Legal Battles : South Wales Police cover-up, Professor Roger Wood

Just What Really Goes On in Our Courts

Maurice Kirk — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 11:30:00 GMT

21.34 hrs and I am still holding......

21. 25 hrs I ring South Wales Police101 number again as I am far from happy with Roger's 'advice' (advice I must say appropriate for the sort of calls I can imagine he is swamped with every night). I am asked to hold...but not before suggesting it takes only one phone to arrange for the doctor's house to be burnt down to address the minds of those ultimately responsible for what they have done to both my family and my life.....

21.07 hrs I ring Roger Davies on police 101 number re advice: Do I go to court on 16th or go to a long overdue Bristol psychiatrist appointment to get brain scan and establish once and for all ...do I have a brain tumour or not?...... if not I can have my cancelled CAA medical restored to allow me to fly in the cub to South Africa.

13th October

13 05.10hrs

No one seems to be listening around here so it means writing another laborious letter to inform the world just what really goes on in our UK law courts:

Clerk to the Cardiff Crown Court BS614159/T20130801 13^th Oct 2013

Dear Madam,

Regina v Maurice John Kirk (Kirk v South Wales Police) Further to my e-mail seeking advise as to which 16^th October 13 appointment I take, my preferring the psychiatrist’s appointment as I have waited for over four years, I find there are still several Crown Court appeals and other outstanding issues relevant to the trial listed on 12^th November 13.

1. My 12^thApril 2013 appeal application (Case 62120007323) filed with the magistrates remains ignored despite reminders and despite my sixtieth odd Judicial Review Application paid for and posted.

This is a residual matter from the 25^th January 2010 jury trial, re my trading in machine guns. The fact that I was acquitted meant the South Wales Police, with malice afore thought, continue to refuse to return my property confiscated during their 22^nd June 2009 dawn raid, brandishing automatic weapons.

The truth of the matter was they simply wanted me jailed for anything to affect my current ongoing twenty year running civil trial and even attempted to snatch our ten year old daughter under Operation ‘Orchid’ to further undermine my, then, already fragile state of mind..

2. Money for fifteen further court cases

As my purloined collection of antiques and shot guns exceeded an estimated £10,000 in value may I apply for the residing Crown Court judge to order the immediate release of said property that I may dispense with the need of my applying for Legal Aid and delay the police may cause? District Judge Bodfan Jenkins continues to refuse to state a case for delayed JR.

3. My appeal for 'common assault' conviction from arresting a mischievous Cardiff barrister, attempting to pervert the course of justice yet again, needs to be listed for an early hearing except another hearing before that is needed, outside Wales, like last time, because this individual has, at this late stage, now employed another barrister, at tax payer’s expense, stating he does not like the thought of my cross examining him again.

http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/legal/13%2009%2024%20CPS%20Complainant%20Appl.png

4. He is, of course, the Crown Prosecution lawyer who cross examined me in the past but is now fearful that my reason for his arrest may be disclosed to the general public. On 1^st December 2011 this complainant, David Gareth Evans of 9 Park Place Chambers, Cardiff, was and still is, despite my years of countless applications for disclosure, privy to the content of court and cell CCTV, police, court and custody records that will clear my name to successfully apply to become a veterinary surgeon.

5. Most important is the fact that both he and His Honour Judge Richard Thomlow have access to the Cardiff Crown Prosecution computer that produced the draft version my ten witnesses all watched District Judge John Charles scribble all over before ordering it be shown to me in the cells for my approval. 6. The 4^thMay12 jury, during my ‘Breach of a Restraining Order’ hearing, was, just like myself, refused sight of any of the above public records simply because Luigi Stranati, court manager, had not transferred the case to England as I had previously requested. When it suits the CPS, I notice, it is transferred to England like with the last two cases so similarly constructed. 7. That 4th May12 jury requested information that was all destroyed and will only be confirmed by, 'on who's orders', from David Gareth Evans if he is on oath but only if he is cross examined by myself.

6 and 7 seem to have been removed to protect that nice doctor who was so wise in his diagnosis and report about M's brain...

8. He knows I NEVER EVER WAS SERVED THE RESTRAINING ORDER, to possibly breach about three days later, by anyone that day as it was arranged by the then Recorder of Cardiff, His Honour Judge Llewellyn Jones QC, on 14^th November 2011 for a longer prison term (see clerk of court notes and High Court Order) with the usual intention for the prison to serve it upon my release.

9. But ‘the fearful sight of ten outsiders in the public gallery’ and Strinati sneaking in was just too much for the district judge who significantly shortened my prison sentence sufficiently enough for my immediate release.

11 11 14 Cardiff High Court Acting Recorder of Cardiff Witheld Orders.pdf

10. Release for only twenty minutes, I hasten to add, before the next trumpeted up South Wales Police conspiracy unfolded and my arrest for ‘Failure to attend court’.

11. Just two days earlier, with me in prison, the Nigerian Musa family’s corrupt Kilburn High Street solicitors hearing succeeded as without my evidence they had buried the truth of their unlawful arranging of Tottenham police arresting both them and myself.

12 Similarly iniquitous conduct, months earlier, by the Haringey Council’s huge lawyer team, had me gaoled from the High Court to further aid their lucrative snatching of the six Nigerian children.

13. Mr Evans also knows, full well, that had John Charles allowed me to have cross examined the rogue police psychiatrist, under exemptions under the 1998 Harassment Act in the first place, in November11 and again by His Honour Judge Hughes refusing me in 1st March12 appeal of the conviction, none of these cases mentioned in this letter, today, needed to have been outstanding AND that includes my stayed civil police harassment trial BS614159

14. The police refusing to allow Newport office to issue me with a new passport, this week, my having previously had my current one unlawfully confiscated by the Defendant in my civil claims is just power for the couse for an Englishman in Cardiff.

15. Legal Aid is still not processed as Luigi Stranati still refuses my right, even on the telephone, to try and clarifying the Legal Aid queries my Bristol solicitors received when they gave up with the Welsh court. wishing no disrespect to the presiding judge my health, with or without a psychiatric examination, will affect whether I can even speak in any further court rooms as my only legal commitment is, I submit, to attend and not necessarily need to speak

16. Disclosure applications for information controlled by David Gareth Evans, CPS and the police, still need to be re addressed for both the outstanding appeal and this imminent trial.

17. I propose asking for a number of witness summonses to be served and as their subsequent counter measures will be both lengthy and expensive, may I suggest that both primary and Section 8 disclosure be ordered within seven days in the light of their refusal in disclosing my interview DVD and depositions from the last aborted trial.

18. I was entitled to all this from the very start and with a pragmatic expeditious process just as it was in all my three previously successful occasions in Bristol Crown Court concerning completely unrelated criminal allegations.

19. To reduce the number of appeals envisaged, following successful service of summonses on hostile defence witnesses and to counter this deliberate delay of my civil claims are you able, as a criminal court order independent arbitration because, while I still breath, there will be many more malicious prosecutions ahead?

20. Police withheld disclosure of CCTV,telephone and computer records created by the two complainants, Mark Davenport and Nathan Kingsley, before, during and after, alleged assault and subsequent 'intimidation of a witness' alleged incidents need addressing as the police already have mine and will not disclose as unlawful MAPPA level 3 24/7 surveillance continues here in South Wales.

21. I have been denied access in the past to this court room to give evidence, as last time, on precisely these very same issues when raised but, as usual, blocked by 'dark forces', 'the powers that be' that pullute society today.

22. The time before that, on 2nd December 2009, the CPS barrister, Richard Thomlow, also of 9 Park Place Chambers, supported the police psychiatrist in the conspiracy to strike out my current suspended civil case, BS614159, by applying for my being incarcerated in Ashworth high security psychiatric hospital for life. (see enclosed 16th October 2009 REDACTED police/Caswell Clinic psychiatric report).

09 12 02 Transcript Crn Crt REDACTED.pdf

09 09 30 INTERIM PSYCHIATRIC REPORT Oct1 2009 REDACTED.pdf

23. Barbara Wilding, past Chief Constable, had failed earlier in having me shot on 18th June 2009 but only because there were far too many CCTV cameras and armed police in attendance, inside police HQ, to cover it all up an unlawful killing.

24. The South Wales Police have ‘proof of innocence’ and evidence of complainants lying for material gain but, as usual in my criminal cases are, not always so minded in telling any one. His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC has indicated I may apply through his civil court in order that I may get access to my legal papers and clothes in my flat but the police strenuously oppose it.

25. I humbly submit that only the Cardiff Crown Court can vary the bail restrictions following twelve police officers threatening to arrest my daughter's Bristol based bailiff carrying out his lawful duties in eviction of the said squatters.

26. I declined His Honour's offer as I was aware of legal proceedings had already commenced from England. Luigi Stranati would have again 'burnt the mid night oil' in blocking any new judicial process of mine especially as the Cardiff Cabal appears to have over reached itself this time.

3 09 16 GBH on Bailiff.pdf 3 09 16 GBH on Bailiff.pdf

27. The police continue to oppose my having a passport as it is a potential threat, not just to retrieve my papers in Brittany but to their incestuous little world of money making, generally at the expense of the UK tax payer. My visit to France, to find a lawyer, may also lead to the ordering from London that Luigi Stranati allow me access to public court counters in order to process my Legal Aid application papers to expedite outstanding litigation including the machine gun/MAPPA/NHS (Wales) conspiracy implicating so many in both the judiciary and executive of The Principality.

28. Dolmans, Cardiff solicitors, have acted for all the Chief Constables in my twenty year running civil damages claim, for relentless police bullying and malicious prosecutions and in particular over the 'machine gun' case advising over IAG and MAPPA meetings and PII/MAPPA disclosure opposition, in the civil court, once I was acquitted of trading in WW1 machine guns bolted to display aircraft. Not only was the process of my being sectioned under the 1983 Mental Health Act ultra vires, with immunity given to the rogue police psychiatrist, the continuing bullying throughout the four month civil trial I consider as a criminal act with intent to pervert the course of justice.

29. Today I am told by two witnesses from 5^th May 2012 Crown Court public gallery that, following the jury passing a written note to the trial judge, in my absence, with regards to CCTV, court or custody records being in existance with the recording of the alleged service of a ‘restraining order’ on me in the cells, CPS barrister David Gareth Evans was heard to deliberately misinform the jury to obtain a conviction. 30. I make application to listen to the court tapes, for both the outstanding Evans appeal and 12^th November proposed trial, see original documentary evidence of service, under the laws of best evidence, purported to recorded in both 1^st December 2011 GEOamey custody records as well as magistrate court clerk Michael Williams’contemporaneous , as all previous requests have always been refused.

Seventeen arrests since and without a single successful conviction causes me to wonder whether anarchy really does reign supreme here in South Wales.

I remain Your Obedient Servant,

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

Copy to County Court & CCRC

12th October

13 05.10hrs

No one seems to be listening around here so it means writing another laborious letter to inform the world just what really goes on in our UK law courts:

11th Oct 13 11.36hrs

My letter to Cardiff Crown & County Courts16th October 13 Crown Court Hearing for Pleadings

This date clashes with court ordered Bristol psychiatric examination of me and speaking on Bristol radio, my being just another South Wales Police MAPPA victim subjected to their relentless bullying.

1. To which appointment, please, do I attend?

2. Just who has the power, in Wales, to order area HMC&TS court manager, Luigi Stranati, to allow me to process a Legal aid application at Cardiff Magistrates court public counter when I have been banned by him from all South Wales court counters since 2008?

3. Just who has the power to make the rogue Cardiff police psychiatrist to hand over the evidence, written albeit under MAPPA blackmail, that is denying me my CAA pilot's licence in order to by Solid Savings" mce_href="http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/legal/archive/2013/10/05/anarchy-breaks-out-in-wales-society-without-government-or-law.aspx">compete in the Schneider Trophy Race and now fly to South Africa?

4. Just who has the power when I am purported to be diagnosed with both 'significant brain damage' and a possible brain tumour, when confirmed by HM Crown Prosecution Service in 2nd December 2009 Crown Court hearing, over some matter about my trading in machine guns and to be sectioned to Ashworth High Security Psychiatric Hospital? Neither doctor nor barrister, Your Ladyship and Your Honour, had the relevant qualifications and were both lying with intent to pervert the course of justice.

5. Just who has the power to make the South Wales Police hand back my passport, currently unlawfully withheld, following their blocking HM Newport Passport Office from issuing me with another to obtain legal papers from France?

6.Just who has the power to make the South Wales Police hand over evidence requested by 4th May 2012 jury (Breach of Restraining Order) indicated in their succinct note to His Honour Judge John Curran QC, unbeknown to me, if not your local Masonic lodge?

7. A similar jury note is likely to be repeated on12th November 2013 so who has the power then, in Wales, to order the South Wales Police to disclose my police/court/prison custody records, clerk of the court records and CCTV, both recorded at incidents and whilst I was in custody, not forgetting the numerous interview, under caution, DVDs denied me on so many previous occasions?

Thankyou

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

10th October 0.600 hrs

Tim and myself are up bright and early, in a valley deep into West Devon , to harvest his first crop of Pinot Noir and Solaris grapes.

(Faulty camera is preventing me from down loading a record of the day's activities)

Here is a photo Tim took earlier before the dreaded Botritis blighted the his hard work.......Next year we will have many, many grapes to press with our big feet! (see previous blogs)

7th June 13 Royal Courts of Justice Hearing Right to Tape Record and Call Defendant as Witness

Maurice Kirk — Tue, 04 Jun 2013 10:26:00 GMT

AN E-MAIL WITH NO RESPONSE

FAO Mr Justice Morgan

6^th June 2013 12.02pm

FAO Hearings Cardiff County Court                       BS614159

22nd & 23rd May2013 Claimant Position Statements Ruling

Further to my visit to the court to collect the 'by Tuesday' ruling, promised at the last day of the hearing, l have telephoned today about the Claimant being able to refer to it in RCJ on 7th June 13 as the alternative, possibly, to Barbara Wilding being the subject of the proceedings as past Chief Constable.

Her 'oh so dodgy' 25th Feb 2009 sworn affidavit was written with malice aforethought and proved in court following 99 witnesses's evidence.

There is no need for the Defendant's legal team
to attend as the tape recording issue is not for them.

If the outstanding ruling is substituted for Mr Justice Morgan to consider then compromise as to which witnesses should still be allowed to give evidence could be settled between parties NOW

Without that ruling causes me to remain in some difficulties for tomorrow's RCJ application

Please forward to RCJ as I still cannot find the RCJ ref number or e-mail.

Thankyou

28 May 2013   Further ruling on second list of witnesses whom Mr Kirk wishes to call.

On 29 April 2013, at a time when the Defendant were shortly to call their last witness, Mr Kirk delivered a written list of 44 witnesses whom he wished to call. On 1^st May 2013 I delivered a written ruling identifying which witnesses he was to be permitted to call. I did so pursuant to the responsibility upon the court to control the evidence by giving directions, and actively to case manage the case, under CPR 32.1 and CPR 1.4. In that written ruling it I set out the nature of the present proceedings; the Orders which have been made previously, setting out in particular the dates by which witness statements, or witness summaries, had been required to be served; the background from 2008 to date in respect of preparation of the present trial insofar as it permitted or impeded Mr Kirk’s ability to prepare evidence and secure witness statements or summaries; and the principles by which the court is governed in respect of the calling of witnesses. I adopt that in full for the purpose of the present ruling and I do not repeat it here.

Since then, Mr Kirk has given evidence over several days and has called 13 witnesses. By a Position Statement dated 22^nd May 2013 Mr Kirk served a further written list of some 19 named witnesses he would wish to call. I stated on 24 May that I would again give ruling in writing. This is (i) for clarity as to my reasons and (ii) for ease of access to a record of the ruling. I understand that a hearing is listed for Friday 7 June 2013 to consider permission to appeal (and/or appeal itself) against my ruling of 1 May 2013. I will in this ruling list the witnesses individually in this ruling, as I did in the last, by number and name in Mr Kirk’s list but preceded by a letter “B”, to avoid confusion, assuming that the present ruling may also be the subject of application for permission to appeal.

B1.       Ex-Inspector Coliandris. This is a former police officer. In these proceedings the Defendant gave an undertaking to call or tender any witness in respect of whom a witness statement had been lodged, so long as that was a presently serving officer and thus within the control of the Defendant; but expressly did not give that undertaking in respect of any witness who was no longer a serving police officer. I was told that Mr Coliandris was reluctant to attend court because of his state of health. I am aware that he wrote to the court himself seeking to inform the court confidentially of his state of health and his reservations, but stating that he did not want these details to be made known to Mr Kirk. I declined to read his representations so long as he wished the content of his communications to be kept from one of the parties and I so informed them. In the event Mr Coliandris was not called and the Defendant did not seek to tender his evidence, whether live or under the Civil Evidence Act.

Mr Kirk does not articulate the nature of the evidence which he believes Mr Coliandris could give. On the face of his witness statement Mr Coliandris is not a direct witness to any fact or incident in issue. He appears to have looked into complaint by Mr Kirk, without identifying relevant material evidence. If so, then this appears to be a witness whom Mr Kirk wishes to call blind, in the hope of either fishing for evidence in support of his case or simply cross-examining the witness in support of the same exercise. I have also sought to be alert to the possibility that a witness might be able to assist, as to the matters in issue, if he is referred to in documents before the court; but I have identified no such reference.

Accordingly I rule against permission to call this witness.

B2.       Ex Chief Inspector Trigg. This is in fact a renewed application – in respect of witness 15 in the ruling of 1 May 2013. No new material is advanced. The same considerations apply. Accordingly I still rule against permission to call Mr Trigg.

B3.      Mr Brian Genner. This is a witness who has given evidence in relation to the events of 6 June 1995. Mr Anthony Gafael and his girlfriend Alison Genner the daughter of this witness were excluded that day from their flat, an incident which led to prosecution of Mr Kirk, and in respect of which Mr Kirk complains that police officers forced entry through a roller shutter door to Mr Kirk’s premises. There are discrepancies between the account in the witness statement for these proceedings of Sergeant Roe (as he was in 1995) and others, including Mr Genner, as to when Roe was present or what he did. In the case of Mr Roe, Mr Kirk produced after Mr Roe’s evidence a statement of the time from Sergeant Roe which appeared clearly inconsistent with what Mr Roe had told me. I therefore permitted Mr Roe, exceptionally, to be recalled for further cross-examination. The inconsistencies have been explored in cross-examination by Mr Kirk and in questions from myself.

Mr Kirk seeks that Mr Genner be recalled also. However the evidence of Mr Genner has been given. The evidence of Anthony Gafael has now been given. If there is material in the evidence of Mr Genner (or Mr Gafael) on which Mr Kirk seeks to rely, or inconsistencies in the evidence between witnesses on which he seeks to rely, that is available in closing submissions and will be for me to consider as in any other case. Unlike Mr Roe, there is no earlier inconsistent written statement of Mr Genner relied upon (which in any event, if it had been available, ought to have been put to him), nor other proper reason for him to be recalled.

B4.       Mr Roe. He has been recalled once (see above). It would be wholly exceptional for a witness to be recalled for a second time. I have now heard evidence from Mr Gafael. However Mr Kirk identifies nothing new which would justify, and I have failed to identify anything in the evidence of Mr Gafael which would justify, recalling Mr Roe.

B5.       Ex Chief Inspector Colin Jones. Mr Kirk states that he is a “key player”. A chief reason for Mr Kirk’s interest is that at one of Mr Kirk’s appeals in the Crown Court a police officer attended as an observer, when he was seen to be nodding towards a police officer PC Rewbridge during the giving of her evidence. According to Mr Kirk, when asked to explain himself, the police officer said he was attending on instruction from Chief Inspector Colin Jones. Inferentially, Mr Kirk believes that Mr Colin Jones is, or may be, one of the senior police officers whom he passionately believes to have conspired to hound him.

As with a number of police officers whom Mr Kirk wished to call in his list of 29 April 2013, (i) there is no statement from the proposed witness (ii) it is wholly unlikely that the witness will give a statement, and (iii) there is no direct evidence of connection of the witness with the specific matters in issue in these proceedings. I consider that the real wish of Mr Kirk is to cross-examine the witness in the hope that something might turn up; but that there is no discernible prospect that such an exercise would assist the court.

B6.       Inspector Andrew Rice. Mr Kirk has submitted on a great number of occasions that Mr Rice should be recalled. Evidence has been given by a Mr Alexander-Ebbs that he attended Aust Service Station to give a witness statement, in respect of an assault he alleged against Mr Kirk, at a meeting attended by a number of persons including Mr Rice, where he was encouraged to “sex up” his account. However Mr Alexander-Ebbs was present in person at this court on 21^st February 2013 during the continued evidence of Mr Rice; gave a witness statement on that day making the allegations against Mr Rice; and these allegations were put to Mr Rice. Otherwise, Mr Kirk assets that Mr Rice must have been aware fo covert surveillance of Mr Kirk; and/or he now wonders whether it was Mr Rice whom he sought to “arrest” outside the magistrates’ court (rather than a Sergeant Hill) when handing over a file which Mr Kirk thought might contain important real evidence. In my respectful judgment there is, (and there continues to be), no justification for the recall of Mr Rice.

B7.       Inspector Steve Parry. This is in fact a renewed application – in respect of witness 43 in the ruling of 1 May 2013. No new material is advanced. The same considerations apply. Accordingly I still rule against permission to call Mr Parry.

B8.       Jonathan Clayton.   I made ruling in respect of Mr Clayton on 1 May 2013. No witness statement or witness summary has been served in respect of him. He is said to be relevant to the incident of 4 July 1999, but it is not said that he was a direct witness to any of the events of that day. If anything, there is less reason now for him to be called, in that Mr Kirk’s witness Susan Jenkins has given evidence of what is required of those flying from one airport and air traffic control zone to another; and Mr Aishe has given evidence of the closeness of the police helicopter to Mr Kirk’s aircraft I discern no sufficient or good reason for him to be called.

B9.      Ex Chief Constable Barbara Wilding. This is another renewed application – in respect of witness 2 in the ruling of 1 May 2013. Mr Kirk identifies nothing new. The same considerations apply now as did then. Accordingly I still rule against permission to call this witness.

B10.     Ex Special Constable Frank O’Brien. The position statement itself articulates no cause for him to be called. Orally, Mr Kirk said he was an important witness because he gave evidence which “caused the case [against Mr Kirk] to collapse”. I did not find it easy to follow what this evidence was supposed to be. It seemed to be that an HORT1 form was said by the police officers to have been served upon Mr Kirk, yet no document was ever traced, nor an audit trial provided for such a document, hence the case against Mr Kirk failed. However, to the extent that this is right, Mr Kirk may in any event rely upon it.

This is an incident of May 1995. in which Mr Kirk shows particular interest, in that Special Constable Deren Martin says that she served him with an HORT1 form; and has given evidence that she made enquiries with the police in Guernsey (in pursuit of whether Mr Kirk’s vehicle was or was not exempt from vehicle excise licence), being told that there was warrant for his arrest outstanding. This fuels Mr Kirk’s suspicion and belief that he was the subject of harassment by police in Wales because of his past travails with Guernsey police.

Nonetheless, it seems to me that Mr O’Brian is a paradigm case of a proposed witness from whom there is no witness statement or summary, no reason to suppose that the witness (if he can be found) will give a statement, no indication whether he would remember whether another officer served an HORT1 firm on Mr Kirk on a day 18 years ago, SC Deren Martin being the officer in the case, and one whom Mr Kirk hopes to cross-examine despite him being called as his own witness, in the hope that something might turn up. Accordingly I decline to give permission for this witness to be called.

B11.     Ex SC Ridley. Mr Kirk tells me, (if I have succeeded in following him correctly), that Mr Ridley was the investigating officer for the same incident as resulted in police photographs being taken of his vehicle (as was done for SC Deren Martin for the May 1995 incident). Similar considerations apply as with SC O’Brien. So far as I can see, this is fishing in the dark. In default of witness statement, or the beginnings of a witness summary, I cannot justify permission to call the witness.

B12.    Mrs Diana Graham. Mr Kirk asks for a “foreign witness summons”. This witness lives in France. The Claimant’s Witness Bundle includes at page 91-123 a statement, not in proper form, by this witness with associated documents. The bulk of the statement relates to the proceedings which followed the Vale of Glamorgan Show incident of August 1998, (Action 3, “2”). This is one of the claims struck out by my rulings of November 2010. Accordingly that which relates to it is not now material.

Much of the rest relates to how Mr Kirk was dealt with on occasions in court, by magistrates (and occasionally by judges, including judges in the Divisional Court), some of it clearly recording what Mr Kirk said to her and some although much less clearly being personal observation on the part of Mrs Graham. I informed the parties that I would read this statement and discard all that related to the Vale of Glamorgan Show. I do not envisage that Mrs Graham could assist me significantly further by giving evidence orally and, as I have made clear on a number of occasions, it is not permissible to call a witness in the hope that she might add something further which is not contained either in a witness statement or witness summary. Not least, if there were anything material for Mrs Graham to add, the time has long passed when such material was required to be lodged with the court. I will treat the statement as admitted in evidence, but I will make no further order.

B13.     Mr Gafael. He has now been called, since I directed steps for bailiff service of Notice to show Cause which secured his attendance on 24 May 2013.

B14.     G. Thomas. Without agreeing the content of the statement, the Defendant is content that the statement be read.   The same applies to a Mr Kirke (as to maintenance of tyres on vehicles of Mr Kirk), whom Mr Kirk raised orally on 23 May 2103 as a potential witness.

B15.    Nigel Thomas. This is in fact a renewed application – in respect of witness 30 in the ruling of 1 May 2013. No statement has been produced. No new material is advanced and the same considerations apply as before. I rule against deferment of conclusion of the evidence in order for him to be searched for and thus against permission to call Mr Thomas.

B17.     Mrs Kirstie Kirk. In the event she has been called.

B18.     Mrs G Jones. This appears not to be pursued by Mr Kirk.

B19.     Mrs J Hanson. Mr Kirk told me that he had ‘lost her statement’. In fact there is a letter from her at page 168 (Claimant’s Witness Bundle) which raises complaint about disturbance from his wayward tenants. Mr Kirk and Barry police officer witnesses whom I have heard agree the problems with alcoholism, and bad behaviour on the part of his tenants, in particular a Mr Paul Stringer and a Mr Burns. Oral evidence from Mrs Hanson, not found or available to date, is not reasonably necessary for me to deal justly with the matters in issue.

With the exception of one witness, there is no other witness whom Mr Kirk wishes to call. That exception is B16, a Michael Murphy. The Defendant made clear a considerable time ago that that it objected to reception of the evidence without the opportunity to cross-examine the witness. No witness summons was served in respect of this witness. Mr Kirk told me on Friday 24 May that he had expected the witness to be present voluntarily that day. However there was, and has been since, no communication to the court from the witness.

It is understandable that the Defendant should object to his short statement being admitted without the opportunity to cross-examine him. The statement is one compiled by Mr Kirk in September 2010, with an added signature of the witness, and in manuscript the words “content below relating to me is true to the best of belife(sic)”. It describes him as a scrap dealer previously reported for stealing a veterinary practice car back in 1996 (presumably Mr Kirk’s veterinary practice); and the police are said to have told the witness on the one hand “I want you to take it back immediately to Penarth police station, where I will later inform Kirk it has been traced” and on the other hand one of the police is said to have jumped into the scrap dealer’s cab and himself to have driven it to Penarth: the two clearly conflict. On the other hand the statement reads that the police told him “We hate Kirk’s guts” and that the policeman said he would “have the greatest of pleasure in booking Kirk when he comes to collect it and drives it away without tax, MOT or insurance”.

The failure to appear without explanation, to support the statement such as I have described it, is not a prepossessing basis to ask for the court to appoint another day of hearing. If all, or even some, of Mr Kirk’s complaints of police harassment and bad faith are upheld, on the other evidence I have heard over some 49 days, the evidence of the scrap dealer suspected of stealing the practice car in 1996 will be peripheral; if few, or none are upheld it will be improbable that the evidence of Mr Murphy would tilt the balance on any of them. The court has gone to what I consider to be extreme lengths, in order to accommodate genuine difficulties to Mr Kirk in preparing his case, and those which are of his own making; and has granted great latitude to him in calling witnesses despite failure to serve statements in the form and by the dates stipulated. Applying the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly and proportionately, I do not consider it reasonably necessary that the court should appoint another day for hearing of evidence in the case of this witness.

28 May 2013.                                      His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn, QC

Appellants’ Skeleton Argument for Mr Justice Morgan              BS416159

(Late due to the Appellant waiting for the written rulings of his last applications before Cardiff County Court in time to appeal at Royal Courts of Justice and without it am unable to adequately comment on the Respondent’s skeleton argument with errors and huge assumptions)

There are but three issues for His Lordship to consider,

1)    the right for the Claimant to have the Defendant(s) give evidence in the light of the apparent criminal intent born out both in evidence and contained within the paragraphs of the Chief Constable’s 25^th February 2009 sworn affidavit in another attempt to avoid disclosure of relevant evidence under his/her control since 1992 to date

2)    the right for the Claimant to have senior police officers, identified both before and during the trial, to give evidence or to be recalled, with or without witness statements, concerning their apparent course of conduct to both prejudice the Claimant’s health and his basic right to bring a claim for civil damages in the first place

3)    for the Claimant or his legal representatives to only tape record evidence given on oath, under the strict supervision of the court and/or to be supplied with an audible copy of court proceedings as is allowed all over the world nowadays, including in England.

Witnesses

The Claimant’s right to call both a competent and compellable witness when, by law, a witness is ‘anybody’s property’ and especially, as in this case of these first three of nine Actions for damages against the South Wales Police, one Defendant, as the example, has been identified as signing her own 2009 affidavit (attached) knowing or ought to have known it to be riddled with lies and supports the Appellant’s argument that the Defendant has carried out a course of conduct tantamount to both unusual and extreme bullying with criminal intent.

Analysis of 25^th February 2009 Barbara Wilding Affidavit:

18.   para 8.23

Another traffic incident and a Barry court case was born out in evidence making her denial there ever was one another of her lies to bury the truth of a clear conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. The lengths to which key players, mostly senior police officers, have been protected in these civil proceedings, is scandalous.

19.   para 8.26 as per paragraph 13

20.   para 8.13

The incident when my Guernsey registered BMW motorcycle was stolen while her covert surveillance police were at the scene, my Barry veterinary Hospital, when the theft took place, makes her denial the police removed the number plate, on recovery, just one more of her lies.

2^nd Action

23.   para 5.1

The incident of her officers falsifying Barry magistrates evidence by trying to ‘frame me’ for someone else’s speeding offence was proved in court with the subsequent arrest of the lawyer and seizure of the Crown Prosecution Service’s file makes her denial there ever was an incident or a court case one more of her lies.

The fact that Dolmans, solicitors, admit CPS prosecutor, Stan Soffa, did not wish to be called as her defence witness beggars belief and anyway, who’s counting the incidents committed by the police?

27. to 29   para 10.1

First arrested for the theft of a car I had already reported as stolen, they having confiscated it and deliberately not told me where it was, just like with my Guernsey registered BMW motorcycle and Honda van, secondly, stopped for speeding and faulty exhaust and then, ten or so minutes later, stopped on some fabrication, to breathalyse, embarrassingly overlooked by the previous officers.

3^rd Action

32.

Her throw away comment of ‘antiquity’ being her excuse of failed disclosure is both insulting and typically arrogant. From 1993 onwards my English solicitors, me or my secretaries would follow up each incident with requests for either disclosure or to preserve their records.

Adrian Oliver drafted her document being a party to the fanciful plan to prejudice these civil proceedings by arresting me for trading in machine guns, carrying a mandatory ten year prison term. Caswell Clinic convened my MAPPA level 3 hearings to have me further incarcerated in Ashworth High Security Psychiatric Prison but only using their rogue NHS (Wales) psychiatrist promised GMC protection for whatever he said in a Welsh court room.

These following 22^nd and 23^rd May13 Position Statements were subject to appeal to the High Court but have not been adjudicated upon in time, at the Cardiff County Court, for this 7^th June 2013 Royal Courts of Justice Hearing

That coupled with his Lordship’s Order suggesting that this Claimant ‘may or may not be appealing earlier rulings’ over witnesses causes the court to be reminded that this hearing ought to be adjourned for all the reasons set out in the Appellant’s 28^th May Application (attached at the bottom)

22^nd May 13 Claimant Position Statement

1.      The Claimant asks His Honour to consider whether it is fitting that the Defendant be asked to more formally clarify their position on some points that at first may seem unrelated but have a common theme of legal argument around :-

a.       Whether the Claimant should be allowed to amend any of his Claims ‘out of time’.

b.      Be allowed the issue of exemplary and/or aggravated damages to be considered.

c.       Will the Defendants ever stop ‘actually harassing’ the Claimant as for example of in recent times by police using and sending to other police forces information to lead other police forces and other public sector departments to view the Claimant prejudicially by leading them to believe that the Claimant is delusional.

d.      By the Defendant disseminating information to say the Claimant is delusional either that means what they say is untrue and the Defendant refuse to stop harassing the Claimant and may affect the level of damages

e.       Or if what the Defendant disseminates is true then being delusional is a condition which allows the Claimant to be eligible to amend the Claims before the court that are ‘out of time’ by the time limitation period.

2.      The Claimant raises the issues from reading page 198 point 13.40 and related sections of A Practical Approach to Civil Procedure by Stuart Sime, twelfth edition (2009) that says that Judicial reasoning can be that Claims can usually be amended but that an amendment is treated as a new claim and cannot be brought out of time. However page 101 gives explanation on point 7.40 that a Claim (and therefore an amendment to a Claim) can be brought ‘out of time’ if the Claimant had a mental disability at the time the new Claim accrued.

3.      As the Defendant, in recent years, persistently disseminates information about the Claimant, as being delusional, then that means the Claimant may apply to the Court to amend the Claims that accrued when he was delusional.

4.      If the information, disseminated by the Defendant, is not true then that may be relevant exemplary and aggravated damages and even amount to defamation.

5.      If the information that the Defendant disseminates about the Claimant, being delusional, is untrue then the Claimant asks that a statement is made as to when the Defendant will stop disseminating this untrue defamatory information and how it will go about achieving that as well as the Defendants withdrawing what they have sent to many other public bodies, including the Metropolitan Police, the Guernsey police, the French police and even government departments in the royal courts of Justice and Whitehall from around 2002 and onwards when applications were made that the Claimant be registered a Vexatious Litigant and as a MAPPA level 3 victim.

6.      If, on the other hand, the information they disseminate about the Claimant is true then that requires the Defendant to say as from what date he is delusional or with a mental disability as the Claimant can be allowed by the Court to amend any claim that accrued from that date when he first had a mental disability.

7.      As we are aware much by the Claimant is in writing and so if the Defendant gives detail as to the Claimant being delusional, for just one moment, then an independent expert can be used to trace back the detail from that moment identified by the Defendant to where the indication of delusional in writings first emerged.

8.      A critical detail is that the Defendant actually disseminates information to say that the Claimant is delusional for ‘thinking he is harassed by police’.

9.      The Claimant complains to police, at least, as from 20^th June 1993, when the Claimant was in unlawful custody, up an including to today’s Position Statement

10. Given the Defendant disseminates information that the Claimant is delusional, for thinking he is harassed by police, please would the Defendant clarify at what point the Claimant was first displaying being delusional, by complaining he was harassed by police, so that the Claimant can apply to amend his Claims that accrued on or after that date.

11. If the Claimant was not delusional about being harassed by police, yet wrote and complained that he was harassed by police from say, 20^th June 1993, following information given to the Defendant by the Guernsey Police, at what point will the Defendant ensure the Claimant is no longer harassed by police, such as the Defendant stopping disseminating false and malicious information about the Claimant and will the Defendant comment on the obvious reluctance of the Defendant to stop harassing the Claimant in the context of exemplary and/or aggravated damages

A)      Witnesses outstanding in 1-3 Actions

1.       Ex Inspector Colliandris (medical argument irrelevant)

2.       Ex Chief Inspector Sean (Shawn) Trigg (key player)

3.       Ex Brian Jenner (Recall re Break in Cardiff Vet Surgery)

4.        Ex Chief Inspector Insp Robert Nelson Roe (Recall re Break in Cardiff Vet Surgery)

5.        Ex Chief Inspector Collin Jones (key player)

6.        Inspector Andrew Rice (Recall re 1^st Action 8.23 & CP Ebbs/Alexander)

7.        Inspector Steve Parry (Penal order on Defendant)

8.        Jonathan Clayton Air Traffic Controller (Dangerous flying/Penal Order)

9.        Ex Chief Constable Barbara Wilding (Defendant)

10.      Ex Special Constable Frank O’Brian (Penal Order on Defendant)

11.      Ex Special Constable Ridley (Penal Order on Defendant)

12.       Mrs Diana Graham (Foreign Witness Summons)

13.       A Gafael (re break-in Cardiff Vet surgery/Penal Order)

14.       G Thomas (stolen BMW m/c/ Penal order)

15.       ‘Yosser’ Nigel Thomas (stolen BMW m/c)

16.       Michael Murphy (Defendant’s destruction of Claimant’s vehicles)

17.      Mrs K Kirk

18.      Mrs G Jones

19.      Mrs J Hanson

B)       Application for Jury Trials for:

a)     4^th Action police bullying/ malicious pros, false imprisonments

b)    5^th Action Machine gun Case/malicious pros, false imprisonments

c)     6^th Action Forensic Psychiatrist/NHS (Wales) False Medical Records

           d)     7^th Action police bullying/ malicious pros, false imprisonments

     e)     8^th Action police bullying/ malicious pros, false imprisonments

C)    Claimant’s Fitness to Continue?

D)   Previous ‘struck out’ incidents in 1-3 Actions to be re instated

E)     Current Civil Proceedings (post Woolf/ Human Rights Act)

F) HM Crown Prosecution Service continues to ignore disclosure applications from Claimant, his solicitor or from his barrister re:

              i) Refusal to disclose evidence to clarify NHS psychiatric records at Caswell Clinic, Glanrhyd Hospital, Bridgend

             ii)  Refusal to disclose July 2012 evidence re doctor's statement that caused Claimant imprisoned

            iii) Refusal to disclose depositions re above withdrawn indictment of 'harassment'

          iv) Refusal to disclose depositions re one Lewis machine gun indictment and subsequent acquittal

           v) Refusal to supply Claimant with copy of his own MG11 victim statement re above outstanding issues

            vi) Refusal to supply Claimant with date he was first deemed to have a mental disability

G)     Interim payment for costs and damage

Maurice J Kirk BVSc                                                                  22^nd May 2013

(23^rd May 13 Position Statement mislaid and to follow)

Private Tape Recording, ‘Litigants in Person’ to be awarded legal costs and the Crushing of Family Court Cartels

The future of our UK court administration, if not already a night mare, is a pretty grim one right now with the lack of funding for expertise and the extra work caused by the withdrawal of legal aid.

One’s inability to find a truly independent lawyer these days with ever mounting unexplained costs incurred, should you be so lucky, is why this Claimant is adding to the problem by having to act alone.

Also, if this Claimant’s current Cardiff court action is typical of a ‘litigant in person’ floundering around in a quagmire of both regulation and custom with fast aging faculties barely keeping his head above water, then what is the future of our law courts when many more are forced to do the same?

In order for ‘litigants in person’ to achieve anything from the clear futility of it all then to further break down lucrative and unfair cartels, as currently practiced in the UK courts, is what each must strive to do and share any information from one’s mistakes.

This Claimant suggests we remain vigilant in what is to be ultimately achieved, the significant reform of a grossly outdated money driven judiciary and not to allow our own court cases to over shadow this primary objective, the clinching of that man made concept, some call ‘justice’ for all parties.

In The High Court Royal Courts of Justice                                                     BS614159

Before Mr Justice Morgan

Maurice Kirk v Chief Constable of South Wales Constabulary

Appellant’s Application to Adjourn of 7^th June 13 High Court Hearing

Further to the 14^th May 2013 High Court Order of the Honourable Mr Justice Morgan the Appellant applies for an appropriate adjournment in order to:

12. Obtain the official transcript as he was unable to tape record for his own use within the case in preparation for subsequent appeal(s)

13. obtain clarification as to which of the outstanding witnesses, identified in his 22^nd and 23^rd May 13 Position Statements to the Crown Court judge and

14. in the light of the enclosed further statement of A G Gafael and The Defendant’s February 2009 sworn Affidavit and

15. concerning the proposed 28^th May 13 ruling , by His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC, due to be handed down today and

16. For appellant to obtain fee exemption in order to complete his prosecution and subsequent appeal(s)

AND

17. The Appellant asks the court to consider whether it is fitting that the Defendant be asked to more formally clarify their position on some points that at first may seem unrelated but have a common theme of legal argument around :-

f.        Whether the Appellant should be allowed to amend any of his Claims ‘out of time’.

g.       Be allowed the issue of exemplary and/or aggravated damages to be considered.

h.       Will the Defendants ever stop ‘actually harassing’ the Appellant as for example of in recent times by police using and sending to other police forces information to lead other police forces and other public sector departments to view the Appellant prejudicially by leading them to believe that the Appellant is delusional.

i.         By the Defendant disseminating information to say the Appellant is delusional either that means what they say is untrue and the Defendant refuse to stop harassing the Appellant and may affect the level of damages

j.        Or if what the Defendant disseminates is true then being delusional is a condition which allows the Appellant to be eligible to amend the Claims before the court that are ‘out of time’ by the time limitation period.

18. The Appellant raises the issues from reading page 198 point 13.40 and related sections of A Practical Approach to Civil Procedure by Stuart Sime, twelfth edition (2009) that says that Judicial reasoning can be that Claims can usually be amended but that an amendment is treated as a new claim and cannot be brought out of time. However page 101 gives explanation on point 7.40 that a Claim (and therefore an amendment to a Claim) can be brought ‘out of time’ if The Appellant had a mental disability at the time the new Claim accrued.

19. As the Defendant, in recent years, persistently disseminates information about the Appellant, as being delusional, then that means the Appellant may apply to the Court to amend the Claims that accrued when he was delusional.

20. If the information, disseminated by the Defendant, is not true then that may be relevant exemplary and aggravated damages and even amount to defamation.

21. If the information that the Defendant disseminates about the Appellant, being delusional, is untrue then the Appellant asks that a statement is made as to when the Defendant will stop disseminating this untrue defamatory information and how it will go about achieving that as well as the Defendants withdrawing what they have sent to many other public bodies, including the Metropolitan Police, the Guernsey police, the French police and even government departments in the royal courts of Justice and Whitehall from around 2002 and onwards when applications were made that the Appellant be registered a Vexatious Litigant and as a MAPPA level 3 victim.

22. If, on the other hand, the information they disseminate about the Appellant is true then that requires the Defendant to say as from what date he is delusional or with a mental disability as the Appellant can be allowed by the Court to amend any claim that accrued from that date when he first had a mental disability.

23. As we are aware much by the Claimant is in writing and so if the Defendant gives detail as to the Appellant being delusional, for just one moment, then an independent expert can be used to trace back the detail from that moment identified by the Defendant to where the indication of delusional in writings first emerged.

24. A critical detail is that the Defendant actually disseminates information to say that the appellant is delusional for ‘thinking he is harassed by police’.

25. The Appellant complains to police, at least, as from 20^th June 1993, when the appellant was in unlawful custody, up an including to today’s Position Statement.

26. Given the Defendant disseminates information that the Appellant is delusional, for thinking he is harassed by police, please would the Defendant clarify at what point the Appellant was first displaying being delusional, by complaining he was harassed by police, so that the Appellant can apply to amend his Claims that accrued on or after that date.

27. If the Appellant was not delusional about being harassed by police, yet wrote and complained that he was harassed by police from say, 20^th June 1993, following information given to the Defendant by the Guernsey Police, at what point will the Defendant ensure the appellant is no longer harassed by police, such as the Defendant stopping disseminating false and malicious information about the Appellant and will the Defendant comment on the obvious reluctance of the Defendant to stop harassing the Appellant in the context of exemplary and/or aggravated damages

A)      Witnesses outstanding in 1-3 Action

1.       Ex Inspector Colliandris (medical argument irrelevant)

2.       Ex Chief Inspector Sean (Shawn) Trigg (key player)

3.       Ex Brian Jenner (Recall re Break in Cardiff Vet Surgery)

4.        Ex Chief Inspector Insp Robert Nelson Roe (Recall re Break in Cardiff Vet Surgery)

5.        Ex Chief Inspector Collin Jones (key player)

6.        Inspector Andrew Rice (Recall re 1^st Action 8.23 & CP Ebbs/Alexander)

7.        Inspector Steve Parry (Penal order on Defendant)

8.        Jonathan Clayton Air Traffic Controller (Dangerous flying/Penal Order)

9.        Ex Chief Constable Barbara Wilding (Defendant)

10.      Ex Special Constable Frank O’Brian (Penal Order on Defendant)

11.      Ex Special Constable Ridley (Penal Order on Defendant)

12.       Mrs Diana Graham (Foreign Witness Summons)

13.       A Gafael (re break-in Cardiff Vet surgery/Penal Order)

14.       G Thomas (stolen BMW m/c/ Penal order)

15.       ‘Yosser’ Nigel Thomas (stolen BMW m/c)

16.       Michael Murphy (Defendant’s destruction of Claimant’s vehicles)

19.      Mrs J Hanson

B)    Application for Jury Trials for:

a)     4^th Action police bullying/ malicious pros, false imprisonments

b)    5^th Action Machine gun Case/malicious pros, false imprisonments

c)     6^th Action Forensic Psychiatrist/NHS (Wales) incorrect Medical Records

     d)     7^th Action police bullying/ malicious pros, false imprisonments

     e)     8^th Action police bullying/ malicious pros, false imprisonments

C)    Claimant’s Fitness to Continue?

D)   Previous ‘struck out’ incidents in 1-3 Actions to be re instated

E)     Current Civil Proceedings (post Woolf/ Human Rights Act)

F) HM Crown Prosecution Service continues to ignore disclosure applications from Claimant, his solicitor or from his barrister re:

              i) Refusal to disclose evidence to clarify NHS psychiatric records at Caswell Clinic, Glanrhyd Hospital, Bridgend

             ii)  Refusal to disclose July 2012 evidence re doctor's statement that caused Claimant imprisoned

            iii) Refusal to disclose depositions re above withdrawn indictment of 'harassment'

          iv) Refusal to disclose depositions re one Lewis machine gun indictment and subsequent acquittal

           v) Refusal to supply Claimant with copy of his own MG11 victim statement re above outstanding issues

            vi) Refusal to supply Claimant with date he was first deemed to have a mental disability

G)     Interim payment for costs and damage

Maurice J Kirk BVSc                                                                28^th May 2013

PILOT MAGAZINE....previous pages at bottom of previous blogs

Pilot Mag April 2002 MJK Profile_0001 (4).pdf

POLICE APPLICATION for POLICE CUSTODY VIDEOS TO BE BLOCKED from His Honour Judge Seys Lewellin QC on 3rd April

Maurice Kirk — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:29:00 GMT

Witnesses for Week 4 Cardiff Civil Justice Centre 3rd April 13 10.30

STOP PRESS

Queens Council for the Chief Constable of the South Wales Police will apply on Wednesday, 3rd April, to block this video from being shown to the trial judge, His Honour Judge Seys Lewellin QC, EXACTLY as they succeeded in doing at my original 2000 magistrates, 2001 appeal and three JR applications after these same police, an Inspector Collins reported the driving conviction that the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons relied upon to have my name removed from the veterinary register , effectively , for life!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo26-otaPmo&list=UUo40Twnjw5Z8kYBGqrZHlzw&index=4

Adrian Oliver.

15:11 (1 hour ago)

Dear Mr Kirk,

I refer to your further attendance at our offices on Thursday 28 March 2013, when you again sought to ignore the fact that we have withdrawn your licence to attend at our offices. I am given to understand that you caused disruption and inconvenience to other users of the building which we occupy and that the security staff at the building considered it necessary to communicate with the police in this regard. I would again urge you to deal with any necessary matters in compliance with the court orders which have been made in this matter.

I would also wish to record that you were not prepared to identify the basis of your attendance with the staff who sought to speak with you.

I refer to your telephone contact with Dolmans at 1.30 pm on 2 April 2013. I would again remind you of my prior request that you deal with matters by email due to your propensity to distort comments made in telephone discussion. You have been able to communicate by email and indeed, have sought to encourage the same. I record that it is only during the course of the adjournment of your civil trial that you have sought again to attend our premises and to communicate by telephone, even though you have been prepared to communicate previously by email. I would again ask you to revert to dealing with matters through this medium as it enables both parties to prepare for matters arising in the trial.

You have left a message at 1.30 pm asking for details of the witnesses who are to be called tomorrow (3 April 2013) for trial. You can be advised that it is the intention of Leading Counsel to invite former police officer Robert Osbourne to provide evidence at court on 3 April 2013.

I can also advise you however that Mr Lloyd Williams QC intends to address the court before any further evidence has been provided as to your failure to deal with the disclosure of any videos / digital footage which you might have in your possession.

I trust this email will provide you with sufficient notice to prepare for these matters.

Yours sincerely,

Adrian P. Oliver

Senior Partner

Dolmans Solicitors

SWP Schedule Defendant witnesses 4th week.pdf

SWP Witness Statement of Maurice John Kirk final.pdf

Dear Poorly Informed Tax Payer,

GUERNSEY, Channel Islands, is where I set up a ‘legal aid’ charity and first learnt to 'cut my teeth' on the current subject now unfolding at last, after twenty years, in Cardiff's Civil Justice Centre. It is HM Partnership's 'cosy relationship' as Lord George Foulkes once put it, the ‘incestuous relationship’ between both executive and judiciary, all protected within it by 'Royal Charters'.

.The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeon's immunity to prosecution is the classic example when still refusing to ‘convene a court’, contrary to statute, simply to consider my numerous applications, over the last nine years, for my name to be returned to the veterinary register. [See the past twelve years of ‘Down Loads’ and other ‘Blogs’ on this website].

Here, in 'Old South Wales', as dentist John Wilson in 'New South Wales' will quickly concur, 'Her Majesty's Prerogative' continues to allow rampant nefarious conduct in our UK law courts to flourish, compounded by outdated 'adversarial systems' once based on trust.

Take the ‘Musa Family Case’, as another typical example, currently on appeal, ‘we think’, where Haringey Council lawyers ‘cashed in’ on the act, again all immune to any HM regulatory retribution or HM prosecution in either our civil or criminal courts.

[The Nigerian couple are currently serving seven years imprisonment with all seven of their children now snatched and outrageously ‘re homed’ instead of just being put on the next flight to Nigeria].

The paranoia surrounding this tragic case was further revealed in the way I was jailed for ‘attempting’ to fly the kids home in my two seat WW2 Piper Cub and then being prosecuted, in my absence, as Cardiff’s judiciary would not even ‘produce’ me from similarly outdated prison system! .This old ‘Out of Court’ video, below, has been held back until now to be a stark warning of things yet to come both in England and Wales, if not already here.

Does it stink or does it stink?

EXPOSURE VIDEO of GUERNSEY, as an IRA safe house, drug dealer's dream, insider dealer's paradise and where the incestuous island's De Vic Cary's grand father collaborated, as Bailiff, with the Germans, enough for Churchill intending to have him hanged, was the same little b+stard who jailed me 21 times, anything to prevent education on 'basic human rights' to be intoduced to a two teir structure his masonic mates and the serfs.

http://youtu.be/DWmJGa9RsyM

http://kirkflyingvet.com/tags/Guernsey/default.aspx

While in Wales,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5ywSaTRv3Y

We still have a Dr Tegwyn Williams 'at large', on 'long term sick with his wife,' on my account, despite falsifying yet further 'victim' statements

11 11 15 Solicitor letter to Cardiff Magistrates.pdf

12 08 20 MJK MG11 Redacted shr.pdf

Much more about NHS (Wales) multi million conspiracy, later.

In Cardiff County Court this Month

Lantwit Major's police sergeant Kilberg, one of many in the 1990s police force, who had my name removed from the veterinary register is caught out lying to the currently presiding judgere along with a few others already heard and shortly to also give evidence.

Enclosed is a 90s Barry police station custody video of Kilberg lying to the custody sergeant that I was in breach of a public order offence despite the custody sergeant specifically asking for that clarification.

His Honour Judge Seys Llewellin QC or the police QC, during the three months civil action currently in session in the Cardiff Civil Justice Centre, asked for clarification on exactly the same point with the South Wales Police sergeant qualifying the issue by stating the custody sergeant made the mistake when writing down the facts.

The truth of the matter was his partner, PC Gareth Holmes was right there, seen on video and refusing to support the deliberate lie either by recording it in his pocket note book or in his subsequent MG 11 witness statement.

Llantwit Major's Police Sergeant Kilberg Video to follow

http://youtu.be/eBkNCYYfJOE

Meanwhile a letter of more importance, if 'testicles on a plate without an anaesthetic' is to be avoided, to the only others in Wales, apparently, responsible for maintaining law and order throughout The Principality........

13 03 31 to CPS NHS.doc

AND this latest thoroughly insulting bit of nonsense from Cardiff's magistrates, court concerning the police refusing to return some £10,000 worth of antique guns and a walking stick confiscated in 2009/10 while desperate to get me a 10 year mandatory prison sentace for 'trading in prohibited weapons '!

Such as the WW1 Lewis machine gun, the most effective such weapon in the war and was bolted to my, now sold, replica DH2 RFC biplane fighter, an aircraft, like the September 1940 Hurricane, that turned the tables in 1916, just at such acute points in two world wars.....b*stards

13 03 28 Shot Guns and Muskets MagistratesCase Stated Response.pdf

ARE WE DEALING WITH EVIL HERE?

Masonic Devil Worship?

Dolmans, Cardiff solicitors,

You either settle or or I publish ex Chief Inspector' Jenner and ex Ely police station's Inspector Roe's recorded evidence denying , as did the b*tch of bitches, Barbara Wilding, by sworn affidavit, denying the knowledge of court cases and her ordering the use of a sledge hammer and a crow bar to break into my Cardiff veterinary surgery just to put back Jenner's daughter, Alison, effectively putting trouble and druggies back into my overhead flat .

Your client also had me put in Cardiif prison, for four days, pretending you vermin could not 'recognise' me!

Your client had the machine gun painted a different colour to try and fool a Cardiff jury

Your client had me up for speeding when in possession of the photograph of the true driver, his name adress and when I arrested CPS lawyer Stoffa the police ran a mile , in the wrong direction

Your client repeatedly had me arrested on the road side following a purported positive breath test only for there to be a zero reading within 20 minutes on the police stations' ' definitive test' machine.......any filthy trick to aggrevate and proke a victim.

Do I appear drunk in this Bridgend police custody video? This was immediately after 10pm arrest at Pencoed but almost negative reading on the station definitive machine (a lager or two at lunch time). The arrest was for for 'dangerous driving', that the south Wales Police lost, before a jury, after the judge had to stop the Cardiff trial for jury complaining the police were signalling to their mates onwhilst under my cross examination.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzSPSX-hVEE.

Your client, in 'Operation Orchid' tried to snatch our then ten year old child, using social services, bullying my then wife to signed a pre prepared witness statement that I was insane.......you evil bunch of lawyers conspired with NHS' Morgan Cole, solicitors to use Dr williams to have me arrested by armed police helicopter but failing to get a conviction or steel our daughter but instigated immediate divorce proceedings ....the thought of spineless tactics I should of expected

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JdcyhiC3e0&list=PL0A52598AD5E0C099

As lawyers you advised Barbara Wilding to have me registered MAPPA level 3

Your client, with your advise, then had Dr Tegwyn Mel Williams of Caswell clinic, to have me sectioned under the 1983 Mental Health Act without a shred of evidence and without even examining his patient, for one purpose.....to delay this three month trial ever coming to court!

Oh, yes and what is the latest? Dr Tegwyn Mel Williams falsifies another police victim statement, in july last year, having me locked up for weeks in prison until the CPS then get involved to prepare for another rigged Cardiff judiciary jury trial.

And what did the CPS find? Dr Williams' circa 21st July 13 'victim' statement record? I had been around to his home and had harassed both he and his wife, Dr Janis Hillier causing the police to 'move me on'...utter bollocks,,,I do not even know or wish to know, other than to arrange a private prosecution 'procedure'as to where the fat over paid 'toad' lives.

Oh yes, I almost forgot....four times I have been to the police stations to complain and written long statements but your client, you advise them, ignore him , he will not live much longer.

Two sets of lawyers, one from England and one from Cardiff, have asked both the police and the CPS for a copy of that July 13 victim statement but they both reply....."it cannot be found"

Just for starters...... and we now move into two months of more fun or is it Romans chapter 12, verse19, is it?

Why is your client continuing to ignore the seriousnes of Christopher Alexander's (alias Ebbs). statement of yet anopther south wales Police conspiracy?....Worried it might be true? But you lot can continue to steal another huge chunk of tax payers' hard earned cash if you 'string it along' just like my seven or so listed Actions against your client. Remember, police officer Rice told the court he had no knowledge of Ebbs/Alexander or recognise him standing at the back of the court.

12 10 26 Ebbs Staterment.pdf

Your clients' collusion with Cardiff masonic devil worshiping judges had my web site closed down, last time, when we got a little too close to the truth about your disgusting money making regime but try it again and the articles will spring up on 10 other already primed web sites positioned abroad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0gQc1mveKg

Your client ran to the protection of Judge Nicholarse Cooke QC and got it following His Honour's receipt of the following 'jury note' of a flagrant conspiracy by the South Wales Police caught red handed' by the jury!!! That aborted 'dangerous driving' case must be heard also in the next few days, I presume?

Punitive Damages

Punitive DamagesInEnglandand Wales, exemplary damages are limited to the circumstances set out by Lord Devlin in the leading case of Rookes v Barnard:

Oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional actions by the servants of government.
Where the defendant's conduct was 'calculated' to make a profit for himself.
Where a statute expressly authorises the same.

Rookes v Barnard has been much criticised and has not been followed in Canada or Australiaor by the Privy Council.^[7]

Another case that could arguably be seen as an example of punitive damageswas that of Attorney-General v Blakein which the defendant profited from publishing a book detailing his work for MI5. The details were very old and therefore did not cause loss to the state. The publishing was, however, in breach of the contract of employment (and incidentally criminallyin breach of the Official Secrets Act 1911). The defendant was required to give an account of his profits gained from writing the book.

Thecourts have been very reluctant to follow this approach,^[9]emphasising the materiality of the criminalelement required for these damagesto be considered.

2) aggravated damages

"Aggravated damages are compensatory in nature, while punitive damages are awarded as punishment for egregious conduct....

Maurice Kirk Sectioned under 1983 Mental Health Act with Application for Ashworth High Security Prison for Life

Maurice Kirk — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 13:12:00 GMT

EXAMPLE ONE

09 09 30 INTERIM PSYCHIATRIC REPORT Oct1 2009 REDACTED.pdf

This Caswell Clinic psychiatric report was used to keep me
in prison for eight months, in 2009, destroying my marriage, prior to ‘machine
gun' case when the police helicopter and armed police stormed our home to
arrest me and attempt to snatch my then 10 year old daughter with Social
Services.

On release I was then jailed, using the very same
psychiatric report, on three separate occasions in London,
by the Metropolitan Police, twice in Oxford
and eight times in Cardiff.

Each time, in England but not Wales, following my presentation before three London courts and one Oxford court, while I was unrepresented, I was released.

With all allegations dropped, safe one, a ‘public order offence'm another conspiracy.

That case was heard in my absence with the Cardiff
authorities deliberately preventing my production from Cardiff prison as it
related to the Musa Nigerian six children
having been snatched by Haringey Council, my being a major witness into the
huge lawyer fraud surrounding this case and to scupper the chances of their own very
frightened clients [see previous blogs/ gallery and downloads].

But the Welsh police and their very own incestuous and thoroughly corrupt judiciary had a
completely separate agenda, the details of which are legendary.

18th November 2012 2nd CAR BREAK IN

12 11 18 IPCC.doc

This Friday's 2pm Bristol broadcast is planned to name names

http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/63665

EXAMPLE TWO

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/welsh-jurisdiction-039cart-without-a-horse039?utm_source=emailhosts&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GAZ+16%2F11%2F2012

EXAMPLE THREE

9^th Oct 2012 JUDGMENT

The European Court of Human Rights delivered a new and remarkable judgment on trade union freedom of expression. In Szima v. Hungary the European Court of Human Rights concluded that a criminal conviction of a leader of a police trade union for having posted critical and offensive comments on the Union’s website was to be considered necessary in a democratic society for the prevention of disorder or crime, and more precisely of preserving order in the armed forces

EXAMPLE FOUR

FROM latest issue of PRIVATE EYE

i.e. South Wales Police and Cardiff Judiciary's Lynette White murder cover up.

“Justice

Wails from Wales

For nearly a year a police force has refused to return a journalist’s work on one of Britain’s most notorious miscarriages of justice, despite repeated requests.

Satish Sekar cooperated with police, allowing officers investigating the wrongful arrests of the Cardiff Five two decades ago access to his own investigation. Sekar has covered the case and its fall-out for many years, including for Private Eye.

Officers borrowed material, including taped interviews, for use in the police corruption trial on the strict understanding it would be returned as soon as the trial ended. That trial ended last December in farcical circumstances as the judge decided the eight former police officers couldn’t get a fair hearing because evidence files had been destroyed.

Although the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and the Director of Public Prosecutions are still investigating the trial, Sekar asked South Wales Police to return his property, not least because he was finishing a book about the case. Although Sekar told police chiefs his voluntary cooperation with the force was over, the police have now prevaricated for 11 months and, despite the lack of a court order or it being the proceeds of crime, police still have his material.

They ignore solicitors letters and refuse to explain what entitles them to keep Sekar’s property. “If anyone else had done this they would be arrested for theft”, says Sekar. Police now refuse to talk to Sekar, even though the IPCC has ordered them to record his complaint.”

EXAMPLE FIVE

Aftermath of my 2010 Cardiff 'machine gun' trial acquittal.

In June 2009 helicopter and twenty five other police, many armed, storm our home and jail me for eight months without a shread of evidence of any fire arms offences. As later proved, it was the Chief Constable's private solicitors, Dolmans, who instigated my imprisonment to prejudice the forthcoming three month civil damages trial, she being the defendent !

Thee years later, despite my numerous attempts to retrieve police snatched £10,000 worth of antigue and licenced legally held shot guns and humane killers, the thoroughly corrupt Cardiff cabal have, instead, refused their return and ordered, by that deceitful District Judge Bodfan Jenkins, to pay the cabal a bill of £4000 costs following my attempted use the courts and1897 Police Property Act just to return my property!

EXAMPLE SIX

Between 1992 and 2002 the South Wales Police ordered me to produce my driving documents 35 times. On the 34th occasion I refused and the court was forced, under the then Magistrates Act, to dismiss the case.

I have refused five times since with the police doing nothing about it as they had already complained to The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and succsessfully had me struck off the veterinary register.

EXAMPLE SEVEN

I, Christopher Alexander (Ebbs) wish to add to my previous statement, on the matter of Maurice Kirk's common assault conviction at Bristol Magistrates, that I was approached by the South Wales Police to ware a neck brace and sit at the back of the court throughout proceedings while he was remanded to prison.

YOU maybe you are asking yourselves, the tax payer, why GMC, IPCC, an outside police force and HM Govenment Departments all continue to sit twiddling their toes while South Wales' nemesis looms before them in early 2013.

It stinks, doesn't it?

Why? These culprits are all on huge protected salaries and pensions paid by you.

So, why have they not had me killed, three years later, with the three month trial looming?

SCHEDULE SWP FINAL.pdf

SO WHO IS MAD?

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/around_the_world/Haverford-West-Preparation.aspx

Trying to re live Sir Francis Chichester's world breaking record and without a map?

The cub flew a world record of her own, via Norfolk Island, direct to Coolangata, Queensland.

(Liberty Girl on a lonely windswept beach on the tip of North Island New Zealand preparing for Queensland)

2013 London to Sydney Air Race list of pilots and their contacts

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/around_the_world/Race-Pilots-meet-after-11-years.aspx

Know a Rogue Doctor? £10,000 Reward for Witnesses make it £20,000

Maurice Kirk — Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:27:00 GMT

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/legal/Know-a-Rogue-Doctor_3F00_.aspx

much more shortly

In the mean time:

Dolmans, solicitors
BS6141159‐MC 65

Cardiff
                                   CF204141, CF101741

                                                                       7CF07345, 8CF0226

‘Machine gun', MAPPA, Rogue Doctor and ‘Breach of Restraining Order' Damages Claims

Kirk v South Wales
Constabulary

13^th July 2012

Witnesses needed for
trial

Further to His Honour's direction
for me to consider your letters to me, 26^th March 10 and 24^th
February 10, admitting an incident and court cases, police breaking into my
surgery, denied by the Chief Constable in her affidavit, drafted by you and my
having to travel to an English court in order for Court Orders for disclosure
to be effective, it re opens the argument for the need for ‘consolidation' of
all cases and they be taken well outside Wales.

Your direct influence and involvement in continuing
nefarious conduct with the South Wales Police, scheming repeatedly to getting
me jailed, needs to put in the hands of The Director of Prosecutions.

Your ignoring the repeated Court
Orders to disclose your 20^th June 2009 Mr Nightingale police
complaint statement designed purely to have me jailed is replaced by the now bogus ‘restraining order', the latest parcel being passed around the incestuous
Welsh judiciary until the music stops.

I require the names of the other officers
involved, not just Sgt Roe that I had to supply you with, in the first place, some
eight or so years ago. It proves Inspector Griffiths, your investigator, a
liar and/or widespread cover ups within the South Wales Police Force.

I have a list of some of my
witnesses needed for evidence and refer my 6^th June 2009 incident schedule,
submitted about then listing my witnesses and the then known police present

To expedite matters I need to
know those police you are calling and the names and addresses of those,
relevant to each incident, you are not calling in order to complete my witness
list with the summary of evidence for each that have not or will not furnish me
with a witness statement

My £10,000 reward for witnesses
will again go up on websites in the hope retired police officers etc or their
neighbours come forward with names and addresses for the issuing of witness
summonses.

This mimics the situation no
different to that of 22^nd June 2009 when police Operations ‘Chalice,
and ‘Orchid' had me sectioned under the Mental Health Act and registered MAPPA
level 3 for jail.

Many Cardiff judges refused bail
due to this advertisement just to lock me up for many months

Yours,

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

http://kirkflyingvet.com/photos/legal/picture2588.aspx

Clerk of the Court

Criminal Court of Appeal Your Ref 2012 03241D2

Royal Courts of Justice

London

13^th July 2012

Regina v Maurice Kirk

Appeal from ‘Breach of Restraining Order' 9 Month Prison Sentence

Dear Sir,

This case of breaching of a restraining order was quite unknown to me, at the time, as no such document was ever tendered for agreement or given to me to sign.

The standard procedure in Cardiff, at least, is that in order to obtain release from the custody of the court the prisoner has to sign the ‘licence' relating to such conditions. As I was neither in court nor in the prison no such licence was procured and despite my numerous visits to the court building since, to establish the truth, there is serious indication the official restraining order may well not have been printed and or placed on the court record until the following day.

As I expected I found on the court copy of the official restraining order, during this week's twenty year running damages claim hearing for malicious prosecutions, duly signed over by the County Court clerk, following the orders of His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC to disclose it, a hand written note by someone unknown, dated 2^nd December 2011, the day after my alleged offence.

I have been refused proper disclosure of evidence before, during the jury trial and even now.

The Crown Prosecution admit no record was made of service in either the magistrates court log or that log held by the private custody firm, GEOamey. CCTV proof, filmed by different cameras under the control of different owners, either court or GEOamey, were ‘un available' for the jury.

I write because the CPS (Wales) and South Wales Police have now both been furnished with MG11 witness statements to support what actually went on in court when a draft was being hand written.

Both the police and CPS (Wales) are now refusing to take my complaint or take statements from eight more eye witnesses who were, both in and outside the court, on the day of the alleged offence. Five custody officers were present at the time of the alleged offence but I was denied their attendance to give evidence.

The excuse given is that sufficient evidence is before them but none of the witnesses that have visited Cardiff Central Police Station, so many times, are allowed copy of any of the information given and purported to have been given the CPS (Wales).

CPS (Wales) state that until I am granted ‘leave to appeal' they will not inform you of this important new evidence.

"What if I had not appealed as I have served the sentence?" resulted in silence on the phone.

"If I withdraw my appeal will the police then investigate further?" again, resulted in silence.

CPS staff then stated here in Cardiff we do nothing until the appeal papers are returned to them via their London office. Yet one more telephone call, my twentieth, this time to your office, confirmed my appeal was filed , case worker allocated and papers sent on to the CPS on the 1^st June 2012.

I apply to your court to order the release of Meirion Bowen's witness statement, details attached, he giving me written permission, as it is needed for a number of outstanding directly related matters with the Administrative Courts ( CO/3970/2012 and 6357/2012 and CO/ 4298/12011) and GMC, the earliest due to be heard on 24^th July 12 before Mr Justice Beatson in Cardiff as well as this Thursday's magistrates hearing, before district Judge Bodfan Jenkins, for the return of my shot guns and other weapons unlawfully confiscated whilst attempting to snatch my daughter during an armed police response with helicopter in ‘Operation Orchid'.

Thankyou

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

Enclosed Merion Bowen's copy of permission original sent to CPS (Wales)

Copies to Cardiff Administration and Magistrates Courts

Musa Trial Today but is Your Daughter now Safe Anywhere in UK?

Maurice Kirk — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 12:39:00 GMT

Go Petition summary by Sabine

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/the-secrecy-of-the-family-courts-should-be-lifted-now.html

So what made me focus on the Family Court system here in South Wales? Read on.........

South Wales Police launched 30+ men, many armed and with a helicopter, all at your expense just to snatch one ten year old child from our front garden on that sunny afternoon Sunday three years ago.

9 6 SWP Dolmans app re Wit exchange.pdf

9 6 22 SWP Machine gun Dolmans arrest.pdf

09 06 19 SWP Witness Statement of Maurice John Kirk final.pdf

BUT after three years of police CPS and Dolmans ignoring Cardiff Court Orders I finally get my 'hot and sweaty' on still more proof of the machine gun / false psychiatric reports conspiracy IPCC continue to ignore and this only came in last week because I repeated the application in Bristol Crown Court, in ENGLAND..... 09 06 20 SWP Dolmans MG 11.pdf, that their own solictors, Dolmans of Cardiff, gave advice relating to the FTAC/MAPPA conspiracy over an old WW1 Lewis Machine Gun, excellent for rabbiting, bolted on my aircaft in order to try and get me shot!

And who still dares say 'HM Partnership' is still not thriving in these evil Cardiff buildings?

Will your family be next?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5ywSaTRv3Y&noredirect=1

Three times in HM Cardiff Prison and three times, in row, assaulted by Prison Officer Myers, bigger than me, last time punching me in the face and stomach to then knocking me to the ground onto my had hip whilst returning to court in order to deny me my legal papers overnight.

12 06 25 SWP Prison assault reply_0001.pdf 12 04 16 HMP reply to MP.pdf & this grossly inaccurate HM letter 12 04 16 HMP reply to MP.pdf & refused bail application until a JR is file in court....outragios behavior 12 06 12 JR re refused bail applications.pdf & Harassment State a Case JR .....shortly

THIS E-MAIL just came my way but I do NOT vouch for all its content as, obviously, some of it was without my witnessing it as to what really happened.

However, much of it I KNOW IS TRUE and therefore allowed on this and my other sites of mine should the judges close it down , as they have done in the past..... Hi - we saw Chiwar yesterday and he said the following:

he was incensed that no statements, from those who had made them, went to the jury as the prosecution refused this and the judge backed it.

He also said Owusu's summing up statement was cut short by the judge - he had an 80 page statement and was given till 1 oclock to deliver it but was cut off at 12 oclock, thus not even finishing his summing up. Nobody ive spoken to has a good word to say about the defence team and i agree certain things shouldve been done properly wrongly.

Eg. - the witnesses. i know the 2 defence witnesses who spoke - Steve and Vicki. Steve is a pastor and came to 1 hearing as a supporter at Gee St. court last June which was a closed hearing and i saw him twice at the Musas W Green Rd home when i was there. He would pray with the Musas and they would get into it and begin dancing as he would speak in tongues for 10 mins whilst praying with the Musas which ive never seen before from a supposed Christian pastor. I asked him later was this healthy and a correct thing to do given the circumstances and he said whatever he was saying was good and was confusing the devil who had no idea what he was saying. I pointed out that nobody else did either - not even him and he said it was of no consequence as whatever he was saying was good and was Gods message and will that it be said.

Anyway Steve wouldve witnessed Chiwar + Gloria acting responsibly at all times with their children which i guess was the point of him being called at all.

Musa was incensed that the witnesses for the defence who did not give evidence or were not asked for statements to be shown were:
Maurice Kirk
Kay Young
Paul Randle=Jolliffe
Cecilia Gibson
Moji Word
any of the intimidated witnesses who were affected by H'gey because of having dealings with H'gey / Adesida, often having children removed/threatened to have that. Those i met and spoke with were:

Christine Danko, Janice, another Vicki, and 2 others i forget the names of. Gloria introduced me to these people last May and they all told outrageous tales.
Frank Gad
Janet Owugah
Peter Lee, from H'gey child services
Dr. Adesida
Rosita Moise H'gey solicitor
Joyce Agekyum sw H'gey
Annie Walker head sw H.gey
Sharon Fair
Alison Brooks

Karen who lived downstairs, to answer questioning about ****** being locked in the garden as it is alleged.

- thats 21 people off the tops of Chiwars and mine and Helens heads who couldve given something specific eg. Kays interraction with H'gey sw's who she threatened so much with her knowledge of the law etc. that they hounded her for months after, and H'gey + connected employees who needed questioning about their roles in it all, especially Agekyum and the rest of the H'gey lot mentioned. Chiwar said Moise the H'gey lawyer was responsible for writing the statements so as they would be legally sound especially in court and this needed to be brought out.

Musa mentioned about ketamine being put in a syringe. on the 28 june at st thomas's hospital. He knew it was that because he checked the discarded bottle after watching its contents - ketamine - being put in a syringe. I know a syringe with a liquid in was mentioned the other day. He asks was this given to the baby, and why was it set up in the 1st place and by whom, and hospital staff need to be asked about this.

An important point Chiwar mentioned was that even to date the contents of that 2000 page report that was handed to the defence team one morning early on in the trial still has not been properly discussed with the Musas - who still arent aware of some of its contents. Chiwar says a lot of the time Owusu doesnt see them before the days proceedings to discuss things, as theyre either late on getting to court or Owusu + co simply dont go to see them before the day starts. One dreads what else hasnt been discussed with the Musas thats been received by the defence team at the last minute. He thinks SERCO deliberatly bring them late for this reason + other reasons.

Chiwar says the their DNA test results was not shown to the jury and shouldve been but was refused by the CPS + judge + should be sent in at once also for the jury to see, and the 85 page statement Gloria made for the family court last November should be given to the jury.

Apparently at the prison Chiwar was told by other prisoners that a prisoner who goes by the name of "Floky" was putting it about that the Musas were involved in trafficking 15 children, plus their own. Chiwar assumes this guy is connected to H'gey in some form and trying to get Chiwar beaten. The warders apparently moved Chiwar for a short while for his own safety but now it is ok he says. If you recall the warders at Holloway were allegedly responsible Gloria says for putting it about that she was insane and dangerous and everyone should avouid her and not befriend her. Of course very soon people could see the opposite, and also when other inmates would be murdered by prison staff as happened to the prisoner - long story.

At the hospital on the 28 June Musa says no way was he gone longer than 30 mins when he left - if even that - and no way was he gone 3 hours till midday as they claim.

He says cctv footage stills from his flat in W Green rd werent shown which showed the place very habitable - the opposite to what the cps claim., and he says other photos werent shown to the jury either.

Chiwars says the judge was asked if he wanted to recuse himself but he refused and also refused getting a new jury for various reasons when asked by Owusu.

In reply to my earlier message Hi - the musa case - the prosecution has refused many witnesses giving evidence for musa and the judge is backing the prosecution so we are giving these 5/6 banned witnesses statements to the higher judge at the court on monday in writing and emailing them also to make sure the court and hopefully jury get them also Already owusu has asked the judge to recuse himself over things but he has refused also a new jury. If u can pls send ur witness statement so it can be given 1st thing monday a.m. to the chief judge lyons at the court along with other stuff then. Pls if u can send by email to me asap it can be printed off for monday - tks - {which i sent to those i had addresses of at the time}

*****replied:

I've already given my statement to the court and I believe it went to the jury but wasn't read out. It is now too late for any more statements as all the barristers have finished their cases and now it's just for the judge to sum up and send the jury out on Monday. So if they are convicted these new statements can go towards the appeal, especially if they add anything to the medical issues or are from people who knew the older 5 children. Pity these witnesses suddenly appearing after the trial is over! But actually, I think it will come out OK as Owusu did a magnificent job on Friday and it will be very hard for the jury to find the Musas guilty after what he said to them. Fingers crossed! B

I disagree its too late - the point of getting the statements from the people where possible and sending them to the court after speaking with Chiwar was so the jury could see them and it isnt too late as the trial isnt finished yet. Waiting to give the statements at an "appeal" i disagree with as these statements could add good factors to Musas case before the jury retire and waiting maybe a year - a year for the Musas in prison too - for an appeal is unacceptable in my opinion. I think they would drag an appeal date out so as the other children could be gone via adoption before an appeal hearing which would just add difficulties in sorting this entire child removal side of the case out.

Owusu may have done a "magnificent job" as is suggested but maybe being allowed to finish what he set out to do re: his summing up he mightve made an even better one, as well as doing other important things too, like discussing new bundles with the Musas amongst other things. After all, thats his job.

To my great sadness and frustration however im thinking now it is practically possible to get statements from those Chiwar wanted statements from to show to the jury by the time they could be delivered to judge Lyons on Monday morning as they simply will not be got and sent to Lyons in time, him being the head judge at Wood Green crown court. Obviously if they were given to Patrick they would be refused and i dont think theres any reason on earth why Lyons cant be given the statements except for the time limit - there is only a few hours to get them there physically in print on Monday morning. They could be sent by email of course but they need perhaps to be physically given to the court office so as Lyons can receive them and take action, so it fills me with sadness the negative option of perhaps showing these what might be important statements only at any "appeal hearing" in the distant future might be the only action taken for Chiwars request.

Anyhow if anybody can send their statement to me asap i will endeavour to email it to the court and send it 24 hour delivery on Monday morning so as the court + Lyons receives it on Tues hopefully which maybe wont be too late, or if anyone can think of a better alternative please let us know.

At the end of the day i think not having witnesses for the Musas, as good as Steve and Vicki are, is simply not good enough. The defence team are supposed to be doing the job of defending the Musas and surely witnesses are an important factor in their case.

Heather pointed out an expert toxicoligist shouldve been got as a witness by the defence, if possible. Only prosecution medical staff have been heard at all which is totally one-sided.

Also the person who was at the hospital on the 28 June - the person referred to as Gloria's "sister" when Gloria was asked who she was then by hospital or H'gey staff - shouldve given evidence as to what she heard and saw then - Chiwar maintains Gloria, for example, was not "laughing" at various times as was claimed and was was taking things with the seriousness they deserved throughout which this witness couldve confirmed.

Ian Josephs points out things that shouldve been done too that werent - like asking the children in a certain way if they were coerced into saying things, and asking in a certain way about the alleged abuse on ****** = to ****** herself and Denise Bassett - in the event the abuse wasnt mentioned at all in the trial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5ywSaTRv3Y&noredirect=1

http://newafricanpress.com/2011/10/16/maurice-kirks-account-of-the-musas-family-saga/

http://www.facebook.com/maurice.kirk.16

http://therealipcc.wordpress.com/maurice-kirk/

How to complain about your GP South Wales lot refusinging me a NHS (Wales) brain scan to eventually gaol the b*****d

http://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#search/no-reply%40wordpress.com/1317580a216caf24

Meanwhile all this takes its toll

12 06 18 Section 8 JR Application 18th June 2012.pdf

http://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#search/no-reply%40wordpress.com/1317580a216caf24

And if the enemy wish to continue to cheat let us bring in the Big Guns

http://victims-unite.net/2012/06/28/international-three-day-fast-and-praying-for-the-musas-starting-today/