Deliberate MAPPA/Ministry of Justice leaked lies to cover up 20 years plus multi Cardiff judges/lawyers/HMC&TS bloody disgraceful dishonest conduct.

‘The Buck’ stopped in Cardiff Crown Court last month before The Recorder of Cardiff who handed down a Min of Justice ordered judgment that those HMC&TS staff and Geoamey Custodial Services who lied that there was ‘service’ on me of a Dr XX restraining order in the cells, in 2011 Cardiff magistrates, have won and saved their pensions.

Despite written records of such an event in the possession of CCRC, as well, to confirm my ignorance of there even being a R/O in existence, the 1st jury asked were refused them, of course, by bent bastard, Judge John Curran and a similar spineless CPS barrister David Gareth Evans. He also knew the truth but preferred their ‘alternative’ facts, a habit in the welsh courts it appears.

Frantically altered by clerk of court, Michael Williams, when records were asked for Lord Justice Levderson and Mr Justice Smales, but the court record of my appeal records the lordships asked for no such record and emphasised it by sayin g the transcript appeared to have no record of the jury aking either!

Does it stink or does it really stink?

Slipped copy of hurriedly rewritten page of Cardiff court log

It is now eight years since in 2009 Dr XX said there was significant irreversible brain damage where Dr XX said he could not predict how that condition would progress. Does it therefore follow for the Court to reassess Mr Kirk’s health to see how Mr Kirk’s significant irreversible brain damage has progressed.

Or do we follow up and find the result of the radiological investigations of 2009 where there are Judge Cooke’s comments of the 24 June 2010 saying:-

“..there were clearly radiological investigations undertaken…”

What is certain is Dr XX is only a psychiatrist and he also knows that Professor Wood is only a psychologist and that neither Psychiatrist Dr XX or Psychology Professor Wood are medically qualified to determine the presence or absence of brain damage from brain scans to report their own findings to a Crown Court.

Would it save the time of the Court to face the truth that Dr XX has entirely made things up, and does so in other cases. Please would the Court read Chapter 10 of “Justice for William” by Helen P Simpson to see a trend regards Dr XX.

Reasonable excuse – dissemination of truth to implement various Mental Health Acts.

Dr XX is a Psychiatrist who can take away a person liberty. To keep those powers he must get the support of his colleagues, such as two other psychiatrists with such powers to sign his renewal or else he cannot continue.

Therefore it is a part the implementation of the Mental Health Act 1983, 2007 and all the various updating measures to disseminate information to prevent psychiatrists who do wrong and so who are unsuitable from continuing.

Entirely making up significant irreversible damage is obviously a material issue to being considered unsuitable to continue as a Psychiatrist.

All psychiatrists, employers, regulators and insurers who may be asked to counter sign or support that Dr XX remain a psychiatrist need to know the truth, as a part of the implementation of the law (as in the various Mental Health Acts).

Reasonable excuse – Are Judges allowed to impose Restraining Orders that would collude in a potentially substantial insurance fraud?

A condition of being a UK Section 12 doctor is that they prove they have insurance to cover those duties. The insurers need to know if there is a history of making things up so that the doctor is obviously unsuitable as being too much of an insurance risk.

Preventing the dissemination of material information about Dr XX trend of dishonesty to potential insurers is highly improper if not potentially fraud. A Restraining Order made by a Court that has obviously ignored the facts and seemingly colludes in fraud can be at least morally wrong if not an illegality, to give reasonable excuse to ignore aspects of it’s conditions.

GMC use the “local” Responsible Officer system and so could not previously investigate.

By the Medical Act 1983 the GMC “local” Responsible Officer who recommended to the GMC whether a case against Dr XX should proceed was Dr Bruce Ferguson. But Dr Ferguson is his friend and is accused of collusion with Dr XX.

But Dr Ferguson has now retired. The GMC use a five year time limit rule Therefore by Dr XX still abusing his position as a doctor who works with police, to continue his vendetta by using obviously false reports and false comments, the GMC can start afresh and now seek to investigate.