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

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

JUDGMENT

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

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

pensions

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

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

They had already had the refusal drafted months ago

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

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

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

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

This judgment means trouble

Criminal Court of Appeal ref: 201203241 D2

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

1CF 03546

Regina v Maurice John Kirk

Application to Appeal

SUMMARY

The trial was unsafe because:

The jury was denied the defence evidence

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

JUDGE CURRAN: Do you intend give evidence?

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

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

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

The jury was misdirected

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

g) The mischief by Dr Tegwyn Mel Williams continues

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

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

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

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

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

Maurice J Kirk BVSc 14^th March 2013

SO WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT?

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

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

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

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

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

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

4th Williams Psych Reprt 19 10 9.pdf

9 12 1 medical Kemp.pdf

Dr Tegwyn Williams' wrong doing?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Changes in law and interpretations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and “incompatibility”

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

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

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

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

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

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

Maurice John Kirk BVSc

12 March 2013

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

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

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

Maurice Kirk v Dr T W Williams.docx

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

GMC.pdf

Glamorgan Gem 30th Sept 10.pdf

10 09 06 SWP_Claimant_interim_Skeleton.pdf

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

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

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

10 12 7 MJK MAPPA Executive Summary.pdf

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

09 09 03 MG Trans Redacted.pdf

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

09 09 01radiologist scans report.pd

09 09 30 INTERIM PSYCHIATRIC REPORT Oct1 2009 REDACTED.pdf

09 12 02 Transcript Crn Crt REDACTED.pdf

09 12 17 Court Hearing to Extend IPP.pdf

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

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

ps My birthday is on Tuesday

Quiz Time:

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

clue:

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

Answer:

Work it out for yourself

my e-mail is maurice@kirkflyingvet.com

Subject:

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

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

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

The pledge was created by Patrick Cullinane and reads:

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

Yours,
the PledgeBank.com team

ends

Trial Judge to see Crown Prosecutor's Conduct in the Witness Box

Maurice Kirk — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 22:17:00 GMT

3rd Action Para 2. Vale of Glamorgan Show Convictions under threat for 'strike out'

The trial judge, His Honour Judge Seys Llewelyn QC, expressed interest in reading the Crown Prosecutor, Jackie Seal's account, on transcript, of how Maurice was apparantly, deliberately denied the right to abide by a simple 'bind over' following an argument whilst he was leaving an agricultural show with his young son.

Enclosed, see here, are a sequence of docs summarising an incident when Maurice was arrested for 'Breach of the Peace' [BOP], for refusing to leave, trying to make a complaint of assaults, originating following an incident, surrounded by the general public, with a vicious slap across the face by recently retired Barry police inspector, Howard Davies. This led to a string of judicial procedures typical of so many others, experienced in South Wales, that were designed purely to have Maurice Kirk struck off the veterinary register reliant on false evidence.

The incident led to Maurice's arrest and detention but in court, next day, the simple 'bind over to keep the peace' could not be put to him, as the policeman had drafted three versions, all wrong. So the Crown prosecutor and clerk decided to say nothing in court as to why Maurice was there.

What followed was that the Crown decided to take the case out of the geographical area, Bridgend and not serve fresh summonses, 'common assault', 'public order' and 'resisting arrest', until five months later and until Maurice was actually in court with the prosecution ready to start with their witnesses. The case was heard immediately, so he could not obtain any of his witnesses.

It did not end there, far from it. The three versions expanded to four and then five, as Maurice made 'Abuse of Process' applications and appeals in the Cardiff Crown Courts and Royal Courts of Justice with each barrister, in turn, lying through their back teeth until the one, actually instructed, for the substantive appeal. in Cardiff he admitted, years later, that had he not been so seriously misled [by CPS Jackie Seal, CPS Dennis Davies, clerks of the courts and, obviously, his preceeding barristers, including Andrew Jones] he would never of opposed the appeal. He had not been informed that the police had originally decided it was only a BOP incident, but CPS solicitors cooked up fresh charges, not the reason why Maurice was arrested, withholding favourable evidence for the defence, by way of eye witnesses.

A Breach of the Peace should have been dealt with there and then and cannot be adjourned. Months later, January 99, part way through the trial, the clerk in Bridgend court suggested quietly to the CPS, Dennis Davies, the BOP allegation should be removed from the list of four, before the court, as Maurice would refuse to be bound over. But Maurice was never ever informed or given the opportunity. For had he, the complaint, under common law, would have been spent after 12 months meaning the RCVS could not have used the incident in their particular version of events.

The barrister wrote, in January 2002, to the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, stating that had he known about the original Breach of the Peace decision and that it was only being withdrawn due to police incompetence [with more than a little help from the CPS] he would never have challenged Maurice's appeal against, what the CPS called, 'substituted' charges, which, of course, they definitely were not.

CPS costs exceeded £11,000 and no enquiry could be mounted, by the appropriate authority, for an investigation into what this affair had exposed.

Legal Battles : Vale of Glamorgan Show

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

Trial Judge to see Crown Prosecutor's Conduct in the Witness Box