Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons

OK Captain, read this in your best scouse accent - ya wha??? hahaha

Sorry honey, but this needs translating.

Hope you're well, and hope at least some of this post is good news!

love n hugs,

Kazz. xxxx

web site now unjammed for comments or for offering help on maurice@kirkflyingvet.com, 0033296284741 m 07907937953

Pingback from  South Wales Medical Profession & Magistrates Aquittal - Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons

What does the CHC (Community Health Council) say about the reason for withholding your medical records? I would ring the Wales CHC office (TEL:   0845 644 7814 / 02920 235 558) and ask who you should contact to have a CHC complaints advocate contact Caswell on your behalf. You may wish to explain you live in Cardiff and Vale NHS and Caswell is in the Abertawe Bromorgannwg NHS (ABMU)

If the Judiciary are independent of the CPS and, the CPS are independent of the Police - as they all claim "to be independent of each other"

How come no-one has been arrested for:-

Tendering perjurous evidence; perjury in court etc in respect of Mr Kirk's Acquittal?

Claiming to be "Independent" and actually being "Independent" - is something that can be proven.

With respect to Mr Kirk's case The ONLY independent thing that has been proven so far is that The Judiciary, The CPS and the Police - act

"Totally independently from the public" and "contrary to their 'spoken claims' of in the public interest".

From what you say the Community Health Council (CHC) could progress a formal complaint on your behalf, and take it to independent review.

Please check as I am not sure but it looks to me that his employers have already lost the Charter Mark. If the Charter Mark is lost, and I understand things correctly, then it would be fair to say that Dr Tegwyn Williams played at least a part in that loss,

Topics to raise with 'independent review' (NHS complaints) could be medical recxds disclosure, his opinion and decsions that are prejudicial and hostile to you compared with the opinions and decisions of other clinicians, he shows he cannot relate to you, even to the point of showing strife towards you and trying to fight you as opposed to showing leadership to at least try and gain your confidence.

Informal review means going over the heads of Dr Tegwyn Williams employers.  I imagine Dr Tegwyn Williams and his employers would not like that idea as I believe an independent review could order his NHS employers to do certain things. I believe it would go down as failure on his employers record as in annual reports, that his employers failed to deal with issues regading Dr Tegwyn Williams..  

That reply from the interim guy at CHC seems odd.  

A Information commissioners (ICO) web section on professional opinion gives these contacts.

Phone: 01625 545745

E-mail: mail@ico.gsi.gov.uk

Website: www.ico.gov.uk

I would ring the information commissioner's office (ICO) asap to ckeck what you do next. I think the next stage at the ICO is the ICO would either tell you to complain to NHS, with or without CHC help. Or say the thet ICO can intervene and a caseworker takes it up. (could be too long a wait)  Or say that because it is forensic NHS there are unusual rules and CHC is correct. .I would think carefully about whether an information tribunal isa waste of time and energy. A Tribunal Chair can order the release of information, but there may be  specical rules for forensoc psychiatry reports that allow staff to withhold your records/reports.

My understanding is that you must use an NHS complaints proceedure and that the CHC ahould help you with that complaint. Information commissioners website says:-

What can I do if I'm not satisfied?

If you're unhappy about the way your request has been treated, you can complain to us, provided you have exhausted any internal review procedures

Possibly you could test out how genuine the CHC are to help where they can, by asking to meet an advocate about why you are more generally unhappy with Dr Tegwyn Williams and that you want him to make corrections to your factual history or background in data/records/reports which are unfair and inacurate? Or see a CHC advocate about Dr Tegwyn Williams poor attitude to you as a patient.

This is what the CHC (Community Health Council) in the Caswell Clinic region ABMU says on their website reagrds what the CHC offer patients:-

 NHS Complaints: How We Can Help

NHS Complaints: How We Can Help

The Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Community Health Council offers a friendly, confidential Complaints Advocacy Service. This free service is available to patients or their representatives who wish to make a complaint though the NHS complaints procedure.

Our Complaints Advocates will offer support by:

Giving you advice

Explaining your options

Informing you of your rights

Assisting you with correspondence

Supporting you in meetings

Voicing your concerns

Accessing your Health Records

If you would like to benefit from this service or would like further information, please contact Mr Jeff Lewis or Mr John Power - our Complaints Advocates, who are based at: Suite B Britannic House, Llandarcy, Neath SA10 6JQ.

You can contact them by letter at the above address, telephone them on: 01792 324201 and choosing option 1 for the Advocacy Service, or by e-mailing them at: complaintsadvocacy@morgchcs.org.uk

If you wish to meet with an Advocate following initial contact, an appointment will be made to meet with you.

The CHC need to attempt to negotiate the release of recordss on your behalf, may attend with you to collect them, and/or advise prospects of sucess if you take matters to ICO (Inofrmation Commissioers) or further to information tribunal.

Judicial Review has been reorganised into Regions and is now avialable through the administrative court at the County Court building in Cardiff. Any UK JR case can be lodged in Cardiff.

Look on the courts website to see huge changes and new Regional Courts all over the UK to make JR more accessible. Or rather RCJ JR in London was swamped by so many cases, they set up regions to reduce the backlog.

There is need to take careful advice and consideration about which way is best to proceed, and select what is most important. ICO, JR or a case against selected persons, or can the NHS redress scheme help, or patients complaints, or write to the Welsh Assembly, Chief Medical Officer, Chief Exec or Minister in Wales.

Judge Seys Llewellyn met his match yesterday.

I chuckled when South Wales Police Barrister had his little book to give him a greater understanding of MAPPA. (probably having been tipped off to by one at haste)

A classic case of how the man in the street and victims of the farcical and error ladden MAPPA sham demonstrated to the Establishment that they are fully aware of, and, have a full understanding of the evil, repulsive and sinister abuse by the brigade that operate behind S.T.O.R.M., ViSOR and MAPPA..

An Observation of what went on / was admitted in & around the Court of F.. Law in the Wild(ing's) West of South Wales.

An Englishman has noted what he 'heard' this week 'in court' - as to whether it was a properly convened court .... well that's for the reader to decide ....

The South Wales Prosecutor (SWP) 'stated' .... there's an admission - that he had "only just recieved the MAPPA book" that morning; and that it was the "first time" that "he" had seen it.

But how many 'others' have seen it and known of it before him?

The SW Prosecutor  was also heard (by admission) to say that he "did not know where, each month the Mappa (Gang oops) ... committee meetings sat" - were held ... but in reality he actually knows that MAPPA conduct one at South Wales Police HQ, Bridgend.

Clearly the Prostitutors ... oops ... solicitors Dolmans are milking the 'gravytrain' from both ends.

Their female soliprostitute specialising in fighting for the police with tax payers funding!

She and the barrister (actors union 'fee' also) doing their usual RADA spiel (acting - for a 'fee')  

So the Barrister defends the plod - while M and witnesses listen to the nonsensicle rhetorical jargon of garbage, drivel and  rehearsed lines - they the traders of bull of course being immune from prosecution. [They're days are numbered]

Further Observation noted by an Englishman -

Taxpayer funded lawyers never settle 'out of court' as they are taught at school (Actors college etc) not to even think about settling save until one gets to the trial court door on the day.

Did the female soliprosi utter (Admission) "if the taxpayer is so stupid, why shoot the daft duck that continually lays the golden egg" ........

The legal & judicial system is in meltdown - the Court of public opinion KNOWS that their "trade" is not about justice - but about "business profit" ....

I'm just wondering whether this post somehow got corrupted. There are different font sizes and types of text lined up.

And I'm trying to make sense out of a life whose "quality" was determined by the South Wales Police and its 'connections'...

I wrote a summary of medial / psychiatric reports as well as a reply to an 82-page skeleton argument to be used in next week's trial and put them here:

victims-unite.net/.../maurice-kirk

In The Civil Matter of ........ The Chief Con of the private company run for profit and of her lesser suborned bullyboys employee agents.........

P.A.C.E. Act 1984

(No pace, no case - as they say!)

Section 24

[Arrest without warrant: constables

(1) A constable may arrest without a warrant-

    (a) anyone who is about to commit an offence;

    (b) anyone who is in the act of committing an

          offence

    (c) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds

          for suspecting to be about to commit an

          offence;

    (d) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds

          for suspecting to be committing an offence.

(2) If a constable has reasonable grounds for

     suspecting that an offence has been

     committed, he may arrest without a warrant

     anyone whom he has reasonable grounds to

     suspect of being guilty of it.

(3) If an offence has been committed, a constable

     may arrest without a warrant

     (a) anyone who is guilty of the offence

     (b) anyone whom he has reasoable grounds for

           suspecting to be guilty of it.

(4) But the power of summary arrest conferred by

     subsection (1), (2) or (3) is exercisable only if

     the constable has reasonable grounds for

     believing that for any of the reasons mentioned

     in subsection (5) it is necessary to arrest the

     person in question.

(5) The reasons are-

     (a) to enable the name of the person in

           question to be ascertained (in the case

           where the consatble does not know, and

           cannot readily ascertain, the person's

           name, or has reasonable grounds for

           doubting whether a name given by the

           person as his name is his real name);

     (b) correspondingly as regards the person's

           address;

     (c) to prevent the person in question-

          (i) causing physical injury to himself or any

               other person;

          (ii) suffering physical injury;

          (iii) causing loss of or damage to property;

          (iv) committing an offence against public

                decency (subject to subsection (6)); or

          (v) causing an unlawful obstruction of the

                highway;

     (d) to protect a child or other vulnerable person

           from the person in question;

     (e) to allow the prompt and effective  

           investigation of the offence or of the conduct

           of the person in question;

     (f) to prevent any prosecution for the offence

         from being hindered by the disappearance of

         the person in question.

(6) Subsection (5)(c)(iv) applies only where

     members of the public going about their normal

     business cannot reasonably be expected to

     avoid the person in question.] *

* Amended by SOCAPA 2005, s 110(1)

  (((( Note - amended in 2005 ))))

Section 24A

Arrest without warrant: other persons - omitted here as not relevant.

Section 25

General arrest conditions

** Repealed by SOCPA 2005, SS 110(2),174

   (2),sCH 17, pT 2.

(((( Note again the year 2005 ))))

I am PC  V Green of New Recruit Drive, Statistics Avenue, Sometown near Careersville

My duty is to keep the peace and prevent any harm, injury or loss to the public. I understand or is that I stand under .... that I will enhance my future career prospects according to the number of monthly ticks that I get for the stats on arrests?

Anyway .... hold on ... there goes Maurice Kirk. I've

heard all about him and the way that he is an easy target for a stat ... tick.

Can't miss an opportunity to bag one against him - 'cos none of us has ever been done for anything or any form of harassment of him - so can't look a gift horse in the mouth.

I'll just nick him for loitering with intent .... 'cos I believe he is about to do somethin'.

I'll make it up as I go along; I'll goad him and of course ..... the legals will word up the rest - and hey presto I got me a statistic for nothin - cool Britannia ... result!!!!!

Pingback from  Trial Day 1: Judge orders MAPPA Disclosure | Flying Vet challenges South Wales Police

Day 1 Civil Court Proceedings Kirk v Chief Constable of South Wales Constabulary.

Issues re: arguments today Tuesday 7th September 2010 - MAPPA, Non-disclosure, non-compliance, Contempt of court.

Observations:-

Non-compliance with a Court Order (to disclose) is a "Contempt of Court".

Non-disclosure of the documentation ordered by The Court exacerbates the contempt.

A willing deliberate and knowing refusal to disclose documentation when ordered to do so - gives the Claimant the explicit right to infer explicitly that the Defendant has done so in order to evade that they are in receipt of self incriminating documentation.

To any REASONABLE MAN logic dictates that the failure to disclose can only be for the reason of not implicating oneself and or others.

Otherwise and if there were nothing to hide in the first instance disclosure ought to should and would have occurred - it has not and that issue is timelocked.

To use a limb argument by way of claiming protection under the Data Protection Act and or the FOI Act etc is a trite argument in attempting to protect other persons from being named and notwithstanding that names can be redacted.

That redaction has not even occurred gives further weight for concern against the Defendant's overt and outright refusal to disclose from the outset.

Guilt by ommission coupled with the contempt of The Court can be inferred explicitly and gives the Claimant the full right to demand judgement in his favour and without the neccessity of having to go through the motions of a trial and may well be an issue which matters turn on should an appeal from the Lower Court be sought at a later date.

So glad you concur / enhance what Maurice writes in legalese,BigWhistleBlower!

Far from truly understanding Maurices cases and actions, I am "learning by doing". See mauricejohnkirk.wordpress.com

Some words

"Con+tempt":- n. 1. the attitude or feeling of a

person towards a person or thing that he considers worthless or despicable; scorn. 2. the state of being scorned; disgrace (esp. in the phrase 'hold in contempt'). 3. wilful disregard of or disrespect for the authority of a court of law or legislative body: contempt of court. [See contemptible, contemptuous]

"Learning":- n. 1. knowledge gained by study; instruction or scholarship. 2. the act of gaining knowledge. 3. Psychol. any relatively permanent change in behaviour that occurs as a 'direct' result of 'experience'.

"Novice":- n. a person who is new to or inexperienced in a certain task, situation, etc.: beginner, tyro. 2. a probationer in a religious order. 3. a sportsman, esp an oarsman, who has not won a recognised prize, performed to an established level, etc. 4. a racehorse, esp. a steeplechaser or hurdler, that has not won a specified number of races.

"Controversy":- n., pl. +sies. dispute, argument, or debate, esp. one concerning a matter about which there is strong disagreement and esp. one carried on "in public" OR in the press. [See controvert inc. refute of an argument or "OPINION"]    

Re: Contempt - a fair, just, honest, truthful, balanced and reasonable minded ARBITER ought lawfully to be 'up in arms' at an explicit and expressed contempt .......

Q - Is the contempt at Mr Kirk or the court OR at both Mr Kirk AND the court?

So is justice going to be seen to be done in Mr Kirk's Civil case? Or not?

Issue - There are rumours that a little bit of nepotism may have crept into Mr Kirk's Civil case - are there heads in the sand err ... cooking the books? Investigations are ongoing.        

Issue - Ought Mr Snr Ptnr Dolman to be in the dock alongside his paying client?

It is suggested that Justice must prevail and that the era of spin, deception, duplicity and deciet is dead. (not that some want to believe it!)

Humpty Dumpty of Gulag caswell

Signed a report and then he fell

All the Crowns whores and commissioned men

can't put Humpty together again.

Today the judge was reminded he was the 11th Cardiff judge to refuse discolosure on ANYTHING as to why Maurice was classified MAPPA level 3 just 2 weeks before police arrested him for gun running. Was the imminent commencement of the the civil trial ,for damages, a reason?