen running, with his quick £1,200 attendance fee tucked in his belt, for his Swansea train knowing, full well, much more was due now he had proved his allegiance.
Ah, no, I forget. He did come back, didn't he? Back to repeat the performance at the March 2012 Crown Court hearing, for my appeal before His Honour Judge PD Hughes QC. Again I was denied legal papers, witnesses etc.
2011 Christmas Eve was marked by my being jailed yet again, on the old theme, this time until mid May 2012, for an alleged ‘Breach of a Restraining Order' never served on me until pushed under a police cell door after my arrest. A nine month prison sentence had been arranged, this time, well in advance, with the usual release from custody to be on the predicted last day of trial.
Continuing this Section 36 abuse, however, was to be varied and worked on with much aplomb, as this next case had a lay jury with which to contend. A most unpredictable ‘creature' in this day and age of fast changing habits and social standards.
Basing the prosecution's usual strategy, on the general public's apparent fear of those employed in any court building, the judge and prosecution barrister arranged, therefore, the production only of court officials and policemen to give relevant evidence to obtain a conviction.
This jury and others, no doubt, risk the huge assumption that court clerks and custody officers, as employees from within a court building are to be trusted. Having stupidly replaced properly trained prison officers to do the job we now have too many ‘bully boys' with little training, little regard for the seriousness of their work that that seriously influence proceedings. It may well have been the reason for the jury's majority verdict.
That was a foregone conclusion, to me, once I was allowed no legal papers in court or facilities to interview my witnesses.
My websites may well give world wide exposure on just how Cardiff's so called ‘great and the good' continue to conspire to pervert the course of justice but while the police or judges continue to closing them down others will follow. Soon, I warn you, we will be far too many to jail at any one time.
A sample of what the jury may not have known about this case (to be later expanded in links etc).
Much needed reforms, anticipated in our judicial system, need to be considered alongside the following:
I was again to be blocked from cross examining their key prosecution witness, by application of Section 36 YJCEA 1999 but allowed, at last, to cross examine others. So what is this evil lot up to this time?
The surprising CPS barrister's opening speech, late removal of a key witness and frank admission he, as Her Majesty's Crown Court representative, should not be conducting the case, he being called as a defence witness, was but part of this pitiful story.
The Section 36 ‘court appointed lawyer', to ‘cross examine', had failed to attend despite a string of albeit clandestine but publicly recorded Crown and Cardiff Magistrate Court hearings and Orders on the matter.
One was amongst the defence evidence gently secreted just anterior to my anterior anal sphincter, ready for disclosure, hopefully from a great height.
HM Cardiff prison, GEOamey Custody Services and His Honour Judge John Curran QC, had refused either my legal papers or medication being in the court.
To a casual observer in the public gallery, for what was the usually concocted Cardiff cabal conspiracy, this now having the potential of something similar to a Whitehall Theatre farce.
For the jury to be refused, despite asking by ‘jury notes', to see what record both court and custody services are kept, of a service of a court document, I have all seen before. So what other exhibits would the jury ‘not be allowed to examine' if I bothered to give evidence, called witnesses and obtained the cctv?
Court cases are usually won or lost, in Cardiff, based on who has the most deceitful lawyer on their side. Successful withholding of evidence, failed ‘disclosure', is the name of the game. The veracity and mental state of presiding judge, prosecutor and or South Wales Police invariably influences the final outcome.
To even contemplate prosecuting Cardiff's court, prison or police services, for civil damages, a jury trial, for example, has to first ‘collapse', be ‘withdrawn part heard' by the CPS' or ‘be stopped' by the presiding judge. Above all, the Defendant must never, except in rare occasion, call defence evidence if he thinks he, his family or even his long suffering friends in the public gallery, will ever get reimbursed, following acquittal, of even their bus fares.
CPS barrister David Gareth Evans to then go on and admit that, yes, I had been handed a piece of paper in my cell, on 1st December 2011, by their star lying witness, Geoamey Custody Services manager, Leigh Barker and yes, containing District Judge John Charles' very own ink from his fountain pen scribbled through three lines of CPS type, should of also of stopped this trial ‘dead in its tracks'.
Approx copy of notes taken by Defendant's solicitor before jury trial
Restraining Order - Not in Court
CPS came into cell - handwritten an(d) print 2/3 lines.
Refused to leave prison until given something in writing - and was then out.
Went to Court and asked for copy of what convicted for.
Also contacted Crown - who had file.
The CPS barrister then went on to admit, Oh yes, that piece of scribbled on paper was initially sent down for Mr Kirk's ‘approval', to draught an order and that it had been ‘left behind' in his Merthyr Tydfil office. This was all sparked off in court by my McKenzie Friend, Mr Merion Bowen, forcing the CPS to even disclose still further yet undisclosed documents! These other drafts were uncovered in the face of the court and still the judge did not stop the trial knowing ,full well, I had written for them many weeks before.
If that was not enough, to stop proceedings, this issue was compounded, yet again, by the judge now actually pretending to order the disclosure of ‘District Judge John Charles' hand written note to me, a small matter I had been asking for, for months, along with the overhead cctv, capturing the lot, with both custody and court contemporaneous record that MUST GO BEFORE THE JURY.
Even the visiting solicitor to the prison, before the jury trial took place, took contemporaneous note of all this gross irregularity and e-mailed me his typed record. His quiet ‘negotiations' with CPS have, so far, failed to materialise the sensible way forward for all involved.
Further ‘Grounds of Appeal' papers, to the London, must go via Cardiff court within the next few days.
But I have to personally deliver them to Cardiff Crown Court, possibly to Derrick Hassan again!
(Links and court docs to be added shortly)