Summary of Trial Kirk v South Wales Police
Maurice suffered countless time consuming and expensive incidents instigated by the police, in the early 90s, until, in 2002, when police complaint achieved his name being removed from the veterinary register. Very little harassment has taken place since that date, until the current 10 week trial date was fixed in early 2009 when 'all hell let loose'.
Maurice lays claim that his high rate of success, approximately 90%, in the criminal courts and apparent unheeded complaints, for the police to investigate properly an excessive number of crimes committed against him, his family and his veterinary practice, during that same period, are all down to police 'special treatment' reliant on 'targeted malice' and numerous 'false imprisonments' all condoned by the most senior of police officers, in his locality, the Vale of Glamorgan.
Maurice has now started the trial with substantial unequivocal evidence, before the Cardiff County Court, for appropriate damages, but with the outstanding problems from the scandalous 'machine gun trial', earlier this year and years of MAPPA covert police surveillance and falsified medical evidence before ten Crown Court judges who opposed his bail. Police failure in stopping that criminal trial means, there is now a vast quantity of 'failed disclosure' of evidence remaining under the control of the current Chief Constable.
Maurice has been deemed 'medically unfit' by his local GP and several England based doctors, accepted by the court, to proceed with the trial, to no fault of his own because 'authority' continues to refuse to 'put its hand up' over falsified medical evidence, tendered by the police and Crown Prosecution Service, at the 2nd December 09 Crown Court hearing, in their last ditch attempt to send Maurice to a High Security Psychiatric Prison, IPP, 'Imprisonment for Public Protection'. Or should it have read 'Police Protection'?
But Maurice was to continue attending the 9th Day of the trial, on Wednesday, 22nd September 2010, whilst on Morphine Sulphate and numerous other medication, due to the delayed 'total hip replacement' operation, urgently needed, as he has been warned the case will continue without him.
Rough Notes from 20th September 2010 Trial on 'Law'
(from Maurice's son during his absence)
Police QC, "misfeasance in a public office is a path Mr Kirk could/should have pursued"
Strasbourg case law - osman
"deliberate failure & wilful neglect"
Birmingham 6 - you must be joking. Using one of UK's most famous micscarriages of justice as an argument to wilfully repeat it, I'm sorry is that even an argument? It was even quite extraordinary to hear the Police QC actually call the men "murderers" in court in 2010, when they were cleared 19 years earlier. He continually referred to the now discredited proceedings of 1981, in front of Lord/Judge Diploc (he of such fame in Ulster), citing how these were paragons of good process to which this judge should emulate now. I thought it was bad enough when he kept citing Lord Bingham, whilst in the same breath stating how his opinion was the minority one, the one to which he was overruled/out voted by his Lawlord peers, but this is in a different league..
Police QC "Our argument is Mr Kirk has no case because when 6 men were tortured into confessing to a crime they didn't commit 30 yrs ago, it was all good practice for their trial judge to disregard these claims and declare the confessions sound evidence, in the spirit of administering a coherent system of justice and protecting it from potential disrepute being the dominant imperative." [Josef Stalin could construct a better argument than that].
So after all the nonsense of many hours monotone diatribe spread over 2 weeks the judge only had one question.
Trial Judge, "But are there no indications as to what might constitute a truly exceptional case?"
to which the Police QC responds " No Your Honour"
which begs the question (or what we hope the judge is thinking)..... then why did you impose this lengthy, irrelevant onslaught of verbal diarrhoea upon us all, if none of it addresses the central tenet of contention as highlighted by a single utterence form the Judge. Who pays for all that wasted time?
Not sure what all the nonsense about the US Federal Tax Commisison case was about, kinda wrong jurisdiction. Jim listened to that, I was dozing.