The WOG has spoken on TV – She came to plunder, a typical ‘Wighly Oriental Gangster’
Well done Prince William
This war monger’s number 10 side kick, back in the 90s, is starting to influence me. He is absolutely right over this gold digger –15% of the over 60s supported the 2 hour gibberish TV program, made simply for the cash, while 65% of the young and less well informed under 65s opposed any criticism
LEST WE FORGET SOUTH WALES POLICE AGENDA
This fabricated Caswell Clinic medical report was leaked supposedly only for the clandestine 2nd Dec 2009 Cardiff Crown Court, hearing when the police were applying, in my absence and without legal representation, to have me locked away in Ashworth prison, for life, without even a jury trial. While I still breath I will expose the thoroughly corrupt welsh police reliant in the day to day nefarious of its of its so called ‘judiciary’.
EXTRACT from a blackmailed welsh level 12 police psychiatrist being played in a cinema near you
Dear HM Crown Prosecutor,
Apologies, I overlooked sending this enclosed 8th March 2021 letter to you at the time and copying in my 3rd March 2021 letter to our Crimes Commissioner for Somerset. Copies enclosed.
I spoke to South Wales Police Professional Standards Department, this week, who deny even knowledge of my letters to Alun Cairns MP that triggered the welsh police to telephone MPs tha Would therefore not be released from prison as already arranged by HM Parole Board.
Mr Evans, it stinks, does it not?
Just how more incestuous can the Welsh police be?
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 – INFORMATION REQUEST
Thank you for your request for information about:
SUBMISSIONS TO THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND JUDICIAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
Your request was received on 07/03/2021 and is being handled under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Your query has been given the reference 0020
In some circumstances a fee may be payable and if that is the case I will let you know. A fees notice will be issued to you, and you will be required to pay before I will proceed to deal with your request.
You will receive the information requested within 20 working days unless the Council does not hold the information or there is a reason for it to be withheld. I will write to you in any event.
If you have any requirements regarding the format any information should be supplied in, e.g. the language to be used, audio, large print and so on, then if you have not already done so please let me know.
If you have any queries or concerns then please do not hesitate to contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
Further information about your rights is also available from the Information
Information Commissioner’s Office – Wales
Second Floor, Churchill House
Churchill Way, Cardiff CF10 2HH
029 20678400 / Fax:029 20678399
Information Governance Officer
Vale of Glamorgan Council / Cyngor Bro Morgannwg
HM Crown Prosecution Service
8th March 2021
The Proverbial Sticking to the Blanket
It may be of no surprise for you to know that during my desperate requests for help from MPs in Devon, Somerset, Hampshire, Dorset and at least four in South Wales i, in relation to the 2019 G4S HMP Parc robbery for my property for the South Wales Police and having already acquired the orchestrated thefts of G4S controlled Caswell Clinic medical records specifically sent by Dr Gaynor Jones to me in 2018, to me, in HMP Parc, I received a police telephone call , yesterday, indicating nothing will be done about any of the thefts.
Remember, my January 2020 many hours with Welsh police in Taunton ‘going through the motions’ of taking down my complaints under the pretence recovery would be expedited, all, has now proven quite futile and a waste of my time. The Welsh detective inspector, on the phone yesterday, stated he had no knowledge of my property stolen by G4S but knew about John graham’s stolen prison correspondence I had tried to send , in May 2019!
But those thefts were on the list in my letters of complaint for the police professional standards department in South Wales. It stinks, does it not?
Meantime, you will be aware that both the Avon and Somerset and Dorset police have stolen my Volvo and Citroen for my legal papers within and my Volvo, stolen by one of their local hoods in Blandford, was for the very same reasons.
YOU, of course, have the power and control of the contents of my property stolen in the three cars and post and prison cells in both HMP Cardiff and HMP Parc do you not as, primarily, you all needed my legal papers following the welsh police multitude of conspiracie resulting in 423 failed malicious criminal prosecutions culminating in my vindictive two year prison term handed down by some Welsh judge bimbo, in the name of Tracy Lloyd Clark, as corrupt as so many I hav so far encountered in that barbaric tribe of villains with their inept hatred of anything English.
But you, my own English CPS, appears to be also acting ‘hand in glove’ with the welsh authorities by your refusing relevant and reasonable disclosure of evidence in my favour while the lying welsh authorities, as the policeman on the phone, yesterday, recounted, knew all about John Graham’s bag of ‘anthrax’ from my 2019 Cardiff prison
Cell. He stated, quite succinctly, he knew nothing of the bags of purported ‘heroin’ I had been sending to the HM Secretary for Wales at the same time, Alun Cairns MP and yet it was that , was it not, that had caused the drug dogs needing to be called in for 32 minutes while I sat in wheelchair locked up in the prison shower unit?
It stinks, does it not?
i). Are you ever going to disclose the evidence and motives of each culprit in the above police arranged thefts?
ii) Are you going to disclose same from the named participants, below, responsible for my three vehicle thefts?
iii). Do I have to file the tort, instead with the Taunton court, this week?
iv). or do I simply go back to my MPs for help about this escalating criminal conduct now that one, at least, is being prejudiced now his or her mail is being tampered with?
Avon and Somerset Police Commissioner
3rd March 2021
Dolmans, solicitors South Wales Police Fraud
I have had no response from you following my complaint on the above matter last month or
was it the month before that.
I enclose a follow up website article highlighting the new court ordered evidence of 2020,
ten years after the trial revealing that the South Wales Police conspiracy incorporated our
own Avon and Somerset police officers which is why I wrote to you also for help.
I contacted your police HQ today but not confident either the matters I raised with you ,
concerning my sending purported heroin to to HM Secretary of State for Wales or the
enclosed will be investigated
Maurice J Kirk BVSc
Mult-police force campaign to get me off UK roads, anything to hamper my civil claims against the vindictive South Wales Police. They have unlawfully confiscated my cars to purloin my legal papers.
(TAUNTON DISTRICT REGISTRY)
B E T W E E N: MAURICE JOHN KIRK BVSc Claimant
– and –
CHIEF CONSTABLE OF AVON AND
SOMERSET POLICE 1st Defendant
GEREC LIMITED 2nd Defendant
Weston Recovery Ltd 3rd Defendant
Chief Constable of Dorset Constabulary 4th Defendant
ROUGH FIRST DRAFT OF PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
- This is a claim pursuant to section 7(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998 in addition to remedies already simultaneously existing in domestic statute and common law.
- The 1st Defendant is and was at all material times the Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Police and the Avon and Somerset Police Service is and was at all material times a public authority within section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in that it is responsible for law enforcement on behalf of the state within the Avon and Somerset Police Authority area.
- The 1st Defendant is further responsible for the torts committed by Police Constables under his direction or control in the performance or purported performance of his functions under section 88 of the Police Act 1996.
- The 2nd Defendant is and was at all material times a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act 2006, Company registration no. 10458443 and is vicariously liable for the torts committed by its servants and agents in the performance or purported performance if their company duties.
- The 2nd Defendant runs a car pound at 2A Dunball Industrial Estate, Bridgwater, Somerset, TA6 4TP and retains vehicles seized by Police Constables of the 1st Defendant and at all material times was acting as a servant and/or agent for the 1st Defendant.
- The details of the contract between the 1st Defendant and 2nd Defendant are at present unknown until after Disclosure herein.
- It is not known whether or not the 2nd Defendant is a public authority within section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 until after Disclosure herein, although it appears to be performing public functions on behalf of the 1st Defendant.
- The Claimant is and was at all material times the owner and entitled to possession of a Volvo Estate vehicle registration number AO 55 VCD and vehicle registration number .
- On or about 2020 at within the County of Somerset, Police Constables of the 1st Defendant wrongfully and unlawfully seized a Volvo Estate vehicle registration number AO 55 VCD and thereafter conveyed it or caused it to be conveyed and detained at the 2nd Defendant’s vehicle car compound at 2A Dunball Industrial Estate, Bridgwater, Somerset, TA6 4TP.
- On or about 2020 at within the County of Somerset, Police Constables of the 1st Defendant wrongfully and unlawfully seized a vehicle registration number and thereafter conveyed it or caused it to be conveyed to and detained at the 2nd Defendant’s vehicle car compound at 2A Dunball Industrial Estate, Bridgwater, Somerset, TA6 4TP.
- In respect of the Volvo Estate vehicle registration number AO 55 VCD, this vehicle was eventually released to the Claimant at the 2nd Defendant’s car pound at Dunball on or about 2020, after repeated requests for its release made by the Claimant to servants and/or agents of the 1st and/or 2nd Defendant at the said car pound, which were initially wrongfully and unlawfully refused.
- In respect of the vehicle registration number , this vehicle is still wrongfully and unlawfully detained in the custody and control of the 1st and 2nd Defendant at the 2nd Defendant’s car pound at Dunball, after repeated requests for its release by the Claimant to servants and/or agents of the 1st and/or 2nd Defendant at the said car pound, , which have all been wrongfully and unlawfully refused.
- Further, the Claimant sent letter before claim to the 1st and 2nd Defendants in which he specifically requested the return of the Volvo Estate vehicle registration number AO 55 VCD to him.
- The said Police Constables were at all material times under the direction and control of the 1st Defendant in the performance or purported performance of their functions.
- The servants and/or agents of the 2nd Defendant were at all material times under the direction and control of the 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant in the performance or purported performance if their company duties.
- In the premises the Police Constables under the direction or control of the 1st Defendant and the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant converted and/or wrongfully interfered with both vehicles to their own use and control to the detriment of the Claimant.
- Further, the said Police Constables and/or the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant conduct amounted to harassment of the Claimant, contrary to sections 1 and 3 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, as the said Police Constables and/or the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant had at all material times known or ought to have known, and they have thereby caused the Claimant anxiety and distress.
- Further the Claimant alleges and avers that his Convention rights have been infringed.
- The Claimant was entitled to the right to “peaceful enjoyment of his possessions” under schedule 1, protocol 1 ECHR of the Human Rights Act 1998.
- The Police Constables of the 1st Defendant and/or the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant failed to respect the Claimant’s right to “the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions” in breach of schedule 1, Part II, The First Protocol, article 1 ECHR for the reasons set out in paragraphs 4 to 8 herein.
- By reason of the matters aforesaid, the Claimant has suffered damage as a result of the actions of the Police Constables under the direction or control of the 1st Defendant and/or the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant.
- The Claimant has been very greatly distressed by the breach of the wrongful seizure and continued detention of his vehicles without reasonable and probably cause or lawful excuse and has suffered severe shock and mental anguish thereby.
- Further, in the premises the said conduct by the Police Constables of the 1st Defendant and/or the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant was arbitrary, oppressive and/or unconstitutional and the Claimant claims aggravated and/or exemplary damages.
- The Claimant repeats the facts and matters set out in paragraphs 8 to 18 herein.
- The said Police Constables and/or the servants and/or agents of the 1st Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant would have known full well that the Claimant was the lawful owner of the vehicles in question and the car pound should have immediately released both vehicles on proof of ownership and valid insurance being provided by the Claimant.
- Further, pursuant to section 35A of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the Claimant is entitled to and claims interest on the amount found due to him at such rate and for such period as this Honourable Court may think fit.
- And the Claimant claims jointly and severally against the 1st and/or 2nd Defendant.
(a) An Order for the delivery up of the Volvo Estate vehicle registration number AO 55 VCD to the Claimant under section 3(2)(a) of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 against the 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant.
(b) Damages for conversion and/or wrongful interference with goods under section 3(2)(c) of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 and/or harassment under section 3(2) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 on the footing of aggravated and/or exemplary damages against the 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant.
Further or in the alternative:
(c) An Order for Replevin for the return to the Claimant of a Volvo Estate vehicle registration number AO 55 VCD against the 1st and 2nd Defendants.
(d) Damages under section 8(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 for wrongful interference with “the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions” in breach of schedule 1, Part II, The First Protocol, article 1 ECHR of the said Act against the 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant.
(e) Interest pursuant to section 35A of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the Claimant is entitled to and claims interest on the amount found due to him at such rate and for such period as this Honourable Court may think fit.
- The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Dated March 2021 MAURICE JOHN KIRK B Vet Sc
Defendant Denied Relevant Disclosure Contrary to Article 6 of ECHR
- For nearly two years I have, under Criminal Procedural Rules, been trying to extract from relevant authorities, in both South Wales and England the evidence, under your control to, that will once again demonstrate this insulting conspiracy was another hatched by the South Wales Police.
- To not disclose the crucial evidence first concocted on F wing of HMP Cardiff in May/June2019 by ‘in house’ police officers, is an abuse of process and flagrant criminal conduct when trying hide the truth.
- Are You or are you not giving me the disclosure, to which I am entitled, already applied for in the light of both CPS (Wales) and Dolmans, solicitors, for the South Wales Chief Constable defending my 1CF03361 machine -gun conspiracy damages claim, fearful of the consequences if I should get it?
- Following the failed malicious prosecution, T20097445 ‘trading in machine-guns police conspiracy, that only needed my pre written witness statement for an obvious acquittal, is again needed for this case.
- BUT neither Dolmans nor CPS (Wales) will release to me my 64-page defence explanation (case BS614159), of course, just as you lot are continuing to refuse to disclose the audit trail of my correspondence to and from at least five Members of Parliament including Alun Cairns MP, then HM Secretary of State for Wales while I was in three welsh prisons. Remember, as a MAPPA victim, ‘authority’ even kept a log on the times I visited the lavatory or had a shower.
- MPs were told by the South Wales Police they were supposed to be receiving, had prison staff not blocked my mail both in and out of HMP Parc and HMP Cardiff, my letters stuffed with ‘bags’ of what the prison believed to be heroin from my prison cells.
- Are you going to disclose or not or do I have to move on to PLAN K where there may be a risk in a breach in public order from above?
Maurice J Kirk BVSc