Proven Inspector Andew Rice conspiracy

Action 2 paragraph 5 speed camera St Nicholas 2.10.1997.

Facts referred to in this extract of judgment are contrary to the facts in the case.

Dolmans, Solicitors, for South Wales Police, deliberately manipulated the learned judge into stating the ‘speeding’ vehicle was a Guernsey registered veterinary ambulance. This was due to a conspiracy emanating from Inspector Trigg of Barry police station causing Appellant to be gaoled in Cardiff Prison as ‘unidentifiable’

EXTRACT from corrected October 2015 judge’s draft by Dolmans, solicitors

  1. Vehicle 43083, the vehicle on this occasion, was a Honda Acti Van. This vehicle ricocheted between registered keepers by November 1989 respectively Mr Kirk, Mrs Janet Kirk, Mrs Marianne Fanshawe and Mr Kirk again, all in Guernsey (“green” bundle pp 34–36). A theme of Mr Kirk’s evidence is that vehicles were being stopped because his name appeared as the registered keeper to police search; but it is not challenged that on this occasion the vehicle in question travelled through the speed camera at 44mph in a 30mph zone.

Both Janet and Mrs Fanshawe considered taking legal advice as to suing the police by their conduct with the former not being informed, until right now, as to why none of her children were ever to be educated in Wales owing to the apparent inherent deceit regularly nurtured in both the Principality’s schools and so called law courts.

Why? The vehicle on this occasion was not liable to road fund tax as a veterinary ambulance. (In Action 1 para 8.5 both judge and police failed to raise this simple fact re PC Lott’s excuse to stop-Road traffic Act).

PC Lott and police husband, Sgt Lott and also in Barry, had been briefed on all the Appellants Guernsey vehicles, in 1993 were not liable road fund tax (four motor bikes and thee motor vehicles) and hence the reason why all were mysteriously stolen in quick succession, mainly in broad day light and burnt out or destroyed.

None of his other UK registered veterinary vehicles, of course, were touched except the one Inspector Andrew Rice stole from right outside the Appellant’s veterinary hospital while his victim was tied up again with the usual weekly drivel from those, milking the system, in some equally smelly Cardiff Crown Court.

All this sudden flurry from Barry police officers, appearing so concerned about Maurice’s welfare, was triggered to try and bury ‘Wednesbury reasonable’ legal argument in (Action 1.6) Prince Charles incident over a blood stained ‘garotte’ type instrument that was used on His majesty’s Boverton farm, Llantwit Major.

FACT: These fabricated criminal allegations again required Inspector Andrew Rice to deny incidents as ‘never occurred’. The Appellant was prosecuted for ‘speeding’ in a veterinary practice vehicle whilst not the driver already known to be the case by both police and HM Crown Prosecution Service, Mr Stan Sofa.

FACT: Inspector Rice’s version of accounts, as in paragraph 314, (see paragraph 262 Action 1 claim 8.11 3 October 1993 at St Athan stop and arrest for driving whilst disqualified) is also quite untrue as when he described this earlier motoring case’s police and court records. First the Appellant was convicted, in his absence and then, again in the Appellant’s absence, the conviction was over turned.

FACT: The Appellant was denied access to either police or court records relied upon to, first, obtain a successful prosecution and then, second, be made ‘aware’ the conviction was over turned.

Does it stink or does it not demonstrate once again the thread of deception for these civil proceedings for a motorist again to be ‘stitched up’ out of sheer spite?

FACT: Throughout most of these incidents the South Wales Police knew the Appellant was never ever going to get incriminating HM court, HM CPS or police records from any South Wales establishment.

FACT: Inspector Rice had, also in evidence, with Christopher Ebbs alias Alexander present in the room, deny identifying him or having been at the Aust ferry cafe meeting, with Mr Alexander, CAA and Bristol police (involving an Appellant assault conviction, subject to appeal, in an incident in the Plume of Feathers public house, Bristol public house to discuss that and flights to Ireland.

FACT: The driver of the van, Kevin Fairman, was called to give evidence and without warning to anyone stated he was routinely stopped by police believing him to be the Appellant when driving any of the now Appellant’ recognised vehicles.  No explanation was given or inspection of the vehicle other than police admitting they believed in was the Appellant who had been driving.

FACT: Kevin Fairman indicated he was stopped more by Barry police in the Guernsey registered Acti van, see-paragraph 684 below, assumingly because all side windows had been previously deliberately ‘blacked out’ by the Appellant and leaving only a small slit across the windscreen, for legally requirements.

FACT: Both police senior management and their lawyers, Dolmans, had been lying through their back teeth for years with their collective denials of the very existence of the Appellant’s veterinary ambulance featuring in this ‘speed trap’ fabrication.

FACT: The selection of ‘mysteriously now found’ police photos, (see- Action 1 claim 8.23 May 1995 The vet ambulance), of the Appellant’s untaxed with no MOT parked on a double yellow line, over night,  veterinary ambulance, outside his veterinary surgery, were originally taken to allow PC Matin/PC O’Brian and all other circulating police officers, should they see the Appellant and no one else driving, to have the excuse to stop him and attempt to identify their victim’s latest insurance company to harass ( see insurance agent, Mrs Kenyon/nee Charlie Brinson and  vet nurse, Mrs Walker, damming joint oral evidence including – police in back of a Barry court room caught say, “ we are going to eventually catch the little bastard always talking human rights)

At the summary hearing therefore some FACTS also not in this judgement:

  •  Inspector Rice would not call the operator of the camera at the inciden
  • but prosecuted the Appellant when knowing he was not the driver
  • Mr Soffa subsequent arrest, for ‘perverting the course of justice’, was now further supported by the incriminating clear photograph of the driver that had fluttered so gently to the ground from his CPS file.
  • had assisted in the earlier Barry magistrates hearing despite having already supplied HM Crown Prosecution Service’s Mr Stofa with two contrasting photographs name and address of the actual driver, Kevin Fairman.
  • had confiscated the CPS court file, to shred no doubt, with all parties in the court room intently looking exactly as he had done or Sergeant Hill had done following the collapsed ‘smuggling pigs flight to Ireland’ case.
  • The case was immediately abandoned for all trace of the hearing to be ‘expunged from the record’ as a lawyer said at the time in 2006 as. this is exactly what Texas’s State Psychiatric Prison’s court did to avoid the publicity.
  • The Federal Aviation’s Authority’s speedy intervention, by a ‘wrap over the knuckles’, was kept from all the American newspapers just as the CAA’s repeated complaint of these Welsh police, in Actions 2 paragraph 2 flight to Ireland 9th February 1996 and Action 2 paragraph 7 – 4 July 1999 the police helicopter.
  • along with at least five other officers he was last seen escorting away Mr Sofa, in handcuffs, with CPS file neatly tucked under his arm, to make, no doubt, the yet undisclosed but detailed MG11 statement as to ‘what the magistrate saw’.
  • Until the South Wales Police had intervened by fabricating a PNC record coupled by erroneous psychiatric information to Austin’s police and repeating themselves in 2009, over a machine gun incident, all knew that at no time had the Appellant broken any FAA legislation while landing his cub next to the President’s ranch. He was simply carrying a letter thanking GW, personally, for causing this Appellant’s life from being saved from the Caribbean sharks by Julie, the pilot and one of his Coast Guard helicopters.
  • So, again, as if it was a figment in the imagination of the Appellant this is another court process that just never happened triggered by the clerk of the court’s 10 am fax to the Appellant, signed J Caress and hoped to be buried.
  • Disappeared Stipendiary magistrate, Ms Watkins may well have been an eye witness to the other similarly collapsed hearing, see paragraph 430 Action 1 claim 8.23 May 1995 The vet ambulance but definitely in the ‘smuggled pigs’ fiasco case all to have the Appellant’s name removed from the veterinary register.
  • This incident supports the view to an overarching MAPPA type 24/7 surveillance conspiracy, along with the many yet to be heard ‘stayed’ damages actions, currently protected by HMC&TC, as in the current appeal by JR in the Royal Courts of Justice and Supreme Court, if need be, of no ‘restraining order’ having ever been served on their victim, in the 1st Dec 2001 Cardiff magistrates’ cells to then maliciously used to gaol him, for years to further prejudice his preparation for these civil proceedings.
  • As for any other witnesses, from the two crammed full vehicles, dispatched by Inspector Andrew Rice with all sirens blaring across the town, none, it appeared, could be identified
  • Despite many years of both CPR and FOI act applications none of these three collapsed hearings nor that of 1st Dec 2011‘harassment’ conviction, when CPS switched exhibits mid-trial to be confiscated by Cardiff police to prevent the Appellant access to them fin subsequent trials have disclosed no contemporaneous notes of evidence or identity of any used exhibits.


  1. Action 2 paragraph 5 speed camera St Nicholas 2.10.1997 On 2nd October 1997 a speed camera snapped a Ford Escort Van D821 LNY travelling apparently above the speed limit of 30mph. This is not disputed. The monitor on the speed camera showed 44mph to the police officer operating it. A Notice of Intended Prosecution was sent to Mr Kirk as keeper of the vehicle requiring him to identify the person driving the vehicle on this occasion.


  1. Vehicle 43083, the vehicle on this occasion, was a Honda Acti Van. This vehicle ricocheted between registered keepers by November 1989 respectively Mr Kirk, Mrs Janet Kirk, Mrs Marianne Fanshawe and Mr Kirk again, all in Guernsey (“green” bundle pp 34–36). A theme of Mr Kirk’s evidence is that vehicles were being stopped because his name appeared as the registered keeper to police search; but it is not challenged that on this occasion the vehicle in question travelled through the speed camera at 44mph in a 30mph zone.

How on earth could the Appellant have known what speed either of the vans had been doing? The police barrister would not call or cross examine on it in this civil trial as that would of liberated a whole new fragrance of corruption into the court room as yet another new ‘can of worms’ is opened.

  1. It appears to have been processed in the ordinary way by the Central Ticket Office, without fault in the process itself. It is not disputed that the Notice was sent in proper time (see notice itself dated 13.10.1997 at A2/2.20, and his letters of 21.7.1998 and 17.9.1998 at A2/2.38. A summons was issued on 27.4.1998 within the required 6 month period for excess speed and for failing to give information identifying the driver (A2/2.29, 31). Mr Kirk in fact pleaded guilty, “to save time”, but in mitigation said he was not driving and the Magistrates restored the matter to be tried at a hearing on 1st June 1998. On that occasion, the prosecution withdrew the prosecution (see A2/2.36 and 41 – 42). A letter from the CPS dated 28 September 1998 states that, following the adjournment of the case on 27 April 1998, “the case was further reviewed by a member of the Crown Prosecution Service. In view of the quality of the photographic evidence the Crown took the view that the case should not proceed against you in relation to the speeding offence” (see A2/2.42).
  1. The pleaded case is that the prosecution was instituted and continued by police officers maliciously and without reasonable and probable cause, in that they knew that Mr Kirk was not the driver of this car at the time of the alleged traffic offence and there was no evidence that he had committed the offence (A2/2.1). His case is that the driver was his employee Kevin Fairman.
  1. The Defence, after further particulars of the date and occasion, served a witness statement from PC Lovell dated 3.11.2009, which simply records the date, time, vehicle registration number, and checks as to system, and that PC Lovell on that day sealed the video cassette and forwarded it to the Central Ticket Office at Treforest in the normal way. It did not identify or describe the driver. Mr Kirk declined repeated offers to call him for cross examination.

CF paragraph 684

  1. A copy of the photographic evidence from the video camera was sent to Mr Kirk: by letter of 11 November 1997 to the Central Ticket Office, he asked for a copy of it (A2/2.21); by letter dated 9 December 1997 he wrote again stating “I refer to my letter of the 11 November and your response thereto enclosing a photograph. I am able to confirm that the driver is not me but I cannot confirm his/her identity” (A2/2.23).
  1. By 21 July 1998 Mr Kirk was writing both to the police and to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors that “on receipt of the Notice of Intended Prosecution I wrote several times to the South Wales Ticket Office and my letter of the 10 March identified the driver, and his address who was well known to the Barry police as my employee”. By the time Mr Kirk was making a witness statement for the purpose of the present proceedings he was asserting that “in October 97 the police summoned me for speeding despite the fact that to the police’s knowledge I was not the driver. The camera photo clearly identified Fairman. Therefore the summons and trial were motivated by malice….. The police never even approached Fairman despite the fact that I told them in writing at the earliest opportunity that he was the driver, not me, and therein lies why I say it was harassment and malicious” (witness statement 19 May 2002 A2/2.3D); he repeated this in his 2009 statement (paragraph 647 A2/2.3B).
  1. In fact what he had written to the police was, “One of my staff has suggested the driver may have been a Mr K Fairman of 52 Tynewydd Road, Barry. Without sight of the original film I am in some difficulties.” (A2/2.28, emphasis supplied).
  1. My letter dated 21 January 1998 the police had written in reply that Mr Kirk had failed to establish the person and invited him to view the film at the Central Ticket Office which might assist in the identification process adding “I should point out that it is the responsibility of the registered keeper to supply such information” following a police request and “if you wish to view the film would you please contact this office on the above telephone number when the necessary appointment can be made” (A2/2.25).
  1. Mr Fairman was called as a witness before me. He had a worried look throughout; he had an uncertain memory. His written statement said that in 1995 he was stopped by Barry Police “at least three times” and made to produce his driving documents while driving Mr Kirk’s Guernsey registered van”, whereas orally before me he did not remember three occasions “I can only remember one occasion I was stopped”. (In fact, he was stopped three times, on 14.08.1995 in the Honda Acti van, see HORT 1 at Mr Kirk’s green Bundle 33; and on 23.08.1995 and 22.9.1995, see letter from South Wales Police 24 January 1996 Mr Kirk’s “green” bundle at 43).
  1. In my judgment the driver may well have been, and probably was, Mr Fairman. In a statement made during the currency of the hearing before me, Mr Fairman stated that in 1997 he was employed by Mr Kirk and was driving one of his vehicles through St Nicholas to cause him to receive a speeding ticket (“second statement” in Mr Kirk’s additional, “green”, bundle). In oral evidence, he told me that he had no dealings with the police, it was all dealt with by Mr Kirk; he could not remember being shown a picture of the person from the speed camera; and he did not remember the camera flashing but he remembered “the situation of it all. [Mr Kirk] must have said that I picked up a speeding ticket, it would have been the little white van I used to drive”.
  1. However it is clearly not the case that Mr Kirk “told [the police] in writing at the earliest opportunity that [Mr Fairman] was the driver’.
  1. Strictly in law, he was required to identify the driver within 28 days of service of the Notice of Intended Prosecution (which was on or about 13 October 1997). It would have been open to the police to lay an information, for summonses to be issued, by late November 1997 if Mr Kirk had not identified the driver by then.
  1. In fact, he asked for a copy of the photographic evidence by letter dated 11 November 1997 and expressly stated, having seen the photograph, to the police that as to the driver he could not confirm “his/her identity”. By 10 March 1998, five months after 2 October 1997 and over four months after expiry of the 28 day period, Mr Kirk was going no further than to say that one of his staff had suggested that the driver “may” have been a Mr K Fairman.
  1. In view of Mr Kirk’s own difficulty with the quality of the photographic evidence there is nothing inherently improbable in the CPS having taken a view, (after 27 April 1998 when Mr Kirk had pleaded guilty), that the quality of the photographic evidence was such that the case should not proceed (letter 28.9.1998 A2/2.42). The decision to offer no evidence was taken before the court hearing, and before any representations or requests by Mr Kirk at that hearing (see fax Magistrates Court to Mr Kirk “the prosecution is withdrawing the case this morning – no need to attend Court” (A2/2.36).
  1. Mr Kirk has (or has developed) furious suspicions or belief of ill motive or conspiracy in relation to this particular incident. Those centre on the fact that at the hearing the CPS representative was someone who knew Mr Kirk personally and regularly met him, but he would not produce the photograph to Mr Kirk, “he just withdrew the charge” (Mr Kirk’s statement of 2002 A2/2.3D). Remarkably, Mr Kirk physically seized Mr Stoffa the CPS representative and physically tried to wrest from him the photograph. “I therefore arrested the CPS Prosecutor, Stoffa. After a very long wait in the courtroom for the police, I handed him over by the scruff of the neck to the Police Sergeant, making it quite clear that I needed to make a statement of complaint and that they were to seize the CPS file before documents were shredded, as they had been in my previous cases when I’d made similar complaints…. The police refused to interview me concerning my complaint.” (A2/2.19 written statement of ?? 2002).
  1. Mr Kirk identifies Police Sergeant 1581 Rice as having attended (together with a body of police arriving ‘under blue flashing lights’) and as having seized the CPS file. This would in itself not be relevant to the merits of having prosecuted this matter, but during the course of this hearing a Mr Christopher Ebbs (or now Mr Alexander-Ebbs) attended Court and purported to identify Inspector Rice as a police officer present at a meeting at Aust Motorway Service Station when Mr Ebbs alleged that Mr Rice applied pressure to him to “sex up” his allegations against Mr Kirk in relation to an incident at the Plume of Feathers Public House Bristol.
  1. I deal with the evidence of Mr Alexander-Ebbs elsewhere, in more detail, but in respect of the present incident, it suffices to say that first, up to certainly 2007 Mr Kirk was anxious to emphasise to the courts that any information given by Mr Ebbs was totally false; and second, looking forward to my findings below, I found the evidence of Mr Ebbs before me bizarre and incapable of belief.

Would the RCVS now hold a similar view to their one ruled upon on 29th May 2002 when so reliant on the evidence of Christopher Ebbs, Inspectors Howard Davies, Khilberg and Andrew Rice and evidence from the likes of PC Osborne?

  1. When Mr Rice himself gave evidence before me, he denied any recollection of attending on the “Stoffa” occasion. I consider that there was more than a hint of seeking to distance himself from any and every possible suggested involvement with Mr Kirk. Whilst Mr Kirk’s memory is certainly not immune from error, as I have observed elsewhere, including occasions during the hearing before me when within minutes he misremembered what a witness had said, there is here a letter bearing the date 1 June 1998, (the very day of the Magistrates Court hearing involving Mr Stoffa), in which Mr Kirk identified “Sgt Rice number 1581”.
  1. I deal below with the allegations against PS Rice. However on logical analysis of Mr Kirk’s claim that he was maliciously prosecuted for speeding in respect of the present incident, (i) the fact of speeding by the vehicle in question is not in question; (ii) the matter was processed via the Central Ticket Office in the usual way; (iii) the photographic evidence was sent to Mr Kirk; (iv) Mr Kirk went no further towards identifying the driver (contrary to his later assertion or recollection) than I have set out above, and he did so long outside the statutory period within which he was required to identify the driver. I find it impossible fairly to discern evidence of malice or want of reasonable cause on the part of the police. Mr Kirk’s incendiary reaction to the CPS prosecutor declining to give up possession to him of the speed camera photograph speaks much to Mr Kirk’s personality and character, but the role actual or supposed of Sergeant Rice in restoring order to the courtroom or its environs adds nothing to Mr Kirk’s case overall in respect of this incident.


  1. Incorrect- both of the alleged van incidents of ‘speeding’ remain in question
  2. It was not processed in the ‘normal way’
  • no photographic evidence was ever sent to the Appellant, safe to identify anyone, especially when put alongside the still withheld clear enhanced copy of the CPS’s photo that had fluttered out of the police file to the court room floor

Despite the Appellant’s secretary’s repeated requests by both letters and telephone calls and by supplying further proof of the Appellant’s innocence, once again, ‘selective amnesia’ appears to have dominated those in Barry police station, deciding or not to prosecute, with their ‘in house gravy train’ colleagues, the area’s CPS office, just across the corridor within their police station walls

Ample opportunity had been allowed, from the Appellant’s information, supplied before the Barry magistrates hearing to withdraw the prosecution doomed to failure when fuelled by obsessed senior management with a ‘current batting average’ by now of still only a 11% win overall. This was to change once both roadside tactics were changed and HMC&TS offered to give a helping hand.

Inspector Rice’s denial of being at the incident of CPS’s Stofa arrest is again indication for the need for an outside police force to obtain proper disclosure of court records and a stark warning to others who chose to cross the bridge from England especially when the Westminster is shortly to grant Wales, like Guernsey, both their own police force and judicial autonomy!






Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Five Lying Crown Court Judges

The fabricated 2009 ‘Trading in Machine Guns’ allegations, resulting in the Appellant being registered as a South Wales Police MAPPA level 3 category 3 victim, to be nearly shot and when not, having him sectioned under the 1983 Mental Health Act for incarceration into Ashworth high security psychiatric hospital, for an indefinite period, could only have been with the apparent  co-operation from some Cardiff Crown Court, Magistrates judges and Cardiff Crown prosecutors.

Incarceration, for possible life without any trial, was only prevented  by the quick thinking lawyer, ex Vale of Glamorgan MP, Walter Sweeney and his wife, Nuala, consultant Radiologist, by obtaining a counter medical report, from England, castigating the conduct of Dr Tegwyn Mel Williams who appears now to be banished from NHW (Wales) to reside in Christchurch in New Zealand.

August 23, 2012 12:46 AM ——————————————————————————– ————————— 7} nWhite Ferret said: It is said that the Doctor who gave unlawful information in order to have Maurice Kirk convicted as well as his wife are on sick because of MJK harassment. If this is true, then someone has to be taking the Michael. This presumably means that they would both be paid sick leave from the public purse by the NHS. So, this raises a number of questions. 1. Does this mean that they are also too ill, or unfit to work at their other private clinics. 2. If this is the case, could it not be argued that they are taking money presumably from the public purse under false pretences. 3. Where do they have their main income from NHS Wales or their Private Clinics. 4. With NHS Wales having an in depth knowledge of this case; and having their own people sitting in the public galleries during Maurice Kirk’s cases, would it not be appropriate to suspend this Doctor and his wife with immediate effect. 5. An NHS Wales Doctor has proved another NHS Wales Doctor wrong. Surely, the honourable duty of the public funded NHS Wales is to investigate. 6. How many other cases has this doctor got wrong. 7. Naturally there are Royal Charters immunities to prosecutions, however, it is a matter of public interest and confidence to investigate fit and proper use of public monies in this instance, and protect the integrity and trust of those that may be tarnished by any disrepute that may have been brought upon NHS Wales by this Doctor. 7. Should this Doctor have brought the Caswell Clinic and NHS Wales into disrepute, then NHS Wales has a duty to act accordingly.

A fat lot of importance that is to this Appellant, of course, as until Dr Williams’ fabricated medical reports, such as the extract below, are corrected or expunged from the record both his Civil Aviation Authority’s pilots licences and attempts to be re-registered with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons are doomed.

The South Wales Police were ultimately responsible, once again, for first instigating FTAC’s, unfortunately for them, clean bill of health after Maurice had visited Highgrove to deliver a letter to HRH Prince of Wales with a stark warning of the quite unchecked corruption that seems to be within the heart of in the South Wales judiciary.

Dr Williams’ August 2009 psychiatric report, destined for his 2nd December 2009 Ashworth application, before HHJ Neil Bidder QC, was very cleverly written by arranging not to examine his victim himself but basing it only on the fictitious 8th June 2009 MAPPA data, much of which he disapproved as written by senior police officers and a couple of student nurses that just happened to visit his Cardiff prison cell, at the time, for a chat.

A string of Cardiff judges, ever since, have had to fight off the Appellant with his numerous applications to obtain those fabricated medical records in order to  expose the conduct of the South Wales Police hell bent on prejudicing the prosecution of the long running civil claim of their unfortunate victim.

The Chief Constable, Peter Vaughan, has  used these medical records to successfully oppose the Appellant’s bail applications to incarcerate for almost three years of his life when either falsely accused by the South Wales Police or having never been convicted.

EXTRACT from Dr Tegwyn Williams’ Sept 09 psychiatric report when not even qualified to examine his wrongly ordered Aug 09 SPECT brain scans by way of i/v radio isotopes.


Tottenham section

14 11 14 A20140082 McKenzie Friends Assoc MUSA Pt 1-4


These hidden reports were given, by the Welsh police, to the Tottenham London police while tied up in knots over their unlawful snatching of the six Nigerian Musa children, in 2010, before the parents were deported without them.

11 09 17 Musas and MJK at Tottenham Police Station

Met police were asked by South Wales Police to arrest Maurice and have him sectioned, indefinitely, again, anything to slow down the ongoing civil damages claim against them and their ill earned pensions.

All charges, in two  separate Metropolitan Police incidents, were  later withdrawn and the Appellant was released from the Harringay Corner Magistrates cells.

The 3rd incident, over the Musa family, was heard in a London court with the South Wales Police having refused his release from HM Cardiff prison as considered too dangerous.

Successive Welsh judges, ever since, have now appeared to have conspired with their police force to prevent the Appellant from properly preparing his on going civil claims, requiring well over two hundred witnesses and was even a matter raised in The Royal Courts of Justice in February 2016, by Lord Justice Burnett QC, in his attempt to be allowed his own written records, from now on, whilst defending himself in any welsh court

The Appellant has been reluctantly slow at coming to terms with ‘just what really goes on in our law courts’, now a days, as he had just left ten years of living within the corruption in the  British tax haven called Guernsey where they boast its allegiance was not the UK’s Parliament but only to Her Majesty The Queen.

Guernsey’s incestuous Mafia had relied on two UK veterinary surgeons, in amicable partnership, trusting their respective island lawyers to put a stop to outside attempts to disrupt their business. However, their respective insular lawyers, UK layers have no right of audience, Messrs ACK Day and Peter Ferbrache had other ideas with their sole intention in aiding in the stealing their client’s veterinary practice and freehold from right under their own feet.

But the veterinary practice and all the Appellant’s personalty, with his father’s veterinary equipment, was stolen and sold off at a fraction of true value to someone, let us say, chosen to be more ‘malleable’ to the island’s customs rather  than to anyone else so foolish to have stepped off the boat in the first place.

The purchaser, A Mr McCrae, took the joint lawyer’s advise, before purchase, to obtain the owner of the freehold’ signature, a Nicholas Blackwell BVSc MRCVS Esq, to sign a disclaimer accepting full responsibility of the sale in case his partner found about the fraudulently drawn up deal. This was only achieved whilst Mr Blackwell was mentally impaired by needing psychiatric assistance.

This was quite unbeknown to his partner, of course, with his first right to the purchase of the practice in the event of the other’s demise or retirement.

But this Appellant found out within the statutory period and raised the Clamour de Haro.

The police, of course, had agreed before the illicit sale not to step in once the fraud was uncovered as it was lawyers that had concocted the fraud it in the first place!

For further information on how the ‘Clamour de Haro’ prohibitive injunction was abused, to protect lawyers, see:


The South Wales Police, having now failed in all the above, has caused successive Chief Constables to continue in conspiring with the local law courts to have the Appellant locked away on the slightest  fabricated piece of nonsense they could muster and had quietly agreed upon with HM Crown Prosecution Service (Wales) to be prepared to turn the proverbial blind eye to.

  1. His Honour Judge Hughes

So, in 2010, following the Appellant’s acquittal in the ‘machine-gun’ trial, where the police had painted the antique a different colour in the hope of fooling the jury, His Honour Judge Hughes [1], on St David’s Day 2012, erred in judgment, it is humbly submitted, over basic principles of British law.

It had been agreed by Cardiff’s cabal to cover up their failed attempts in getting their victim locked up for even longer as the alleged ‘harassment’ of  Dr Tegwyn Williams and ‘breaches’ of the never served ‘ restraining order’ was all invalid from the very start.

As was so recently discussed by HHJ Rolands and a Cardiff CPS barrister, in another one of their clandestine court hearings, their victim was deprived of the full d]facts other than it had been decided the serving of a restraining order was, in itself , an unlawful act as the police had tampered with the original evidence once the hearing unfolded the wrong way.

Note in the transcript below:

Page E6       Appellant being refused the right to cross examine the police or their police doctor.

Page 7D      Appellant being refused his legal papers in court, another recurring theme.

Judge Hughes’ purpose?

For the Appellant to be refused the plethora of papers generated in 1st Dec 2011 magistrate’s hearing, by the then clerk of the court Mr Michael Williams, was in order to orchestrate a harassment conviction in the first place.

Despite the conduct of the original police ‘investigating’, in cahoots with the now sacked HM Prosecutor, David Gareth Evans, to change the original fabricated evidence, only carrying a non custodial sentence, they have now confiscated those prosecution exhibits to ensure the 4th Jury cannot see them either.

Judge Hughes is recorded, on tape, misleading the Appellant which only reminds us that any UK judge, if he or she is so minded, may kill, rape or even lie in a welsh court, as he or she has HM immunity to prosecution for apparant‘ institutional corruption’ each time their respective positions of privilege, in HM Partnership, is in any way challenged.

12 01 27 RO Appeal

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is yet another case in point and another British anomaly, like a Judicial Review, controlled and driven by any politics of the hour.

16 03 12 Pre Action protocol letter (1)

This Judge Hughes is only first of the five or so  Cardiff judges’ routine conduct to be published for the proverbial unsuspecting UK tax payers. Over the next few weeks Maurice will be attempt to publish the facts on other judges to show this behaviour is tolerated by the HM Justice Ministry once known as HM Home Office.

The 2nd  judge to consider, over Dr Tegwyn Williams, must be Nicholas Cooke QC or Llewellyn-Jones QC, as both of whom in the Spring of 2009, were fully aware of the South Wales Police’s MAPPA plot  to having the Appellant conveniently shot if  playing their plan B, the  ‘Gulag’ card, should also fail with their fragile machine-gun nonsense.

2. HHJ Lewellyn-Jones QC

On or about 7th August 2009 this judge had admitted receiving a fax, that morning, purported to have come from Dr Tegwyn Williams of Caswell Clinic who just happened to be Barbara Wilding’s Chief forensic psychiatrist for Wales.

The Appellant  had been  wheeled in from Cardiff prison, protesting whilst on remand, over an antique WW1 machine-gun conspiracysuch as these of institutional corruptions tend to dream up.

This judge was also in possession of the facts surrounding the Chief Constable’s falsified February 2009 sworn affidavit, see appellant’s 9th September 2009 letter to Barry Magistates and HHJ Seys Lewellyn QC’s currently blocked list of civil damages claims

09 07 23 Dr TW rpt

Maurice was NOT a patient nor ever has been but only because he refused to consume, later that day, the Caswell Clinic food and only drank tap water.

09 10 19 DrTW extract

!CF03546 DrTW Prof Wood Claim

10 06 16 CAA Psch Rpt

much more to follow ,shortly……

For details: Face Book Twitter &

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Cardiff Prison now deny I was There?

Alternative titles may be;


Frantic to cover-up the Cardiff cabal having  now re written 1st December 2011 court logs and clerk of the court’s contemporaneous notes of evidence, in District Judge John Charles fiasco of a magistrates hearing (listen to tape recording!) over Dr Tegwyn Williams’ fabricated forensic evidence


So, who is lying?

9 12 1 medical Kemp  and police have now snatched the original court exhibits, to stop the 3rd and now 4th jury trial  from seeing the forgeries , now today, my Bristol lawyers inform me the prison are saying they did not even take me to court that day!

‘We have reviewed our records and find that no movement of Mr Kirk took place on the date in question unfortunately. Could the date have been earlier or later for us to expand our search please as it was a very specific request for information. Thank you.’

Kind regards

Kevin Skinner

Business Hub Manager, HMP Cardiff  Tel:     02920923417


So who is lying?

11 12 01 PER

First its Judge John Curran telling  4th May 2012 jury there were no court records of magistrates evidence ‘available’, 12 05 04 Jury Notes then Lee Barker, court cell manager, told the jury he had served on me 1st December 2011 ‘restraining order’, 11 12 01 Restraining Order also quite untrue and only proven by my having to arrest the CPS barrister, David Gareth Evans, who, himself, had conspired with the South Wales Police to concoct a new allegation, as nothing before court carried a custodial sentence and had switched court exhibits before police confiscated them all.!

Barker_Statement (1)  Barker went home 3pm which is exactly why court, prison and now, GEOamey, have all shredded their respective records.

12 01 27 RO Appeal

So who is lying?

12 05 04 Extract taken from 4th May 2012 Cardiff Crown Court

GEOamey Custodial Services  had five of its men dragging me out of the cell at 5pm and by throwing my crutches on my head, as I lay on the floor, failed to what I guess was the prison returned restraining order being stuffed in my pocket.

It was the returned restraining order as some idiot had sent it over to the prison at lunch time, by mistake, when all had been told, in advance of evidence, I was to serve the maximum prison sentence!


13 03 06 Criminal Court of Appeal Criminal ref

Cardiff courts withold the the jury-note request from Lord Leveson et al, at the Criminal Court of Appeal, as is not unusual in a Welsh law court  13 03 14 Application for Leave to Criminal Court of Appeal…see transript


So which barrister is complained about most?

23rd March 2016       UK Barrister Complaint               BS 614159 etc

Barrister Robert Trevis knowingly lied to His Honour Judge Denyer QC, in Bristol Crown Court on 10th July 20, when he stated that my rent monies, stolen by his client, were acquired by his fanciful idea that they were the ‘proceeds of crime’ and that I had misled the court into thinking I had sufficient funds of my own to finance in order to seek remedy in a UK law court for a simple freezing-order on the villain’s bank accounts.
Meantime, the court schemed to wasted many months only to correct their deliberate error, in the first place, over the requisite court and court fee needed.

My money was stolen by his client as a police accomplice but only because Cardiff magistrates court had originally ordered him to be my McKenzie Friend, without my consent, knowing my now 24 year running damages claim against the Chief Constable had considerable merit but not without funds.
Jeffrey Matthews was employed to tape record all UK court hearings relating to Dr Tegwyn Williams, the then South Wales Police chief forensic psychiatrist, as he had deliberately falsified my medical records with Professor Rodger Wood of Swansea University for His Honour Judge Neil Bidder QC’s clandestine hearing, without their victim, on 2nd Dec 2009 in Cardiff Crown Court
A further Crown Prosecution Service barrister, known to Mr Trellis in their conspiracy, was a Mr Richard Thomlow who sought my indefinite incarceration, being the HM prosecutor for the already doomed 2010 ‘trading in machine-guns’ trial, in Ashworth high security psychiatric hospital as a MAPPA level 3 category 3 registered victim.
Barrister Thomlow had deliberately misled the court by stating my ‘significant brain damage’ was due to a brain tumour. No one, to this day, has officially told me of these medical findings as I was again banned from hearing my own court hearing for not employing a Cardiff barrister
Barrister Robert Trevis again lied in the 2015 Bristol County Court proceedings in a further hearing, this time before Mr Justice Newrey QC.
Barrister Charles Murray, also of Queens Square Chambers, knew all about the above conspiracy when he replaced Mr Trevis from acting for the thief. It did not stop him either from misleading the court when the judge asked to see as a copy of the sealed copy of my particulars of claim.
Both he and his client lied having a copy just as Matthews had lied receiving other papers proven to have been posted to his address. It needed the Claimant to physically point at it on the Defendant’s table, thought hidden, for the case to be adjourned for yet another chance to swindle the money.
Barrister Robert Trevis had known, all along, CPS barrister David Gareth Evans, in the 2009 harassment hearing fiasco, had switched police concocted court exhibits and had knowingly relied on fabricated police evidence which is why police confiscated the altered court exhibits, court log and clerk of the court’s contemporaneous notes.
Mr Trevis’ colleague, barrister Michael Smyth, also of Queens Square Chambers, Cardiff, had, of course, prosecuted me in this alleged 3rd breach of 1st Dec 2011 restraining order which is why it is currently with the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Barrister Robert Trevis was also aware that the police had, immediately after the March 2014 3rd ‘breach of a restraining order’ jury trial, seized the court exhibits to have the court log and clerk of the court’s contemporaneous records altered in order for His Honour Judge Roland to quash the original ‘restraining order’ that has caused me years of unlawful imprisonment.


The 2nd  corrupt judge to consider, where frank dishonesty is concerned in date order, must be either be Nicholas Cooke QC or Llewellyn-Jones QC both, in the Spring of 2009, having been fully aware of the South Wales Police’s conspiring to having me shot if their playing the  ‘Gulag card’ should also fail with the machine gun nonsense.

more to follow

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Police Cover-Up Mark Davenport Crime Spree to Gaol Maurice

South Wales Police have once again conspired to fabricate spurious criminal allegations to obtain many months in prison for their victim only for all charges to be then dropped.

By using their informant, ex gaol-bird for drug-dealing and GBH convict Mark Davenport of Cardiff’s underworld of crime, to get information about myself the Chief Constable, Peter Vaughan, turned a ‘blind eye’ over Davenport’s trading in allegedly stolen motor cycles, committing criminal damage, to simply delay  his inevitable eviction by allowing his  hired henchmen to beat-up the Bristol Bailiff’s men.

Could Enid Blyton have made it up?

Despite His Honour Judge Bidder QC’s early comments on all its futility HM Crown Prosecution (Wales) persisted, of course, to maintain his custody from October 2013 until March 2014 when all charges were again dropped. This not was  not just to prejudice the ongoing civil claim it was to affect his preparation of outstanding charges for the March 2014 3rd jury trial on Dr Tegwyn Williams’ fabricated, as never served, restraing order on their victim, another cooked up South Wales judicial conspiracy……. More detail of all this can be read in early blogs, face book, Victims Unite web site and

Just 20 seconds before January 2013 Brittany arrest to the psychiatric hospital

13 01 25 Gendarmes arrest

A few police prosecution files back from France

13 02 12 files from France

13 02 12 SWP files from France - Copy

Mark Davenport squatting at ‘work’

Violent Drug Dealing Squatter


The policeman responsible?

peter vaughan

So who is lying?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Oh, Rambuctious One!

Dear Norman,

1997 Prevention of Harassment Act and Cardiff Cabal’s Restraining Order

This is an interesting point you raise, Norman, on the subject of bad ‘restraining orders’ and our statute defence, allowing you to both detect and prevent further misconduct by those in positions of privilege and with immunity to prosecution.

It reminds me of a Dr Tegwyn Williams, the now sacked chief police psychiatrist for the South Wales Police, deported to the Antipodean extremities to be as far away from me as was possible, in the time, that the Cardiff cabal could manage.

This is of little comfort to either me or him, of course, until such bad law is reformed and in my particular case, until there is full disclosure of that clandestine 8th June 2009 MAPPA meeting in Barry police station.

Both the police doctor and then Chief Constable, Barbara Wilding, had hatched their notorious ‘re- painted machine-gun’ plot, to having me shot, reliant in having the full co-operation of the Cardiff law courts which have also been conspiring ever since! His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC continues to refuse, in these past six years, to allow the ‘machine -gun’ civil damages claim to come back into court as too many HM servants are also implicated.

All this started when Ms Wilding had just received HHJ Nicholas Chambers QC’ order to disclose their records of sixty odd police incidents of their harassment of me these many years.

Dr Tegwyn Williams had neither examined me nor was qualified to interpret the brain scans I had secretly arranged, from inside prison, to be put before another, for a £1,200 fee, an expert in the field. No doctor in South Wales, therefore, for my parole board release, in Aug 2015, ‘could be found’ as all were too spineless to affect their very nice thank you ‘gravy train’ set up here in The Principality, as usual, at the unsuspecting tax payers expense.

Whereas Dr Tegwyn Williams is no longer allowed to work in NHS (Wales) I struggle on to get that fabricated MAPPA 3/3 evidence he used against me but it has also been blocked by my current civil trial judge, His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC.

Also, of course, the Criminal Cases Review Commission, also now waist deep in the proverbial when trying to cover it all up, is refusing to disclose the only, most likely, true copy left of the 1st December 2011 clerk of the court’s contemporaneous notes, court log and prosecution exhibits, as so many different versions have, so far, been produced following my arrest of the original bent CPS prosecutor, David Gareth Evans. Professor Rodger Wood of Swansea University is next.


After my 3rd purported ‘breach of a restraining order’ trial, in 2014, the same trial judge, HHJ Rolands, would you believe, told the CPS, in my forced absence, that Dr Tegwyn Williams was no longer protected by the Cardiff cabal as my original defences, citing criminal conduct, had now been corroborated and proven to be precisely correct.

It is also a repeat, of course, of CPS barrister, Richard Thomlow, not telling me, when he told HHJ Neil Bidder QC, that I was only MAPPA 3/3 registered as one of the 5% most dangerous in the UK, because Dr Tegwyn Williams believed I had a brain tumour, requiring to treatment but my indefinite incarceration into Ashworth high security psychiatric hospital.

Does it stink, Norman?

Maurice Kirk's photo.
Maurice Kirk's photo.
Maurice Kirk's photo.
Maurice Kirk's photo.
Maurice Kirk's photo.
Maurice Kirk
Write a comment…
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

More South Wales Police Bullying and Malicious Imprisonments

Cardiff County Court                                                                                                    BS614159 etc etc     South Wales

15th March 2016

Maurice Kirk v Chief Constable of South Wales Police

Application to Appeal

Position Statement

  1. The claimant’s ‘Wendesbury unreasonable’ example, in his 16th Nov 2015 ‘provisional grounds’ for appeal, identifies the defendant’s unusual and extreme abuse of process throughout the last twenty-three years. The Defendant refused to negotiate settlement with the claimant’s Bristol solicitors, following his 20th May 1993 routine HRH Prince of Wales farm visit, simply because it only required his veterinary attention using routine embriotomy wire and ‘FOR ANIMAL USE ONLY’ clearly labelled medicines taken from his BMW motorcycle panniers.
  1. The claimant’s subsequent unlawful arrest, assault and imprisonment, as being ‘unidentified’, required the prisoner’s interview tape and custody log to be redacted and then destroyed in order to hide the Barry police officer’s identity and finger print evidence.
  1. Failed defendant disclosure of standard documentation and deliberate delaying tactics was only achieved by using the uncontrolled lucrative private sector rather than using the force solicitor who, incidentally, was paid to attend the 2016 final hearing.
  1. ce this claimant was denied the originally promised jury, a decade later, for any single or groups of or for all thirty-three police incidents of one hundred yet to be settled, he would be faced with substantial legal costs if he should then withdraw.
  1. Since the Chief Constable was ordered to sign, personally, her 2009 sworn affidavit, that proper disclosure of records had occurred, then the claimant would invariably be found locked up on spurious grounds only to be acquitted or all charges withdrawn.
  1. The trial judge continues to stay the multifaceted ‘machine gun’/MAPPA/Dr Tegwyn Williams/Swansea University NHS (Wales) fabricated psychiatric records/HMP Swansea parole board conspiracy, dependant on HM Crown Prosecution Service (Wales), meaning the claimant now faces invincible prejudice within the Welsh judiciary to no fault of his own.
  1. The following claim was filed in Cardiff court, today, only to be informed of it also being referred to the trial judge thereby further compounding the claimant’s overarching legal argument that the conduct of certain South Wales Police officers warrants a custodial sentence for having committed just so many criminal acts with malice aforethought.

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

                                              Maurice Kirk v South Wales Police             Case number

Brief details of Claim

1.        In July 2012 the Claimant was wrongfully arrested and detained in custody on an alleged breach of 1st December 2011 Restraining Order, contrary to Prevention of Harassment Act 1997, in that the Claimant had visited Dr Tegwyn Williams home causing the police to be called and stating his intention was to burn his house down. No such incident occurred and police statements were deliberately fabricated to prejudice ongoing civil litigation against the Defendant.

2.        In July 2012 the Claimant was detained in prison with Defendant alleging a breach of 1st December 2011 Restraining Order and a breach in the civil procedural rules tantamount to a contempt of court. On or about 3rd October 2012, with the Claimant not being allowed to attend court, all counts were withdrawn.

3.        In January 2013 the Claimant was wrongly arrested in Merdrignac France and sectioned under French legislation following the Defendant having informed the gendarmerie of information emanating from Dr Tegwyn Williams and Professor Rodger Wood’s 2009 fabricated medical reports. Reports were needed to justify the then Chief Constable of South Wales Police, Barbara Wilding’s fictitious June 2009 data to obtain the Claimant’s MAPPA level 3 category 3 registration.

The Claimant had then goaled for ‘trading in machine guns’ and further sectioned to Caswell Clinic secure unit reliant on the chief forensic psychiatrist for South Wales Police, Dr Tegwyn Williams, neither being appropriately qualified nor even having examined his police victim as he was being black-mailed to do it.

The Dfendant supplied the French authorities this fabricated information to ensure the Claimant’s detention, as identified in a later released RESTRICTED MAPPA 3/3 NOMIS no A7306AT OASys Assessment Form, similarly used by the Defendant to regularly oppose the Claimant’s release on remand.

The Claimant was only released from Pontivy secure psychiatric unit once the Claimant had been identified as a previous patient requiring a total hip replacement following negligence on the part of the Guernsey police having delayed a dislocated femur to be re located by insisting he be handcuffed to his St Peter Port hospital bed.

4.        In May 2013, during the preparation and hearing of the civil damages claim BS614159, requiring many more than the 99 witnesses heard, the Defendant harassed the Claimant by repeated visits to his premises in Cowbridge Road, Cardiff, trying to make a forced entry and arrest him for an alleged fraud relating to Mark Davenport in the elicit business of stolen motorcycles.

All allegations were later withdrawn following the serious assault of grievous bodily harm (GBH) on the Bristol bailiff’s staff, by and/or on behalf of Mark Davenport, while twelve South Wales Police officers attended refusing to protect those lawfully evicting Davenport a convict for GBH and drug-dealing.

5.        In or around June 2013 the Claimant was again wrongfully arrested for the ‘assault’ on Mark Davenport and Nathan Kingsley, his black-market employee, despite the Defendant knowing any such incident, had it occurred (Claimant allegedly poked his finger in the chest of Mark Davenport), was on the newly installed CCTV by Mark Davenport for such an incident by dissatisfied 3rd parties in his business.

6.         The claimant was eventually released only to be restricted to stringent bail conditions in order to prevent his access to his own residence, court files and witnesses required for the ongoing civil claims against the Defendant. All counts were finally withdrawn in March 2014 with the usual failed disclosure.

7.        On 18th July 2013 the Claimant was wrongfully arrested for breaking bail conditions relating to similar fabricated Mark Davenport allegations. All allegations were finally withdrawn also in March 2014.

8.        On 19th July 2013 The Claimant was again arrested by the Defendant this time for ‘being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle’ and ‘being in breach of bail conditions’ again fabricated to further prejudice the ongoing civil damages claim of police harassment while its final submissions were then in the process of being filed with the civil court.

9.         The definitive breath test at the police station was deliberately delayed for over an hour while alternative charges may be concocted. The Claimant’s reading was zero level of blood alcohol, as is the custom for the Claimant, with the wrongful arrest required to try and provoke the usual other alleged offences, such as ‘resist arrest’ and ‘common assault’, often successful due to the absence of independent witnesses.

The Defendant’s main purpose was an unimpaired search of the Claimant’s data on his computers and in his two hundred odd arch lever files to assist in defending the ongoing civil damages claims. All allegations were finally withdrawn with no further action (NFA) other than to dream up another incident.

10.     On 31st July 2013 the Claimant was again wrongfully arrested for ‘breach of bail conditions’ and ‘intimidating witnesses, Mark Davenport and Nathan Kingsley’ and remanded in custody. All charges, in March 2014, were withdrawn once maximum damage had been achieved in the current civil claims against the South Wales Police for over twenty years of ‘unusual’, ‘extreme’ and unlawful ‘bullying’.

11.     On 23rd August 2014 the Claimant was wrongfully arrested at the Cardiff Crown Court as he was obtaining further evidence that the Defendant had unlawfully confiscated the original 1st Dec 2011 court exhibits fabricated, with both Dr Tegwyn Williams and Professor Rodger Wood of Swansea University, to obtain a conviction of harassment and incarceration in Ashworth high security psychiatric hospital for an indefinite period.

This was to cover up Barbara Wilding’s fabricated 2009 MAPPA/’machine gun’ criminal conduct. These fabricated court exhibits had been introduced by HM Crown Prosecutor, David Gareth Evans, who the Claimant therefore arrested as he had been the prosecutor both in 1st Dec 2011 summary hearing and in 4th May 2012 jury trial. Both court exhibits and clerk of the court’s original contemporaneous notes were essential for disclosure essential as they had also been asked for and refused by first of three juries.

12.      In March 2013 Lord Justice Leveson et al (see official judgment) were denied even knowledge of their relevance as the Cardiff Crown Court transcript had again been deliberately or otherwise ‘redacted’ and or ‘corrupted’. It remains essential, for the 4th jury trial, for full custody and court record disclosure.

13.     On 21st Sept 2014 the Claimant was wrongfully arrested for actual bodily harm (ABH) when the Defendant had refused to attend, inside the Cardiff prison, to help apprehend a prison officer, a Mr Rogan, who had aided the Defendant in not allowing return of the Claimant’s passport following his release from custody. The Defendant further prevented the Claimant from retrieving his passport or obtaining a new one from Newport passport office to prejudice the Claimant’s ability to return to France to retrieve valuable data in the civil case far too risky to be left in Wales.

14.     On 14th October 2014 the Claimant was wrongfully arrested whilst attending Barry police station attempting to give further evidence, following temporary apprehension of the thief of his £1,500 (see 3rd Damages Action CF204141), denied by the Defendant as having ever been reported, a recurring theme.

15.     On 14th Oct 2014 the Claimant was wrongfully arrested for making a ‘threatening telephone call’ to burn down Dr Tegwyn Williams house as the Defendant knew his earlier communications with both the police and Cardiff Crown Court, withheld from the 3rd jury, indicated that there was no threat nor did he know nor wished to know the house’s location. MAPPA 24/7 covert surveillance data was withheld as was covert surveillance data withheld from the current court judge, His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn QC.

16.     The Claimant was first wrongfully imprisoned, before the arrest, while police spent a significant time trying to first contact Dr Tegwyn Williams and then to agree to make a complaint to justify an arrest.

Unlawful police covert surveillance had emanated from Taunton and Guernsey the moment, if not before, in 1992, following his detention having been accused of deliberately setting fire to his own WW2 D-Day Piper Cub when police knew neither the garage nor his aircraft were insured.

17.     On 30th September 2015 at around 7.30 am the Defendant had the Claimant arrested at Portsmouth on entering the country following the French authorities having refused him a private flight to UK from Dinard aerodrome. The local police detained the Claimant until almost 11pm when he was released without charge or explanation.

18.     The Defendant is jointly accused of being responsible in an over-arching conspiracy with some within HMC&TS (Wales) and some within its cosy legal professions in unlawfully maintaining their lucrative ‘gravy train’ generally guaranteed to be financed by the unsuspecting tax payer.

This list is not exhaustive

19.     The Claimant is seeking punitive damages



Maurice J Kirk BVSc

13th March 2016

 Maurice Kirk v South Wales Police & HM Prison Governor             Case No. 9CF02983

Maurice Kirk £50,000 Judgment against HM Cardiff Prison Overturned

This chronology of events illustrates why victims, representative of financial exploitation and legal oppression in the UK, have approached the EU Commission for Justice for Fundamental Rights and Citizenship: there is no effective remedy or fair trial (Article 47). Instead, the failure to disclose evidence that is detrimental to defence or prosecution victimises victims in courts. Article 1 and another deliberately absent from HRA 1998.

  1. Jan 2008: Imprisonment for refusing to pay Crown Prosecution Service costs as it was an abuse.
  2. On day of release 1st Claim for damages filed as prison had refused, each day, to accept payment in lieu of prison sentence. Crown defends claim.
  3. Jan 2009: HHJ Nicholas Chambers QC ‘stays proceedings’ to allow Claimant to change Defendant from ‘HM Home Secretary’ to the female prison governor.
  4. April: Amended Claim for damages filed against HM governor and police. Police admit receiving ‘Particulars of Claim’ and defends.
  5. 8th June: Crown places Claimant under surveillance MAPPA level 3 category 3 (meaning monthly meetings of prison and police discussing their victim’s intricate welfare).
  6. 23rd June: Claimant jailed for possessing, a year earlier, a decommissioned WW1 aero machine gun.
  7. July: Claimant files for ‘default judgment’ from his Cardiff prison cell.
  8. October: Claimant awarded £50,000 damages by HHJ Seys Llewelyn QC.
  9. 2nd December: HM Prison denies Claimant access to court as CPS and Dr Tegwyn Williams make last ditch attempt to have him sectioned to a psychiatric prison called Ashworth for an indefinite period.
  10. 17th December: Claimant removed from MAPPA level 3 register without explanation and later released from prison, denied any costs, having ‘offered no evidence’. Victim never told of his brain tumour possibility.
  11. 2010: Crown’s new governor denies ever ‘receiving’ Particulars of Claim sent by court. HMCS state it had ‘unreliable record’ of ‘good service’ on Cardiff prison in April 2009. HM continue to refuse to return court fee.
  12. Both new prison governor and HMCS refuse October 2009 Court Order to produce proof of ‘audit trail’ recorded at the same time by their MAPPA 24/7 surveillance.
  13. September: After 2009 judge’s ‘observations’, Claimant offers an alternative settlement by dividing liability, £25,000 against Crown and £25,000 against female governor.
  14. New judge refuses to uphold Order to disclose ‘audit trail’ or obtain obviously needed affidavit from April 09 governor, Ms West, who had ‘good service’. Claimant refused her piano, at prison gates, as part payment.
  15. October: Court agrees three month ‘stay in proceedings’ due to Claimant’s ill health but rules Claim was ‘never served’ and had claimant had cited wrong Defendant.
  16. 29th October: Crown requests payment for £2,200 costs but Claimant is yet to receive any Judgment awarding Crown any costs (or for it have its £360 court fee paid by English tax payers).
  17. The Claimant awaits HHJ Seys Llewelyn QC’s Judgment on MAPPA disclosure of that ‘audit trail’ within The Principality preventing his rights to ‘remedy’ in his eighteen year running damages claim due to South Wales Police’s unlawful conduct. This judge adjudicated in original criminal courts and still refuses to recuse himself.

Maurice J Kirk BVSc

   IN THE COURT OF APPEAL                          CASE NUMBER BS 614159

CIVIL DIVISION                                                                                                   

                                                MAURICE KIRK                                  Claimant    


                              SOUTH WALES CONSTABULARY                  Defendant    



  • The tribunal hearing the pleaded 33 incidents of malicious prosecution brought by

The Claimant erred in both fact and law when considering The Wednesbury Test

(see paragraph 33) ‘The Claimant would have to establish that the Custody

       Officer (reviewing officer’s) decision was ‘ Wednesbury’ unreasonable,

       See Wilding v Chief Constable of Lancashire where the test for deciding

      whether a decision that a detention was necessary under PACE was

      lawful was formulated as follows:

      ‘Whether the decision of the custody officer was unreasonable in the

       sense that no custody officer acquainted with the ordinary use of

       language and applying common sense to the competing considerations

       would reasonably have reached that decision’.

      With regard to Action 1 Claim 8.6 Incident 20/5/1993 the tribunal had to consider

at paragraphs 140-189 whether it was ‘reasonable’ to detain a known police

veterinary surgeon for four days in custody, inter alia, for possession of established

veterinary surgical tools proximate to his own surgery under Section 25 PACE

(the general arrest provisions) when that detainee was in possession of

correspondence establishing beyond doubt he was The Claimant. In deciding


the question in favour of The Defendant the tribunal was susceptible to the

criticism of bias or that it exercised ‘Wednesbury’ unreasonableness.

2).      The tribunal erred both in fact and law at paragraph 13 by propounding the

following analysis taken from Lord Nichols in Re H (Minors) 563:

            ‘the more serious the allegation the stronger should be the evidence

            before the court concludes the allegation is established on

            the balance of probability’ The tribunal indulged in the artificial exercise

            of dealing with each pleaded incident piecemeal ignoring the fact there were

33 incidents in all. There were just too many allegations of false prosecution

which required The Defendant to have to answer the binary test propounded

in Re B (2008) EWCA 282:

            Lord Hoffman:

            ‘2 if a legal rule requires a fact to be proved (“a fact in issue”) a judge

            or jury must decide whether or not it happened. There is no room for

           finding it might have happened

            the law operates a binary system in which the only values are 0 and

            1… if the party who bears the burden of proof fails to discharge it a

            value of 0 is returned and the fact is treated as not having happened.

            If he does discharge it, a value of 1 is returned and the fact is treated

            as having happened’

             Baroness Hale:

            ‘as to the seriousness of the allegation, there is no necessary

            connection between seriousness and probability… nor are serious

            allegations made in a vacuum..consider the famous example of the

             animal seen in Regent’s Park. If it is seen outside the zoo on a stretch


of greensward regularly used for walking dogs, then of course it is

more likely to be a dog than a lion. If it is seen in the zoo next to the

             lion’s enclosure when the door is open, then it may well be more

             likely to be a lion than a dog’. The Burden of Proof rested with The

              Claimant to prove he was detained/prosecuted. Once detained/prosecuted The

Burden passed to The Defendant to prove the detention was lawful. The

Claimant satisfied the evidential burden in 33 instances. Just like the proverbial

lion identified by Baroness Hale, it would be much more likely the animal was a

lion if the sightings of it in the zoo outside the lion’s enclosure when the door

was open numbered 33. The sheer number of cited serious instances created a

multiplier which augmented the Re B probability equation in favour of

The Claimant.

  • The Learned Judge was himself susceptible to the criticism of bias:
  • At paragraph 10 The Learned Judge, His Honour Judge Seys Llewellyn

QC, states that in his closing submission the Claimant also relied

on the fact that he was MAPPA categorized in June 2009, arrested

14 days later, and detained for nearly 8 months on possession of a

Machine Gun, only to be acquitted at his jury trial in February 2010.

The Learned Judge himself stayed that action which he chose to

ignore when in fact it represented the apex of The Claimant’s


  • He chose to ignore The Claimant’s repeated arrests on spurious

Grounds by The Defendant Constabulary during the actual hearing

itself ignoring the possibility that it provided further evidence

of the system The Claimant claimed was operating against him.


(see paragraphs 19-25).

  • By his Order dated 1st May 2013 the Learned Judge precluded The

Claimant, a litigant in person, having to represent himself in

circumstances of great adversity enumerated therein, from availing

himself of certain key witnesses.

I Believe The Contents of This Document Are True

SIGNED: Maurice John Kirk

DATE:  16th November 2015

Unqualified Dr Tegwyn Williams arranged victim’s brain scan, which turned out to be clear, for the South Wales Police to have the Claimant against them incarcerated, hopefully indefinitely, by the Doctor and CPS barrister both lying to His Honour Judge Neil Bidder QC while locking their victim out of the clandestine 2009 Cardiff Crown Court room


14 01 23 Bautiful Brain

HMP Swansea Brian Scan

      11 06 28 Contempt Appeal & Norman MF 2                    14 04 23 Files go to Knox Road 2  

        OVer 200 arch lever files brought into Cardiff Prison in the middle of 23 year running damages claim against South Wales Police     


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

South Wales Police’s 45 years of Bullying a UK Pilot

The Civil Aviation Authority                                                                     BS614159 etc

Gatwick Airport


Dear Sir / Madam,

South Wales Police’s 45 Years of Bullying a UK Pilot


1st South Wales Police Incident

9th February 1996 Alleged Breach of Prevention of Terrorism Act 1989

  1. I was prosecuted by the South Wales Police for an offence under the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act1989 due to my flying to Southern Ireland for a truly excellent day’s hunting, on 9th February 1996, with the County Meath foxhounds.
  1. Police stated, on oath, that I had failed to report to them that I was proposing to make the flight, early on the following day, out of Cardiff control zone via a farmer’s field.
  1. The relevant police officer lied in court causing collapse of the case and attending police sergeant to have to confiscate the Crown Prosecutor’s file, in the full face of the court with HMC&TS(Wales) assisting, as they do, by refusing to supply copy of the court exhibits because stating, ‘I had been acquitted’ with no costs.
  1. Senior CPS officer, Mr Mundy, specifically sent from London, was warned of the predicted outcome by my letters, copies of which are still available despite the Barry police station staff having shredded its prosecution file in their CPS office.
  1. I request full copy of the CAA’s records of this incident and detail on how I can also obtain NATS records of this incident, eg communications surrounding the consequences following my having filed a flight-plan for my G-ARSW Piper Colt.
  1. Both HMC&TS (Wales) and police confiscated exhibits containing the name of a Mr Christopher Paul Ebbs who had informed a DC Murphy that I had been smuggling pigs to Eire in both my D-Day two seat Piper Cub and Piper Colt.

EXTRACT of Evidence due for Royal Courts of Justice

South Wales Police lied from onset when:

  1.  knowing a flight plan had been filed by the Appellant.
  2. meticulous record had been kept by the pilot throughout the International flight.
  3. ‘police notes’, ‘miraculously found’ during an adjournment, were actually written overnight, part way through his evidence by DC Murphy with the full support of Bridgend Police HQ.
  4. Inspector Rice of Hill, in court for the purpose, had confiscated the CPS file immediately following collapse of yet another failed prosecution knowing its content contained still more proof of day to day ‘perversion of justice’ in South Wales courts.

2nd South Wales Police Incident

7. Following evidence from the South Wales Police, recently, it appears both police officers and NATS personnel, of Cardiff Airport, reported me to the CAA on or just after 4th July 1999, for flying my aircraft, registration G-KIRK, neither with a valid licence nor keeping at a safe distance from a police helicopter.

8.The court heard that senior management had ordered its helicopter, piloted by Captain Mosely, to be scrambled to intercept my aircraft simply to identify who the pilot in command was by taking close up video of the occupants for Cardiff ATC. Just a four-minute drive from my local police station would of sufficed.

9.Please confirm what communication police and NATS was made with you and supply full documentation for both the IPCC and Royal Courts of Justice.

10.Please note records supplied at my expense, if need be, are to contain dates and times of all communications with the South Wales Police since so many apparently dangerous incidents. and also since my Auster caved in the roof of a police car at Haverford West to cause a RAF Brawdy Hawker Hunter to give pursuit.

3rd South Wales Police Incident

11. Request for records re unlawful detention, at Swansea, of pilot and his Auster Type 4, G-AIJM, to dismantle her when heavily loaded with fresh Manx kippers.

4th South Wales Police Incident

12. Request for records of police complaint following my Auster Type 6, G-ARGI, having caved-in the roof of a police car, at Haverford West, to cause a RAF Brawdy Hawker Hunter to scramble towards our Enniskillen’s Harrier hunt ball.

13. I apologise in advance should appropriate witness summonses need be applied if I consider the CAA have failed to fully disclose relevant evidence as, with respect, was the case in numerous Crown Court and RCJ hearings in the past.

Finally, I must again thank you and your predecessors for your concern over my welfare whilst airborne, at least, during these past 52 years whilst operating over one hundred various both service and private types of ‘heavier than air’ flying contraptions.

Blue skies,

Maurice J Kirk BVSc APO RAFVR Rtd.

[See face book &]

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment