It takes the observation of MANY cases to realise the depth of deception that is paraded in courts. That’s why one of my blogs is called We Who Oppose Deception, even though it focusses on the bigger picture of mass deception.
Going through the bundle of 135 pages that Maurice has to process for this case, I ask myself how many staff have been paid by the public purse to put him into Caswell Clinic, where XX was the Director, and / or in prison since.
At the time, XX was commissioned by South Wales Police to put him away to the high security mental hospital Ashworth for life. Hence he produced the false diagnosis that has been refuted by six documents on this blog post.
However, South Wales Police keep trying to get him behind bars, using the infamous Restraining Order of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 that I have also experienced – for the same reason: online exposure – even though Subsection 3a says clearly that Section 1 does not apply,
when reporting or preventing crime.
In the words and spirit of The Law, it is also more than evident that Maurice had reasonable excuse to defend himself against the torture caused by imprisonments and re-arrests.
Violating a Restraining Order or Reporting and Detecting Crimes?
Maurice is now supposed to have violated the Restraining Order on 4 counts which gives the jury the power to send him to prison, while the judge has to advise whether it’s in the public interest to send him to prison, yet again.
On 01 December 2011 when not enough seats were in the public gallery to hold supporters, this Restraining Order was made in the Magistrates Court Cardiff:
You must not
- contact, approach or communicate with XX, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsoever;
- disseminate any material, photographic or otherwise, relating to XX;
- become a party to the display or dissemination of any material, photographic or otherwise, in relation to XX;
- place any information on the Internet any material, photographic or otherwise, relating to XX;
- become a party to any material being placed on the Internet, photographic or otherwise, relating to XX;
- attend within the curtillage of the Caswell Clinic or its grounds.
On 12 April 2013 this Change of Restraining Order was supposedly made, while Maurice was in prison. Can you detect a ‘change’ in any of the words?
He’s effectively being accused of using the Internet as the Court of Public Interest and Public Opinion – as his last resort to:-
- defend himself after vicious and malicious attacks;
- expose his case of Police Corruption as one of many mentioned in Bent Lawyers and Cops;
- expose XX’s crimes online, as they are being covered up in Courts.
False Witness Statements after False Diagnosis
To back the efforts of South Wales Police, XX produced Witness Statements which Maurice refutes, just as professional experts refuted his false diagnosis.
However, even Maurice has seen the most ‘obscene’ one, South Wales Police have refused to close it. Maurice recalls that the handwritten statement said something like “he was found at night at my house with a can of petrol and the Police moved him on.”
Meanwhile, his most recent document of 03 November 2016, says that Maurice has published:-
- he was sleeping with Barbara Wilding
- he was subject to Criminal Review
- “Wanted Dead or Alive” posted
- which is true
- that Maurice was CONVICTED of harassing him
- which was true; but was it correct / just / fair / justified or the result of corruption as virtually everything that came Maurice’s way
- that the Restraining Order was amended [note the above zero difference between the original and the changed order]
- that he was finding him in New Zealand
- that he was looking for a Christchurch based solicitor
- that he was gone to New Zealand to “escape the corruption of South Wales Police”
On 03 November 2010 XX complained about
- “inaccurate and disturbing information”
- “My children do not like seeing “WANTED: Dead or Alive” posters with my picture on them strewn over the internet.
What came first:
- Maurice’s children having to visit him in prison and Caswell Clinic courtesy of XX’ “brain damage diagnosis” or
- XX’ children seeing “Dead or Alive posters”?
Over to you, dear jury members: who’s guilty of what crime?