With CAA litigation looming again, it reminds me of the 70s. The 'intimidation of witnesses', burly ex Met cops banging on doors in the dead of night in Bristol, a Hampshire magistrate's case deliberately staged with orchestrated press 2 page spread coverage about 'Captain Kirk and the Star Ship Enterprise' just days before a TRIAL by JURY deliberating on my ATPL flying career, while I was completing an instructor's course at Goodwood......
And another case....about a vintage Stampe biplane flown unlawfully by others, a year after it is sold by me, but I am the one remanded for six weeks in 'solitary' in HM Winchester prison, below ground and beaten up by the prison guards (one called Clark, in particular)......before the trial that disclosed the CAA had given immunity to the pilots, in order to be a prosecution witness, in a case that failed without a penny compensation.
And another case of being 'pilot in command' leaving a closed airport in the dead of night they already having statements from the pilot of the aeroplane to the contrary.
And another... proposed drop over Somerset at 3am.... No, that one is for the book!
And there was that other failed case of the £11,000 bribe by the prosecution barrister and CAA solictor, mid trial, using tax payer's money, for me to change my plea to 'guilty' for something they knew damned well, 'low flying', I could not have done. Two commercial pilots had already given written statements to the CAA that the aircraft, G-KIRK, 'landed'!........ the RCVS are not the only ones in the UK dependent on the 'Royal Prerogative', the 'immunity to prosecution' clause guaranteeing 'invincible prejudice' to continue in our courts.
And the USA still crave for a monarchy?
Mr R Britton, Legal Department, CAA, London
30th June 2008
Royal Courts of Justice Judicial Review Application CO/49/46/200
Dear Sir,
It is nearly 2 months since the CAA suspended my licences based on the information attached to the defence papers. The FAA confirmed to me, at the time, that I had committed no aviation offence.
I apply for full disclosure, for the above hearing, under the Freedom of Information Act, Data protection Act and CPR rules of discovery.
Full disclosure is to include all other information relating to me before Mr Stephen Williams and referred to in your internal communications with the Licensing Department of the CAA.
It is quite unreasonable not to revalidate my licences now, based on the material so far disclosed.
Yours faithfully,
Maurice J Kirk
EYE WITNESSES FROM PRESIDENT BUSH'S RANCH
1st July 2008 e-mail to CAA
To whom it may concern,
Brian Throop of the FAA in Washington D.C stated to me on 6/20/08 via telephone that as far as he knew there were no known airspace infractions or FAA violations made by Mr. Maurice Kirk. I have also spoken with Mr. Throop on several occasions in regards to Mr. Kirk. Tel: (202) 538-9013.
Also on 5/01/08 in taking Mr. Kirk back to his aircraft in Crawford, Texas. Mr. Arnold Theymeyer of the FAA in Ft. Worth Texas had a phone conversation with Mr. Kirk stating that he had committed no offenses, and was given authorization to fly his aircraft. My wife, Kandy Howell was also present and spoke with Mr. Arnold Theymeyer.
Alvin M. Howell
Private Pilot/Airframe and Power Plant Technician/Inspection Authorization with 36 years experience in the aviation industry. Have had a US private pilot's license since 1974. I also work for Standard Aero located at George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston as a QA inspector on corporate Business Jets.
My wife and I have a business that provides Safety Compliance Training to Aviation Maintenance Certified Repair Stations.
AMT Training Solutions
http://www.amt-1.com/
Thanks for your time
Sincerely
Alvin M. Howell
22715 Piper Rd
Needville, Tx. 77461
(979) 553-3040 home
(281) 974-6593 cell
Safety Regulation Group, Civil Aviation Authority, UK Article 13 ECHR ‘Right to an effective remedy'
7th July 2008
Meeting 17th July, London ‘Suspended Pilot Licence' your ref 10D/006/005/001
Dear Mr Alcott,
I am in receipt of your 1st July 2008 letter and with which I am most disappointed.
However, it appears you have now accepted information from the Department of Homeland Security, USA, was erroneous and my landing in a field, five miles from President Bush's Crawford Ranch, not on his front lawn or public road outside his front gate, ‘engaged in criminal activity and endangering life', did not constitute ‘substantive' action on my licences. The FAA, I understand, have also given me their blessing on the incident.
But now you wish to raise old incidents, some dating back four years. This tactic, I must say, appears remarkably similar to that of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons when first contacted by the South Wales Police, for the HM Crown Prosecution Service, having lost 121 charges out of 130 against me. Their combined 10 year campaign of harassment and deceit started in 1992 and only appeared to diminish on 29th May 2002, the very day my name was removed from the veterinary register. Both RCVS and South Wales Police continue to refuse to disclose evidence that will undermine their defence confident, of course, under the immunity of the ‘Royal Prerogative'.
I therefore require your full disclosure also for the Royal Courts of Justice for your continuing refusal to re instate.
As conduct by the above so mimics that of the Guernsey Insular Authority, when they stole both my business and personality in the 80s, I must ask what continuing ‘devil worship' influence there is to now involve the CAA?
You raise fresh issues:
- 1. ‘Failed to take adequate action to avoid the thunderstorm'[at Mr Bush's ranch]. What thunder storm?
- 2. ‘The ditching of a cub in the Caribbean'. Upon what information do you rely in respect of my fitness?
- 3. ‘Forced landing on a closed road on the edge of Kanazawa City, Japan'. Are you suggesting I destroyed these aircraft on purpose? Did not the Japanese CAB supply you with GPS record of the exact point of engine failure many miles up a mountainous range, not even fit for a J3 cub to force land in?
- 4. ‘In 2004 a Taylorcraft caused ‘overdue action' by ‘search and rescue'. As with the RCVS I suggest full disclosure to support your allegations and as to why none of these matters were raised earlier?
I have invited a Patrick Cullinane Esq. to attend our meeting he having suffered similar ‘failed disclosure' by HM Inland Revenue and also witnessed the appalling state of our Royal Courts of Justice on my numerous Judicial Review Applications on ‘disclosure' indicating none of you have any ‘accountability' for possible malfeasance.
Yours Sincerely,
Maurice J Kirk
CAA proposed impartial meeting on the17th July 2008
8th July 2008
So who is the Racist?
Dear Madam,
Interesting choice of interrogators, as if it was not predicted.
I have had a number of communications, only this day, on the very subject of racism possibly being at the bottom line of this deceit with the welsh courts and treatment by the Freemasons in the RCVS?
Now we have the CAA!
Had I been black and landed in Crawford, Texas, I may be now be 3 feet under in a swamp, in a surplus Vietnam body bag. But that is elsewhere.
The welsh police complained to the RCVS to get me 'struck off', in order to deny me income to fight them, having just lost their 100th odd charge against me.
A Swansea judge then refused me a jury trial for compensation of 10 years of intense harassment by those very same welsh police.
Lord Justice Williams refused me legal representation on the very same subject for a jury trial at the Royal Courts of Justice Appeal in his nanoseconds of deliberations in July 2007 before me and a Patrick Cullinane Esq.
A Mr Justice Lloyd Jones, only last month in the Royal Courts of Justice, clearly ignored the fact that the RCVS have decided they can now refuse re instatement or ‘strike off' a veterinary surgeon from the veterinary register without even a hearing with the disciplinary committee.
Despite judgment against him in a welsh court the Home Secretary refuses to pay me the money for false imprisonment last year instigated by a welsh court on welsh police information they knew ,damned well, was false. Racist or what?
Not one welsh newspaper has published the fact or I have won 121 out of `130 charges in 6 or 7 welsh Crown courts in Wales and countless Magistrate similar farces and it is not based on Racism?
And now you offer me a ‘Mr Williams' to decide my, possibly, last year of flying as ‘pilot in command'!
Oh, yes, do bring on your ‘Mr Williams' to decide whether I can fly as long as I can have CAA's Mr B Alcott's personal consent to publish Mr Stephen Williams's and other people's ‘internal memos' in the CAA created due to ‘racist intent' but will be obtained, eventually, by me, by the true letter of the law or similar bribes as with RCVS staff that have proved to have been so successful.
I suggest you look at the sample of HM Solicitor General internal memos leaked and published on ‘downloads' of http://www.kirkflyingvet.com/
Oh yes, I will look around, instead of a lawyer for the ‘meeting', I will bring someone else, particularly familiar on the subject of racism, the very reason why this country is in such a bloody mess since Enoch died.
Mr Stephen Williams would not be a freemason and worshipper of the devil by any chance?
from
Maurice J Kirk, white Caucasian, English born and bred but forced to live in Wales originally due to racist unchecked conduct in Guernsey, Channel Islands.
CAA, Gatwick, UK
Royal Courts of Justice Judicial Review Application
Maurice Kirk v Civil Aviation Authority
Dear Ms Gregory, 9th July 2008
Re Suspended Pilots licence. Pre Litigation Protocol
Further to my letter of 8th July I have considered it would be appropriate, in the current climate with usual absence of full disclosure and for the CAA's decision to suspend my licences and write off to other licencing worldwide, that the meeting be tape recorded and that if any issues relating to the 1998 Human Rights Act have been raised in the past, in other cases, I should have site of them.
If new staff of the CAA is deciding my case history then let them be made well aware that the revocation of my commercial licence, in 1981 was, I believe, unlawful and that the failed disclosure was significant. In that incident, November 1979 Cessna 150 night flight from Morlaix, France to Bournemouth, I was not the pilot [except using the radio to correct South Hampton Radar information to my pilot in adverse weather], I was not drunk nor registered owner of the aircraft. The threats, in the dead of night that followed, on the young inexperienced Bristol pilot by ex Metropolitan police bully boys were also unlawful.
The latest incident was when the CAA barrister waxed eloquent to the Taunton magistrates, around 1998, following my deliberate plea of ‘Guilty' to ‘low flying', lying through her back teeth that I had ‘endangered life', contrary to section 74 etc. not even on the charge sheet! I quietly changed my plea to ‘Not Guilty' as I had landed ‘in accordance with normal aviation practice', later accepted by the Crown Court judge when no defence evidence was tendered [2 CAA prosecution witnesses, commercial pilots, confirmed a landing]. The CAA continues to refuse to identify her name for complaint to the Bar Council.
Another incident fabricated due, I suspect, to Masonic devil worship needs clarification. Remanded in Winchester prison, circa 1980, beaten up in solitary confinement, all for a CAA case that collapsed in Southampton Crown Court with, again, not a penny compensation or an apology.
The bribe of tax payer's money by the CAA of £11,000 for me to change my plea back to ‘guilty', put in writing, is an indication why tape recording and European Law, need to be addressed now.
‘Flight Safety' is of paramount importance but it is my opinion that the powers invested in the 2005 Air Navigation Order, for CAA personnel to do their job, is both draconian and contrary to the 1998 Human Rights Act with little allowance given for ‘accountability ‘ for any act of malfeasance it hiding, as with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, behind Her Majesty's skirts and HM Partnership.
I put both the CAA and RCVS on notice, following the Law Lords decision this week to waiver the 6 year, time bar rule in civil actions for damages that I may now sue without further notice given.
Yours faithfully,
Maurice J Kirk
COPY TO RCVS
Download