Legal Battles : McKenzie Friends, Fraud Act

Lord Leveson Mr Justices Mitting & Males REFUSE Maurice's Applic for NHS (Wales) Falsified MAPPA Psychiatric Reports to be CORRECTED OR CLARIFIED

Maurice Kirk — Sun, 10 Mar 2013 08:56:00 GMT

JUDGMENT

14th March 2013 Criminal Court of Appeal, whilst sitting in Cardiff, refused Maurice Kirk both legal representation and clarificationion as to whether he had 'significant brain damage’ and 'possible' cancer reported to 2009 Cardiff Crown Court, by a South Wales police psychiatrist, whilst recommending his victim be incarcerated in Ashworth High Security Prison for the doctor’s own safety, from an interested third party, an elderly Norman Scarth Esq.

That makes 14 UK judges, now, protecting NHS (Wales) and South Wales Police policy and damned the danger to the general public, to allow servicer of the 'Gulag card' on anyone who dares threaten their

pensions

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2013-03-14a.147843.h&s=speaker%3A11420#g147843.q0

Maurice's very simple submission, today, stating, at the out set he only wanted his psychiatric reports corrected or clarified.

They had already had the refusal drafted months ago

Maurice asked for an ajournment for legal representation but was refused.

Maurice asked it be adjourned owing to a JR application was outstanding about the circus of District Judge John Charles circus on 1st December 2011....Maurice was refused

Their Lordships already had this document from me, knocked up at 6am on the day, served on them for Cyberr space world wide ECHR and CCRC

Please note today's court judgment is a stark warning to others in Wales of what has been going on re the practice of false psychiatric reports understood by no one, not even the writer.

This judgment means trouble

Criminal Court of Appeal ref: 201203241 D2

At Cardiff Crown Court ref: CO/3970/2012 &CO/6357/2012

1CF 03546

Regina v Maurice John Kirk

Application to Appeal

SUMMARY

The trial was unsafe because:

The jury was denied the defence evidence

Extract taken from 4^th May 2012 Cardiff Crown Court hearing at approx. 10.45am

JUDGE CURRAN: Do you intend give evidence?

MR KIRK: It depends on whether you let me get my legal papers that are down stairs.

JUDGE CURRAN: Mr Kirk, I am not going to let you get at what you call your legal papers.

(The Appellant was not allowed to be present or allowed to call any defence witnesses)

The jury was misdirected

Jury note(s) to the learned judge they received a response, in the forced absence of the Appellant, that there was ‘no evidence’ from both the custody manager and court clerk’s contemporaneous notes and CCTV footage stored from GEOamey Custody Services cameras positioned both in the Appellant’s cell and in the long custody suite corridor or from the HM court’s controlled cameras at both exit of the custody suite and building.

LEE BARKER, the custody suite manager said, both on oath and in his witness statement, that he ‘served’ the ‘restraining order’ in the cell after he had to first unlocked the cell door.

MICHAEL WILLIAMS said, both on oath and in his witness statement, that he saw served on the Appellant the ‘restraining order’ whilst the Appellant was on crutches in the corridor returning from the toilets. Potential weapons, such as crutches, are not allowed in that area.

CCTV cameras recorded the part hand written ‘restraining order’ remained in BARKER’S hand , whilst in the cell and recorded the Appellant literately being dragged out and thrown out of the suite by no less than five angry custody officers who then threw his crutches onto his head as he lay on the floor of the public corridor. The camera at the exit of the building recorded defence witnesses, called to give evidence, seeing the Appellant both in hand cuffs and in a wheel chair.

The jury was subjected to a ‘An Abuse of Process’

The psychiatrist subjected the Appellant to the NHS (Wales) zero tolerance policy thereby seriously prejudicing current civil litigation from 20 years of persistent police bullying by

a) Causing the Appellant to be registered, in Barry police station, on 8^th June 2009, a MAPPA level 3 victim, to be one of the 5% most dangerous so registered and then

b) On the 22^nd June 2009 caused the Appellant to be arrested and remanded in custody on dreamed up fire arms charges over a WWI antique Lewis machine gun and then

c) had the Appellant, on 7^th august 2009, sectioned under the 1983 Mental Health Act, without even examining his own patient and then

d) without the appropriate qualifications and contrary to others with appropriate qualifications, recommended to a Crown Court, on 2^nd December 2009, that the Appellant be further incarcerated into Ashworth High Security Psychiatric Prison for the doctor’s own safety (see para39 of 19^th October 2009 psychiatric report) and then

e) The psychiatrist wrote that the Appellant had ‘significant brain damage’ with the court being told, in the forced absence of the Appellant, that he possibly had cancer’

f) The Appellant has NEVER been supplied with the evidence, clarification or retraction of such nonsense despite this Appellant’s last application before this very same Criminal Court of Appeal for that very same purpose

g) The mischief by Dr Tegwyn Mel Williams continues

Last July he signed a ‘victim’ statement that the Appellant had harassed him at his home with his wife, Dr Janis Hillier, also of Caswell Clinic, to such an extent that they are now both on ‘extended sick leave’. The lies continued in that he also stated police had to be called to the scene but with Appellant’s subsequent imprisonment ending by all charges being dropped.

4 Section 1 (3) of 1997 Harassment Act provides a DefenceThe Appellant was not allowed at the1^st December 2010 summary hearing, while facing ‘harassment’ allegations of the police doctor, at its subsequent 1^st March 2013 appeal or even at the 4^th May 2013 jury trial to put a legal argument that the police doctor had knowingly committed crime, due to police black mail and therefore the Appellant was permitted

a) that it was pursued for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime

b) that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment

c) that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable

Maurice J Kirk BVSc 14^th March 2013

SO WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJU6U8OdPUc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3x4G0vYqzTc

At my age the evilness from UK courts' cartel is but small beer.

I broadcast a taste of last time I was in front of Their Lordships, in the Royal Courts of Justice, on another futile appeal, having served yet another prison sentance caused by Dr Tegwyn Williams, re a Cardiff judge daring to suggest, ney insult my intellegence, that he would order and obtain, bloody liar, for the NHS (Wales) to produce the evidence I was to be sent to Ashworth ipp as a public hazard.

Who filmed this, quite without my knowing and definitely without my approval , I do not know but had I known I would not of been so subservient......and the rest.

Dr Tewgwyn Wlliams black mailed by police to recommend to His Honour Judge Neil Bidder QC that I be incarcerated in Ashworth High Security Psychiatric Prison 'for his own safety'!..... see paragraph 39

4th Williams Psych Reprt 19 10 9.pdf

9 12 1 medical Kemp.pdf

Dr Tegwyn Williams' wrong doing?

The Appellant believes Dr Tegwyn Williams is an unaccountable Clinical Director who can call on NHS lawyers and NHS chiefs to cover up his wrongdoing. It is in papers, that were not before the Courts in this case, that Dr Tegwyn Williams is that unaccountable that he calls on the support of the Chief of local NHS and Welsh NHS to use police to stop complaints about him going to the General Medical Council

Dr TW to help his associates (some local police) in a civil dispute, Sectioned the Appellant, without first assessing him, when the Appellant was not a patient of those kinds of services.

Dr TW then entirely made up that the Appellant had significant irreversible brain damage and made application to indefinitely Section the appellant to High Security Hospital. He failed in his attempted to indefinitely Section as no other medical doctor would support him.

The point is that Dr Tegwyn Williams is not medically qualified to interpret brain scans, as that is the job of the neuro-radiologist who has training and qualifications so to do. Dr Tegwyn Williams does not use or invite anyone who was medically qualified.

The Clinic team wrote in the team assessment from the three monthly Sections at the Caswell Clinic, that they wanted to build a relationship with the Appellant as an outpatient and draw him in.

But each time the Appellant would attend Caswell clinic Dr Tegwyn Williams would arrange that Police were called to arrest him.

In the end, to prevent the General Medical Council acting on what Dr Tegwyn Williams does wrong, he brought zero tolerance prosecutions by claiming, in short, that lawful accurate comments that were not defamatory, made him feel harassed.

Changes in law and interpretations.

Does it matter that what the Appellant says is accurate and not defamatory and now changes in the law (reform of public order Section 5) also means that an insult is no longer meant to be harassment ?

Also Courts have decided to recognise playful or eccentric comments as not malicious and with the example of a jovial threat to blow up the airport as meaning to be light hearted.

That light hearted meaning is very relevant to the Appellant as his ‘Wanted posters’, were clearly meant to be light hearted comment from a man well now as a harmless eccentric.

Where is the proportionality in wanting to imprison a 67 year old man for making accurate, reasonable, eccentric, light hearted but entirely justified and necessary comment ?

Stafford NHS scandal, the Need for Freedom of Expression and Appellant’s course of conduct and alleged Breach, can stop suffering and worse.

Mr Jeremy Hunt, the Coalition Health Minister encourages the need for people to be able to speak out when things go wrong in the NHS and that no gagging Orders should exist on NHS conduct. Especially as around 1200 people needlessly died at Stafford as there was no where to complain and little way to speak out

There are said to be at least fifteen other hospital Trust like Stafford.

The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and “incompatibility”

The Appellant would be raises whether the Criminal Court of Appeal would grant permission for an application to ague “incompatibility” on how the Act is not compatible with Human and Fundamental Rights and that Parliament could not have known the effect that it’s legislation would have.

As we are aware it is for the Higher Courts to declare incompatibility and for Parliament to remove that incompatibility, if it so wishes.

It is said that the ‘course of conduct’ in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 is unique to the UK. No other country has it. Other countries make do with stalking laws and other like measures. One reason why all other countries do not use ‘a course of conduct’ as a criminal offence is that it is said that this kind of law is open to too many problems and abuse.

One of the four cornerstones of EU law is that a person must be able to tell that their conduct would be a criminal offence. The UK law interprets that as would know with advice of a lawyer.

Yet full time Judges decide on if a course of conduct amount to harassment in ways that the best lawyers in the UK cannot predict how Judges will interpret what amounts to harassment in for example the zero tolerance, white collar, neighbour or family disputes. The appellant believes that means that the Protection from Harassment Act is clearly not compatible with EU law, and that is but one example.

With the Malicious Communications Act 2003, a new stalking law and various other measures and that the Harassment Act is know to be so widely over used and miss used, many call for the 1997 Act to fade away, in favour of expanding the scope of other laws

Maurice John Kirk BVSc

12 March 2013

My 64 page statement completed as police helicopter hovered over head as armed police surrounded the matrimonial home (see blog below of home and aerodrome up for auction due to a broken marriage) with frightend wife citing this incident, in divorce papers, due to Operation Orchid, to snatch our then 10 year old daughter at the same time as my hand cuffs clicked on.

Who will be next to suffer under power crazy South Wales Police Hierarchy?

09 06 19 64 pages of Witness Statement of Maurice John Kirkl.pdf

Maurice Kirk v Dr T W Williams.docx

11 03 10 Dr T W position statement (1).pdf

GMC.pdf

Glamorgan Gem 30th Sept 10.pdf

10 09 06 SWP_Claimant_interim_Skeleton.pdf

TO stop this trial from starting Dolmans, solicitors advised Barbara Wilding and MAPPA meetings in Caswell Clinic, would you believe, on how to instigate her Metropolitan Police intorduced tactic of a 'shoot to kill' policy but first she had had to get me registered MAPPA level 3, using Dr Williams, in order for it to be a 'lawful kill'

the 22nd June 09 police raid , using well over twenty, some armed, police officers, and helicopter, under Operation Chalice' to surround our home was co-ordinjated with anotter pack of police officers , under Operation Orchid' in order to snatch our daughter.....telling my wife I was so dangerous a threat to her and the general public our Genevieve was to be 'taken into care'. Kirstie had other ideas.

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/aircaraft_and_airshows/South-Wales-Airfield-FOR-SALE.aspx

10 12 7 MJK MAPPA Executive Summary.pdf

To stop this on going trial , currently in Cardiff County Court, for police now proven police criminal conduct and harassment damages, from ever reaching cross examination stage, first it was 'my possession of a machine gun 'fiasco and then the State playing this fabricated medical 'findings', their 'Gulag Card', as seventeen years of police harassment, so far and HM assisted 'treacle treatment; whough Cardiff's iniquitous law courts had failed to block the true state of both our law courts , prisons and police forces, right across The Principality.

09 09 03 MG Trans Redacted.pdf

Their Lordships, together with the documentary evidence that Dr Tegwyn Mel Williams knowingly falsified, in the presence of South Wales Police officers, his Sect 9 countersigned witness statements, to obtain my false imprisonment, are to consider the 'ramifications' of the enclosed transcript from part of 4th May 12 'Breach of Restraining Order' conviction hearing, now the subject of their deliberations.

The transcript clearly indicates, just as in the 2010 'machine gun' scandalous jury tria, l was refused even my legal papers and personal court exhibits even in thew court room!

On 4th May2012 His Honour Judge Curran QC, whilst I was forced to be absent due to requiring urgent medical attention, had refused me Dr Williams or any others, named, to be either my 'character witness' or as a 'witness of fact'.

On 1st December 2011 District Judge John Charles had done exactly the same, in my absence, when he convict me for 'harassment' of Dr Williams following the publishing of further falsifed documents by Dr Tegwyn Williams, namely, my series of NHS (Wales) Caswell Clinic psychiatric reports culminating, on 2nd December 2009, at Cardiff Crown Court, that I be further sectioned under the 1983 Mental Health Act, due to 'significant brain damage' and 'possible cancer', in Ashworth High Security Psychiatric Prison.

Closer scutiny of my Casswel Clinic, Bridgend, medical records, discloses, as in his October 2009 psychiatric report, his other and most pressing reason as to why I had to be moved to Broadmoor or Ashworth was because of 'veiled' threats , he told me, of 'reprisals' by an old gentleman by the name of Norman Scarth!

T20120090 - Kirk - proc from 10.40 - 12.26 - 04.05.12.pdf

Experts in the field confirm there was no sign of relevant brain damage BEFORE Williams even writes the report without appropriate qualifications.

On 7th August 09, when he wrote his first released psychiatric report, [previous others only for MAPPA South Wales Police meetings], as His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC stated, when refusing, recently, to 'strike out' my one million pound damages claim against NHS (Wales), without evening examining his patient!

09 09 01radiologist scans report.pd

09 09 30 INTERIM PSYCHIATRIC REPORT Oct1 2009 REDACTED.pdf

09 12 02 Transcript Crn Crt REDACTED.pdf

09 12 17 Court Hearing to Extend IPP.pdf

http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2013/03/20/the-supreme-court-on-harassment-purpose-and-rationality/#more-17700

You may like to Google 'The Real Maurice Kirk' and come to the County Court tomorrow and Crown court on Thursday

ps My birthday is on Tuesday

Quiz Time:

What does a Duchess, a dairy maid and a cow have in common

clue:

It was most unlikely my father fought on the D-Day Beaches

Answer:

Work it out for yourself

my e-mail is maurice@kirkflyingvet.com

Subject:

Signing up to 'I, Patrick Cullinane, will demonstrate outside the Royal Courts of In-Justice for FOUR days, starting Tue 1st October 2013, to RESTORE the Rule of Law and banish the Rule of JUDGES from the Kangaroo Courts in the UK' at PledgeBank.com

Please click on the link below to confirm your signature on the
pledge at the bottom of this email.

http://www.pledgebank.com/L/BVyQLvFuTJTaBt79hA

The pledge was created by Patrick Cullinane and reads:

'I will I, Patrick Cullinane, will demonstrate outside the
Royal Courts of In-Justice for FOUR days, starting Tue 1st
October 2013, to RESTORE the Rule of Law and banish the Rule of
JUDGES from the Kangaroo Courts in the UK but only if 150 other
people from the UK will do the same. We the People in the UK
have been denied our GUARANTEED RIGHTS to due-process via the
Common Law Trial by Jury, which is the Law of the Land.'

Yours,
the PledgeBank.com team

ends

3rd Week of South Wales Police B ullying Trial with Avon and Somerserset Police on First

Maurice Kirk — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:08:00 GMT

Maurice Refused a Jury

Maurice Kirk v South Wales Police                                                                                               BS 614159

11^th Day

Monday 4^th March13

Claimant Position Statement

Applications for Consideration

1.       Defendant ordered, to be produced today , the 27 written complaints, as a written list, currently in possession of Defendant and referred to by former Inspector Sydney Griffiths during his cross examination.

2.       Result from those written complaints, identified on the list, to be disclosed.

3.       Claimant awaits the findings of his other complaints, mainly of non disclosure, not being identified by the Claimant, such as court cases with Claimant being the successful victim and police instigated ‘break ins’ to his various veterinary surgeries and places of residence.

4.       Incidents, referred to in paragraph 3., are absent from Barbara Wilding’s 25^th February 2009 sworn affidavit, prepared by Dolmans and signed six weeks late by her, then as Chief Constable, despite the specific court orders by His Honour Judge Nicholas Chambers QC.

5.       Identification required of which Defendant witness relates to which of Claimant’s 52 leaver arch files given to Defendant,, to copy and so expedite proceedings, as there is now total confusion deliberately caused by Dolmans, solicitors, by having masked out the Claimant’s indices on each spine on every file!

6.       52 files were originally prepared and marked by Claimant’s secretary before they were disclosed as Claimant exhibits for South Wales Police to copy and to ‘settle out of court’.

7.       Claimant is seeking a ‘Medical afternoon’ before or after 3pm’, at the court’s convenience, this week, in order to find a GP, with which to register, well out of South Wales.

8.       The Claimant cannot proceed with cross examination until Crown Prosecution Service (Wales) and the Defendant produce both male psychiatrist’s falsely written and his Dr wife’s section 9 statements created, to adversely affect the Claimant, since 2009, in this trial.

9.       Following orders from Barbara Wilding , to cause the forensic psychiatrist(s) to attend Barry police station, at very short notice , to attend and contribute in the 8^th June MAPPA level 3 meeting, not to inform their victim, the Claimant was so registered and should the Claimant approach the Defendant again, to attempt ‘witness statements exchange’ he was ‘likely to be shot’ ‘.[quote from MAPPA contemporaneous notes taken at the time]

10.   The doctor’s 2012 victim MG 11witness statements are partly dictated and counter signed.

11.   That , alone, has caused the Claimant to be detained in numerous police stations, law courts and HM prisons due to one doctors and NHS (Wales) facing my million pound damages claim citing Barbara Wilding and her agents in the conspiracy.

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

SCHEDULE SWP FINAL.pdf

I was originally awarded a jury trial by His Honour Judge Nicholas Chambers QC, nearly 10 years ago, against the bullying South Wales Police over our currently hotly contested 35 mainly motoring incidents being heard, NOW, before His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC, at Cardiff’s Civil Justice Centre.

But only, His Honour said, if I chose any eight from the list.

I did and Swansea High Court judge promptly overturned it as too ‘document heavy’ for a jury to ‘comprehend’ so I suggested one jury for each incident!

[My gut feeling told me, now proved, as in my Royal College of Veterinary College ‘HM Partnership’ controlled trial and Lynette White murder trial scandal, also fiddled in Swansea and also refused to be heard out of Wales, no local judge was ever going to give me a jury unless the Welsh appointed judge could ‘get away’ with using case law, eg ‘Hill’, the murdered girl by ‘Sutcliffe’ ‘Jack the Ripper’ allowing police, effectively, ‘no duty of care’.

What I considered, for compromise, was say, four or five incidents for a jury, at a time.

But my old inherited gift of ‘premonitions’, from Mum or Dad, told me to forget it, that has kept me alive, so far, on ‘terra firma’, in ‘terra aqua’ and even after 14 ‘donkey stops’, having ‘broken the bonds of Earth’ only to suddenly finding myself running out of height , airspeed and ideas, all at the same time!

March 2001.

While I was about to set off from Biggin Hill, with 51 other aircraft, senior South Wales police officers were scheeming to have my name removed from the veterinary register all planned for shortly after my return from Australia.

10 11 25 Forensic Analysis MJK[1].pdf

It was obvious that if I could not get these cases out of Wales, early on or get a jury, then I was now doomed as it was now far too late, fiddled and pre planned by the Taffia, Cardiff’s Cabal, 20 years on, as still further obscene costs would have been inflicted.

As it has turned out, for the whole World now to witness, only due to cyberspace, by no other media, four times they have further delayed these Actions, against their ‘extreme and unusual malicious behaviour, first successfully appealing against a jury, then the ‘machine gun’ conspiracy, then the ‘Dr Williams’ et al playing the ‘Gulag Card’ and MAPPA card, the subsequent ‘fabricated ‘harassment of someone who is a criminal ‘on the run’ to this 14^th March fiasco, as fiasco it will surely be, the Criminal Court of Appeal hearing of my stitched up ‘Breach of a Restraining Order’ when no order was ever served!

The most unusual case continues

Prosecution Refuse to Supply Depositions to Litigant in Person or Mackenzie Friend & RSA Informed

Maurice Kirk — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:23:00 GMT

Tuesday 15th January House of Commons Meeting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDZB97tth1k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T-fydVc8qc

http://victims-unite.net/2013/01/08/mind-the-gaps-between-online-and-mainstream-media-government-and-public-the-house-of-commons/

Bristol Community Radio Friday 11th January 2013

'Victims Unite' Interview with Sabine McNeill

Litigant in Person

The thorn in the eye of the legal professionals, Litigants in Person run the risk of being labelled “vexatious litigant”. But also THE opportunity for strengthening one’s character and one’s ability to help others and get help from others, eventually to make a difference to a system of financial exploitation and legal oppression. Here are [...]

click download

http://bcfm.org.uk/category/shows/dialect-radio

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JVFh-AoHiU

Criminal Court of Appeal Criminal Court of Appeal, ref: 201203241 D Administrative Court ref: CO/3970/2012 &CO/6357/2012 Royal Courts of Justice Court

London

12^th January 2013

Dear Ms Bracken,

Prosecution Refuse to Supply Depositions to Litigant in Person

Police evidence, for the 2^nd May 12 ‘Breach of Restraining Order’ jury trial and this subsequent appeal, was sent to Cardiff prison by the CPS but I was not allowed them in court unlike any other prisoner, on my prison wing, on legal aid.

I repeatedly requested for a duplicate copy for a solicitor or Mackenzie Friend outside the prison in order to help an incarcerated Litigant in Person prepare his defence.

During my 2009 farcical ‘machine gun’ trial and acquittal, again being unable to give evidence, I was given duplicate copy of deposition papers and even legal aid, without examination of my financial status, anything to stop my cross examining the police officers in the MAPPA, Chief Constable and NHS conspiracy. It was blackmail to use a Luigi Stranati, HMCTS Delivery Director’s hand picked Welsh nobbled barrister.

A fat lot of good, no need, as His Honour Paul Thomas QC simply refused me either deposition copies in the court room until the closing stages of a two week trial.

During 4^th May 12 ‘Breach of Restraining Order’ trial I was again refused, in court, any legal papers at all [See references on transcript, court log, prison and GEOamey Custody Services records and prison and court cctv except an extortionate obviously redacted and inaccurate Luigi controlled HM transcript, bought on borrowed money].

Both at original 1^st Dec 11 magistrates ‘harassment’ conviction and at its 1^st March 2012 Crown Court Appeal, Luigi, again refused my legal papers in court, eye witnesses or those to confirm I was, any way, immune to prosecution by sub section 3 a) & c) of 1997 Prevention of Harassment Act.

In July 2012 I was again jailed for alleged ‘Breach of Restraining Order’, again only reliant on the false information from the original ‘on the sick’ police psychiatrist.

The CPS continue to refuse to provide copies of those depositions for this appeal that must have been in existence by my September12 release, with all charges dropped.

Yours truly, Maurice J Kirk BVSc Copies to CPS, Cardiff & GMC, London, very shortly to receive my visits.

Luigi Strinati's title is a Delivery Director (for the whole of Wales)

He is one of only seven delivery directors across the UK. Thats how powerful he is.

Ha? What is this?

Caswell Clinic doctors in Cardiff court next week?

13 01 07 Magiistrates reply re Dr witness summons appl REDACTED.pdf

12 02 04 Assoc Mackenzie Friends to HM Gov Cardiff Prison.pdf

Solicitor's Regulatory Authority letter re Morgan Cole, NHS(Wales)Cardiff solicitors

13 01 10l SRA re Morgan Cole_0001.pdf

Notes from the public gallery of the extent the doctor was CPS barrister Evans 'examined' and little shyster, Swansea solictor, appointed by court against my wishes, 'cross examined!

Neither asked any relevant questions needed to 'put to proof' or 'challenge'

The tape recording of the case is available for any one as to publish may place me 'in some difficulties'.

Dr Magistrates Evidence.pdf

Your Police Budget.pdf

Please Sign The Petition

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/abolish-the-ban-on-recording-court-proceedings.html

To Mr Sashy Nathan, Solicitor, Bindmans, & to Mr. Amos Waldman, Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers.

Re the Application by the Attorney-General's team for my 'COMMITTAL', to be heard before the Lord Chief Justice, the Right Honourable Lord Judge, in the Royal Court of Justice on the morning of 23rd January 2013. I have been looking again at The Treasury Solicitor's letter dated 21 December 2012 (received by email from you on 2nd January 2013). & note it invites written questions for the 'witnesses'. I believe this could be better than questioning verbally.

My questions to ALL witnesses - and everyone else involved in this persecution - JUDGES, LAWYERS, POLICE, COURT STAFF, 'SECURITY' STAFF, BAILIFFS & ALL, are:

QUESTION 1:

Did you read the story that Prime Minister David Cameron had announced that an Arctic Convoy Star medal will be awarded "to those who braved the deadly missions." "I am very pleased that some of the brave men of the Arctic Convoys will get the recognition they so richly deserve for the very dangerous work they did," the British prime minister told MPs."? It is notable he says 'some of the brave men'. In fact, more than 3,000 died on the convoys: Of those who survived, only a couple of hundred or so are still alive to receive the medal.

QUESTION 2:

Are you proud to be playing your part in sending one of those men, a man who fought to give you the 'Freedom' which YOU now enjoy, a man who has worked honestly & hard all his life, A MAN WHO IS COMPLETELY SANE, to die in a Stalinist 'Mental Hospital' - for the 'crime' of exposing the rotten apples in the judiciary?

QUESTION 3:

Or would you claim there are no rotten apples in the judiciary? QUESTION 4: Did you ever wear a poppy, & if so, what did it mean to you? Norman Scarth.

Criminal Court of Appeal Criminal ref: 201203241 D Royal Courts of Justice Court ref: CO/3970/2012 &CO/6357/2012 1CF 03546 9^th January 2013

Royal Courts of Justice Court

Dear Case Worker,

Regina v Kirk Breach of Restraining Order Appeal

Supervised Personal Recording of Cardiff Courts’ Evidence

The Cardiff Crown Court continue to refuse to reply to my applications to both hear and purchase digital CD record of my 4^th May 12 jury trial when I was refused my legal papers in court, witnesses to give relevant evidence and carried on despite my need for medical attention following my attempts to extract some of the CPS deposition paperwork from my rectum.

In the past I have been allowed to hear court tapes but now I am blocked despite clear evidence of erroneous record on delayed and expensive transcripts omitting critical words as ‘inaudible’.

Yesterday I visited an almost fruitless Cardiff Crown Court encounter, following your advice following their refusal to deal with the matter over the telephone.

HMCTS Amanda …… flatly refused my hearing or obtain true copy of evidence subject to appeal in the Royal Courts of Justice .

I even summoned police from the street to witness and record in note book as no one, around here, seems to believe a word I say of what actually is going on in Wales as they barter for judicial autonomy.

I APPLY to the Criminal Court of Appeal to allow me the right to hear and keep, at my expense, what /I heard on official digitally recorded CDs under the control of Luigi Stranati, HMCTS Wales manager.

I managed, by using the police presence, to make the court manager hand over copies of letters instigated by Luigi Stranati ….fairy tales relied on in blocking my access to any of the court buildings in order to frustrate appeals and civil actions for ‘s damages.

Website Blog summary of yesterday’s Cardiff Crown Court experience: .I have repeatedly been refused the right to hear my Crown Court hearings or buy the digital recorded CDs. Interesting that in England friends have not been so hindered by their courts, under the same jurisdiction.So I asked the police to attend Cardiff Crown Court this afternoon and PC 4215 witnessed it all,,,,,,eventually, an hour later, after the usual inherent deceit from one or two, I left ,faxed from County Court, Luigi Stranati's 2010 letter and Neil Pring's letter both refusing me access to any Cardiff courts unless I have a case.....as for listening to or getting CDs I was again flatly refused by Amanda MaCafrey, manager.

The Criminal Court of Appeal are therefore also being denied the proof that despite my asking my defence witnesses be named to HHJ Curren QC, in 4th May jury trial, re breach of Restraining Order, we are both refused proof that what is on the 'official transcript' is NOT what was accurately recorded by someone in the public gallery.no wonder the Norman Scarths and Patrick Cullinanes are also so frustrated to be convicted for taping their own cases strictly for their own use and serve prison sentances....interestingly Norman Scarth’s appeal in London is on 23rd January...PLEASE BE THERE

JUST IN FROM A MACKENZIE FRIEND I think the answer to the issue of refusal to supply the digital copies must be article 10 ECHR in that it is denying legitimate freedom of expression and also receipt of ideas etc.There is nothing in law to say that you shouldn't have copies, so any decision to deny you copies won't be prescribed by law. Also article 6(1) ECHR is involved, as you want the transcripts in connection with your appeal and JR. I think that the only remedy would be a Human Rights Act challenge by JR. However, it would be desirable if you obtained a written decision as to why you are being denied the transcripts.Have you received anything in writing explaining why you are being refused permission to obtain the copies?

Yours truly,

Maurice J Kirk BVsc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtOlrWAbbQU

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Manager,

Cardiff Crown Court,Wales UK ref: 201203241 D & CO/3970/2012 &CO/6357/2012 & 1CF 03546

11^th January 2013

Dear Amanda Mackafry,

Litigant in Person Refused CDs or Hearing Trial’s Digital Record .The Criminal Court of Appeal have suggested I ask yet again to hear the digital record of just what was said in 4^th May 2012 Crown Court following my messages from the cells, for witnesses, being stifled.

I wish the previous applications, over the past 20 years, also to be reconsidered for the civil damages claim hearing commencing 18^th February 2013.

If I were a lawyer or on legal aid I am assured the recording is freely available and a doctor has just confirmed she was supplied with court CDs of a hearing in England so why so different in Wales?

It stinks, doesn’t it?

No wonder more and more, not on legal aid, tape record hearings for them selves.

In order to get that to which I am entitled do I really have to disclose publicly my mother was a Jenkins and grand mother was a Morgan, being a direct line from a notorious locally born pirate?

Yours patiently,

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

Copy to Criminal Court of Appeal

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Cardiff Cabal Poster.doc

In Cardiff County Court Case No. BS614159

30^th January 2013

Before: His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC

B E T W E E N

MAURICE JOHN KIRK

Claimant

-v-

THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF SOUTH WALES POLICE

Defendant

Application to call witnesses

I, Maurice Kirk, make application to call further witnesses, contained in the enclosed witness list, that have become relevant, since 1992, when these damages proceedings were first commenced. Between now and during the trial, commencing 18^th February 2013, more prosecution witnesses will be identified and traced requiring, from time to time, still further applications for disclosure of evidence from parties to include both serving and retired police officers, HM court staff, HM prison staff, Probation staff, participants of MAPPA, FTAC and Special Branch, New Scotland Yard employees, Civil Aviation Authority officers and NHS(Wales) personnel.

Prosecution Witnesses for Trial

include:

1. Barbara Wilding ex Chief Constable c/o South Wales Police HQ, Bridgend

2. David Vaughan, Chief Constable c/o South Wales Police HQ, Bridgend

3. Luigi Stranati HMCTS Delivery Director c/o Cardiff Civil Justice Centre

4. Neil Pring HMCTS Manager c/o Cardiff Civil Justice Centre

5. Inspector J Dave MAPPA

6. AJ Richards ACO MAPPA

7. Assistant Chief Officer Granville Brunt MAPPA

8. Nine of ‘machine gun’ 25^th January 2010 jury trial

9. Jerry Cooper machine gun buyer

10. Original machine gun seller

11. Detective Inspector Hughes c/o Cardiff Bay Police Station

12. Chief Superintendent Tim Jones, Professional Standards Dept,

13. Christopher Paul Alexander, (Ebbs) Hintern Airfield, Banbury

14. Inspector Grothier Professional Standards Dept, South Wales Police HQ

15. Dr Phillips, FTAC, London

16. Dr S Coleman Cowbridge Health Centre, Cowbridge Vale of Glamorgan

17. Dr Andrew Metters c/o Princess Of Wales hospital Bridgend

18. Dr Gaynor Jones c/o Caswell Clinic, Bridgend

19. Dr Seely HMP Cardiff c/o HM Cardiff Prison

20. Dr of MAPPA c/o NHS (Wales) HQ, Port Talbot

21. Dr Aisling Butler of Princess of Wales Hospital Bridgend

22. Dr Tudor Princess of Wales Hospital

23. Ian Mulholland Deputy Director Custody HMP

24. HMP Governer Richard Booty, Cardiff

25. HMP Governor Heidi Murray, Cardiff

26. Dr John Azami, Anaesthetist, Vale Hospital, Vale of Glamorgan

27. Professor Rodger Wood c/o Swansea University

28. Jim Mackenna CAA Investigator, CAA House Kingsway

29. DC Evans c/o South Wales Police HQ

30. DC Jones c/o South Wales Police HQ

31. David Gareth Evans c/o 9 Park Crescent Chambers, Cardiff

32. Ms Caress, Barry Magistrates

33. Mr M Williams Cardiff Magistrates

34. Inspector Trigg Rtd c/o Barry Police Station

35. Sgt PS Warner c/o Barry Police Station

36. PC Nigel Brown c/o Cardiff Central Police Station

37. Crown Prosecutor Ms Jackie Seals, Capital Tower, Cardiff

38. Sgt Runnels c/o Llantwit Major Police Station

39. Sgt Phil Davies Rtd c/o Bridgend Police Station

40. Maurice John Kirk

41. Diane Graham, Brittany

42. Scott Parry Highbridge Somerset

43. Jane Walker, Llandow

44. Michael Powell, Cardiff

45. Jennifer Hanson Tynewydd Road

46. Mr Thomas Tynewydd Road

47. Linda Holland, Barry

48. John Francis Clode, Barry

49. Gerald Thomas, Thompson Street

50. Mr Murphy The Old Police Station Barry

51. Ieuan Rees, Barrister, Angel Chambers, Swansea

52. Antony Glen Gafael Cardiff

53. Kirstie Kirk, Llantwit Major

54. Angus Turnbull St Athan

55. Jonathan Clayton ATC Cardiff

56. Andrew Aishe, Taunton

57. Crown Prosecutor Robert Mundy New Scotland Yard

58. Sue Jenkins Dinas Powis

59. Dr Bruce Fergusson NHS(wALES)

60. Dr Push Mangat NHS(WALES)

This list is not exhaustive

The Gravy Train

Back in 1992 I was originally granted a jury trial by my then English solicitorand in around 2003 His Honour Judge Chambers QC granted one!

But the 'powers that that be', the Cardiff Cabal that run all the courts, had other ideas.....the Welsh papers being at reious risk of breaking rank with the obvious outcome. Cyberspace, remember,was still in its infancy.

No, I as given a jury purely to waste nearly three years of of my time and money with it being over turned in the Welsh High Court in a matter of nana seconds. Another court settled in a bottomless pit of tax payers' money and a cosy relationship between the 'all powerful' Welsh judges and a pack of unscrupulous lawyers, yapping at their heals soaking up the cash.

They have managed to draw this one out, so far, for twenty years. Der.oes it matter? The more they delay the more cash they get either from me or from the tax payer. [The usual arrangement is to steal from both as their is no effective taxation of lawyer bills in the UK and never forget the 'Memorandum of Understanding' between lawyer and theie local men in blue.

Cardiff civil justice centre pg1.pdf

Cardiff civil justice centre pg2.pdf

Cardiff civil justice centre pg3.pdf

Cardiff civil justice centre pg4.pdf

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICECase No.doc

SCHEDULE SWP FINAL.pdf

My Witness if the cabal dare

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/legal/Wanted-for-Attempted-Murder.aspx

LIST OF POLICE DEFENCE WITNESSES

SWP Witnesses Kirk v SWP.doc

schedu;le motoring.pdf

On the 23rd Norman Scarth RN Rtd will challenge the current law with one hand , if not both hands, well behind his back.

My trial, similarly, will be another Cardiff traversty of justice its outcome settled years ago....only dragged out to steal cash, mine or yours.

Compimentary to any Whitehall Farce of Brian Ricks the stench from clumsilly hidden evidence from within police records will not be stiffled and is further arguement to allow supervised recording, for litigants in person (LiP) of magistrates and other proceedings HM runnning the extortionate game of selling you a so called accurate transcript at nearly £10 a page!!!!

I used to listen to court tapes but the evil bastards who run Cardiff Courts now refuse my listenng to or buying CDs as is allowed in the English High Court.

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/legal/Law-Lords_2C00_-it-appears_2C00_-_2700_Cannot-Stand-Corn_2700_.aspx

EBERT another case I have studied in detail......clearly swindled by corrupt judge...(it took three hours, under tuition to go through the papers)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWUizz3bOmU

Princess Diana and Royal Courts of Justice

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xiuj53_unlawful-killing-directed-by-keith-allen_news

http://www.onetruemedia.com/otm_site/view_shared?p=116ea8568481d69d52553f4&skin_id=1702&large

this blog is in its infancy

Maurice 'Burnt Out' and Needs Your Help!

Maurice Kirk — Tue, 29 May 2012 14:34:00 GMT

Please, anyone, have a quick look at the enclosed draft appeal to the Criminal Court of Appeal, London and suggest improvements as it has to be deposited there by this Friday's dead line.

It is far too dangerous to enter Wales and deposit it at Cardiff Crown Court , as procedure dictates, because I run the risk of yet another jail term. Last time I did a Derrick Hassan who supplied falsified forensic police evidence to have me sectioned under the 1983 Mental Health Act , for Broadmoor, puched me down the court steps and broke my leg.

http://kirkflyingvet.com/files/folders/south_wales_police/entry1467.aspx

Keith Vaz MP takes up interest in South Wales' IPCC conduct over falsification of forensic evidence in Cardiff Crown Courts

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/legal/Machine-Gun.aspx

Photo of my leaving Cardiff Magistrates, in hand cuffs, by narked South Wales Police, on 1st December 2011, with no knowledge of any existance of a 'restraining order but beaten up by GEOamey Custodial Services just minutes before. all caught on video the judge, Mr Curran, refused to be made shown to the 4th May12 jury in Cardiff Crown Court.

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/legal/Evil-Cardiff-Magistrates.aspx

Cardiff Cabal are so embarassed this incident, leading to my arrest, has been tranferred to Bristol Crown Court for trial, for fear of the publicity

Can anyone, please, cross the bridge to Cardiff and deliver it, with the court forms, on my behalf, before 4pm Friday, 1st June2012?

I am currently in Bristol and can deliver docs to anyone who can help.....thankyou

But I need help to improve the document as I cannot remember much of what was said during the numerous trials that have kept me locked up since most of the last eight months

tel 07907937953 maurice@kirkflyingvet.com

http://www.channel4.com/news/police-corruption-trial-collapses

His Honour Judge Patrick's Section 39 Order Restricts the publication of more details ...Re Musa trial

so be there!

I hope to be in London, until Friday, while I attend:

the Nigerian seven snatched children, by Haringey Council, a scandalous affair, at Wood Green Crown Court, while their parents remain in prison facing deportation..

http://kirkflyingvet.com/files/folders/south_wales_police/entry1450.aspx

DRAFT GROUNDS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

(CRIMINAL DIVISION)

THE QUEEN

- v -

MAURICE JOHN KIRK

____________________________

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

______________________________

AGAINST CONVICTION

"REAL POSSIBILITY" OF ACTUAL AND/OR PERCEIVED PREJUDICE AND/OR BIAS OF HIS HONOUR JUDGE CURRAN

1. His Honour Judge Curran ought to have recused himself from presiding over the trial of the Appellant as he had previously stayed the Appellant's application to the Cardiff Administrative Court for Judicial Review of the Appellant's appeal at Cardiff Crown Court, Case A20110290, on 1^st March 2012 and his conviction and sentance of harassment, contrary to the Section 2 of Protection from Harassment Act 1997, at Cardiff Magistrates Court, on 1st December 2011, the subject of the Restraining Order allegedly breached in this present case.

2. Whilst accepting that the issues of fact in the trial were for the jury, His Honour Judge Curran made a number of rulings that erred in law similar if not identical to those by both District Judge John Charles, at Cardiff Magistrates and his Honour Judge PD Hughes QC, in its appeal, at Cardiff Crown Court.

3. Subsequently, failed disclosure of evidence, by way of court and custody documents and cctv footage, all under the control of the South Wales Police, caused the Appellant, in each of these court cases, compounded the reasons for refusal of access to his own legal papers in both court and prison and be given any facilities, at all, to either interview or call his own witnesses.

4. All prosecution witnesses, in the two previous above mentioned trials, were prevented from being cross examined by the Claimant while the main witness, a doctor, in the jury trial, subject to this appeal, was denied the Claimant's required examination or cross examination, contrary to His Honour Judge Curran QC's 22^nd February 2012 Court Order.

5. This was further compounded following, first by the failure to attend of the court instructed barrister, to cross examine the witness(es) ‘on the Appellant's behalf ', under Section 36 of Youth and Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and following His Honour Judge Hugh Davies QC's April 2012 Court Order that caused this main prosecution witness to be removed from the witness list, as irrelevant and so facilitate the Appellant's immediate release from prison.

6. For the prosecution barrister, on 2^nd May 2012, to then open the prosecution's case by stating, before the jury and the trial judge, that the South Wales Police had ‘just decided' not to now call the doctor to give evidence, was nothing short of a criminal offence.

7. For the Appellant then not to be allowed to call this already empanelled prosecution witness, being ‘anybody's property', as his psychiatrist, expert witness and/or witness of fact and/or as his character witness, was a further abuse.

8. Before His Honour Judge Hugh Davies QC the prosecution had admitted it was only by the citing of this same witness, in all these three hearings, 2009 WW1Machine Gun trial and numerously related other summary hearings, by the South Wales Police, that the Crown Prosecution Service had been able to be successful, for the South Wales Police, to oppose the Appellant's preparation of both his civil and criminal cases, against the Chief Constable, out of custody, since 8am 22^nd June 2009.

9. By April 2012 the Appellant had almost served the pre arranged prison sentence of nine months, in any event, when bail would have been granted, by His Honour Judge Hugh Davies QC, had the Appellant been so stupidly minded as to apply.

10. There was a "real possibility" of actual and/or perceived bias, as a result of His Honour Judge Curran presiding over the Appellant's trial, when the learned Judge had already stayed the Appellant's application for permission to apply for Judicial Review of the dismissal of his appeal against conviction, on 2 March 2012, relating to the conviction in respect of which the Restraining Order, imposed by Cardiff Magistrates', which was alleged to have been now breached.

11. The certificate of conviction, at last released to the Appellant by HM Court and Tribunals Service, states the 1^st or 9^th December 2011 dated Restraining Order was dependent upon the conviction for a breach in Section 2 of the said Act but Prosecution Exhibit 1 indicates the ‘served order' on the Appellant was that from a Section 4 Restraining Order dated 8^th December 2011.

12. His Honour's failure to conduct a ‘Vue de Justice' with the jury, following the custody officers in the both courts, employed by GEOamey Custody Services Ltd, confiscation of the Appellant's scale drawings of the Cardiff magistrates custody suite, where the alleged offence took place was an abuse in law.

13. His Honour's failure to grant an adjournment for medical attention or even access to his medication in the cells below, following GEOamey Custody Services' vicious assaults upon the Appellant, both on 1^st December 2011 and 4^th April 2012, was an abuse of process.

14. His Honour's failure to allow the Appellant sight of all the prosecution exhibits, eg website blog of 4^th December 2011 on http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/, on arrest, before caution and/or during the trial and sight of various jury ‘notes', passed to His Honour, following the Appellant's suggestion, in the course of the trial, was also wrong in law.

15. His Honour's failure to ever allow the Appellant sight of the original or sight of a certified true copy, of the Restraining Order, allegedly served on him, was also wrong in law.

16. His Honour's failure to order HM Prison, Cardiff to release the Appellant's legal papers and posted in court exhibits by his Mackenzie Friend, allow him proper access to facilities, in order to conduct is defence did nothing but to compound his difficulties and were further breaches in his rights under the Rule of Law.

17. In the alternative, at the appropriate time, His Honour failed to properly consider granting bail, out of custody, in the light of these apparent extreme and unusual circumstances, unable to find local legal representation, as was indicated by His Honour Judge Hugh Davies QC, on 7^th April 2012, in Cardiff Crown Court and by His Honour Judge Lambert in Bristol Crown Court, during an apparent application for bail well outside South Wales.

18. The Appellant therefore had an unfair trial and/or the said trial took place in breach of article 6(1) of the ECHR as incorporated by schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

"REAL POSSIBILITY" OF ACTUAL AND/OR PERCEIVED PREJUDICE AND/OR BIAS OF MR DAVID GARETH EVANS OF COUNSEL PROSECUTING FOR THE SOUTH WALES POLICE

1. Mr. David Gareth Evans of counsel ought not to have prosecuted the case against the Appellant as he was a potential prosecution or defence witness relating to the drawing up and purported ‘service of a ‘Restraining Order' signed? by District Judge Charles at Cardiff Magistrates' Court on 1^st December 2011.

2. An approach by the Appellant's Mackenzie Friend caused the CPS barrister to produce another version of Prosecution Exhibit One, ‘Restraining Order', not date stamped by the court. Prosecution Exhibit One included the court date stamp 9^th Dec 2011.

3. The prosecution barrister admitted, before the jury, a ‘draught' Restraining Order did still exist and was ordered to produce it, by the following day, by His Honour Judge John Curran.

4. There was discussion, quite wrongly before the jury, as to whether Mr. Evans would be called as a witness relating to the ‘drawing up' of the ‘Restraining Order and he indicated to His Honour Judge Curran that he would have to "seek advice from his professional body the Bar Council for England and Wales".

5. The court heard no more so the Appellant called him as a defence witness and was refused.

6. The Appellant was refused an adjournment in the light of late prosecution disclosure of relevant evidence germane to the original 1^st December 2011 conviction, upon which the Restraining Order relied.

7. Further evidence to support, unavailable in the time frame available, was the ‘contemporaneous note' made by the Appellant's solicitor of his client's memory of events on the 1^st December 2011, on 22^nd December2011, just two days before the Appellant's arrest and subsequent incarceration.

8. HM Cardiff prison's governors denied the Appellant proper client/solicitor/witness access, his access to his own funds for the defence or provide proper service of his letters/faxes/e-mails and telephone calls, to and from his solicitor, helpers or proposed witnesses controlled by MAPPA.

9. An issue had therefore arisen in the case as to what documents were allegedly served on the Appellant relating to the Restraining Order and as to whether one had been served as handwritten by District Judge Charles as there had been evidence adduced before the jury by way of unsworn submissions by Mr. Evans and by sworn evidence from those in the public gallery, that the former had handed up a draft of the proposed Restraining Order to District Charles for approval and that District Charles had written comments on it in order stating he withed to make the Restraining Order stronger (change to a Section 4 Order, ‘fear of violence').

10. There was a "real possibility" of actual and/or perceived bias as a result of Mr. Evans prosecuting the case, when he had made oral submissions to His Honour Judge Curran which were in effect the giving of evidence which was unsworn and in respect of which the Appellant was unable to challenge by way of cross-examine.

11. In fact the Appellant had been absent in the cells at Cardiff Magistrates' Court when the issue of the ‘Restraining Order' had been discussed by Mr. Evans with District Judge Charles on 1^st December 2011.

12. In addition, the relevant exchanges between Mr. Evans as prosecutor and His Honour Judge Curran were heard in the presence of the jury when they should have been ordered to retire, causing prejudice and bias in the Appellant's case.

The jury specifically asked for sight of the original, not copy, of both the GEOamey Custodial Services custody and clerk of the court's log and contemporaneous notes of evidence but the judge indicated, in the absence of the Appellant, that they were not relevant.

14 The Appellant therefore had an unfair trial and/or the said trial took place in breach of article 6(1) of the ECHR as incorporated by schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

LACK OF DISCLOSURE IN RESPECT OF THE APPELLANT

1. The prosecution failed to supply to the Appellant the complete log with handwritten notes and annotations of the custody records and cctv footage, kept by GEOamey Custodial Services, that had been in charge of security in the cells at Cardiff Magistrates' Court and also the notes made by Mr. Michael Williams, the Clerk of the Court and others at Cardiff Magistrates' Court.

2. Further, it emerged on 3 May 2012, during the trial that Mr. Evans was appearing in for the prosecution, he had handed up a draft of the ‘Restraining Order' to District Judge Charles on 1^st December 2011 and the learned District Judge had made handwritten additions to it with suggestions for making it stronger to be one under Section 4 of the Act.

3. There was an issue in the trial as to exactly which version of the ‘Restraining Order' had actually been served on the Appellant in the cells by the Security Officer Mr. Leigh Barker and so the existence of the copy of the ‘Restraining Order' with the handwritten additions made by District Judge Charles became an issue as the Appellant wished the jury to see it.

4. At the conclusion of the proceedings, on 3 May 2012, His Honour Judge Curran enquired as to the whereabouts of the version of the Restraining Order with the handwritten additional made by District Judge Charles and was told by Mr. Evans that it was at the CPS Headquarters in the Appellant's case file at Merthyr Tydfil.

5. Although His Honour Judge Curran directed that it be produced at the resumption of the proceedings, on 4 May 2012, only a computer print out of the amended restraining Order was produced and the jury was deprived of seeing either the original version with the handwritten additions, made by District Judge Charles or a certified true copy of the original 1^st December 2011 Restraining Order made on some date between 1^st and 9^th December 2011.

6. The Appellant had also again sought disclosure of the notes made by Mr. Michael Williams, the Clerk of the Court at Cardiff Magistrates' Court at the commencement of the proceedings, on 4 May 2012 but no order or any determination was made by His Honour Judge Curran for their production, instead, in the absence of the Appellant, informing the jury they, along with the prison and GEOmey Custodial Services records were not relevant.

7. Prior to trial His Honour knew the Appellant had received correspondence from Cardiff Magistrates stating he was not entitled to any court record other than the certificate of conviction for this and some currently seven ongoing summary cases, different but all related to this current appeal.

8. The Appellant therefore had an unfair trial and/or the said trial took place in breach of article 6(1) of the ECHR as incorporated by schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

CASE SHOULD HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION BY THE JURY

1. Although the Appellant didn't make any submissions of ‘no case to answer', after the close of the prosecution's case, His Honour Judge Curran should have withdrawn the case from the jury on the grounds that the evidence as it then stood, relating to the alleged service of the Restraining Order on the Appellant in the cell number three of Cardiff Magistrates' Court, on 1^st December 2011, was so unreliable that no jury properly directed could convict on that evidence.

2. Conflicting evidence had been given between the Clerk of the Court, Mr. Michael Williams and the Security Officer, Mr. Leigh Barker as to whether the Appellant had been serviced in one of the cells or in the corridor of the cell area below the Magistrates, whether he had been served with one or two separate documents, if at all and when put alongside their original but conflicting police witness statements, it is the Appellant's submission, that for this case to have even reached a jury was an abuse of process fueled by vengeance.

3. In addition, Mr. Barker had given evidence that he had read "Restraining Order" at the top of the document, that he had stated in evidence he had given to the Appellant but didn't give any evidence that the Appellant's name was on the document or that he had read the Appellant's name on the document in question.

4. There was a serious risk of doubt regarding the alleged service of the ‘Restraining Order' on the Appellant in the cell area of Cardiff Magistrates' Court by Mr. Barker on the Appellant.

5. In the premises, the Appellant's conviction is thereby rendered "unsafe" under section 2(1)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

(CRIMINAL DIVISION)

THE QUEEN

- v -

MAURICE JOHN KIRK

_____________________________________________

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

_____________________________________________

49 Tynewydd Road, (for sale, 'cheap, cheap')

Barry,

CF62 8AZ