Page 447 - tmp

2.4.2
General Principles Charges for any offences may be included in the same file with the same Unique Reference
Number (URN) if those charges:
(i) Are founded on the same facts, or: -

(ii) Form, or are a part of a series of, offences of the same or a similar character. As a result, case files
containing charges which are not linked in either of the ways mentioned above will need to be split
into separate files, each with a different URN.
Organisation: -

In dispute to the Organisation role in the respondent’s pursuit for a convection for organising illegal raves, the
applicant has not adduced no evidence in support of such a claim, I submitted a plea of innocents as for sure I
know that I am innocent and because of that reason, there is no truthful evidence relating to the wrongful
accusations that I find my self defending my character towards, this case leaves me every day of my life
knowing that I never organised any event sighted in the respondent bundle leaving me suffering the
consequences and if the allegations were true I believe the police intelligence would be able to prove some of the
following as they have not got the following:

 No evidence of flyers,
 No evidence of breaches of the licensing act.
 No evidence of promotion on Social Networking Sites
 No evidence of Sound equipment sited within the Antisocial Behaviour Order (ASBO) event
dates being used for private reasons, neither seized under self commercial gain.
 No evidence of Video footage proving any origination or delegation roles.
 No evidence of forensics.
 No evidence of trespass.
 No evidence of Voice recordings.
 No evidence of a past duration of time, relating to any arrest of my person of a similar natured
offence.
 No evidence of and therefore a complete absinth of first hand oral evidence of victims.
 This complete absinth also includes no police PNB note books, for all dates wrongfully accused
and sited within the Antisocial Behaviour Order (ASBO) application.
 Not to forget the complete disappearance of all CAD related emergency 999 / 101 calls, that I
am in pursuit of disclosure towards, that do relate to the audio voice recordings that have been
said to have been destroyed by police, them emergency 999 / 101 call voice recordings are
governed by United Kingdom and continental legalisation and Standard Functional
Specifications for Law Enforcement Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Systems standards
protected by communication standard operating procedures “SOP” and in all incidents should
not be destroyed when they are part of an ongoing trial or appeal and this is to include, the
commence of a Proven verdict otherwise known as a convection as them files should remain
intact for up to 50 years after.

Hearsay I challenge the following points of concern: -

The respondent when seeking pursuit of the Asbo application that was applied at the lower court in conjunction
to their powers, so for the respondent to educe an application notice of (Hearsay Evidence under Civil
Proceeding) Rule 1999.
The applicant took dispute to the legal factors of such a hearsay notice and declined the application.
The reason for the dispute was and is that the respondent is relying on the whole presedent of their case solely
being based on hearsay evidence, with no substance of first hand evidence and a complete disappearance of civil
person(s) under oath supplying oral evidence, in turn no VPS witness, this does also include any other support of
key materials that would aid in any convection as evidence.
The notice to rely solely on hearsay was put before the judge on the 11/09/2014 and 30/10/2014 to Highbury
Corner Magistrates Court this was challenged but was allowed by the judge sitting at the lower court. How can
anyone stand a fair trial when no witnesses can be called? And all of the civil witness statements, not being
signed by the witness themselves.
6
439