Page 509 - tmp

8/6/2017 Print
understand why any solicitor would encourage me to go to trial or appeal and
not draft out the police corruption that you can clearly see in turn making me
accept the clearly fabricated evidence and wrongful conditions that I know have
been imposed on myself under section 63 with no trespass taking place, this
being said as for any of the incidents contained in the Asbo and with you
knowing the true facts of them incidents being contained in private air. There
is also that of the clearly fabricated evidence I am standing against as for
sure any solicitor works in Co Hurst towards the understanding of noun precedent in
relation to the weight of any evidence put towards a client. I am concerned
about the case, relying sole
on hearsay by police. Is this correct in procedure? However I do understand and
take note, that all resident parties contained within the respondents bundle,
were held on single occasions and in places of residence and were not
held as a running commercial business by myself or by any other to my
knowledge. I have also read that any person is entitled to have a house or
resident party in private air under the licensing act 2003 or where they
reside. To my understanding, each
accused incident in the respondents bundle is a place of residence and was in
fact different people holding their own private parties at their places
of residence. Aloe there may have been complaints in regards to issues of
concern about them house parties I was not the occupier of any of
the accused locations; neither was I the hire of equipment and surely
not the organizer. I was establishing a hire company around the dates of the
accused events and have provided evidence of the work I had been committing
myself to. I was not trading at the time and whenever hiring
out equipment I do with due care and responsibility, however I do not accept
responsibility for other people’s actions when hiring out such equipment in
good faith. I do take legal action for any persons when breaking my terms and
conditions. I do not hire out equipment to any person without being
in the constraints of the law and in good business practice or without the
correct ID. On one occasion I did hire out a sound system in good faith on a
pro Bono basis, this being of the
understanding that no laws were being broken and as a Ltd
company acting responsible. I know that I should not be liable for them persons
actions when hiring out equipment and having the correct protocols in place as
I clearly do. I do not feel that it is right for the respondent to obtain
criminal punishments such as section 63 of the crime and disorder act 1994 and
for that section to be then imposed against my freedom of movement and many
other Human Right that have been breached by being pro-claimed under wrongful
civil proceedings, as for a multitude of incorrect procedures and legislation
that I have occurred, for instance I have no previous nature offences of a
similar sort as required by law when applying a stand alone Asbo on a persons
statue, as I do feel I should of have had the right to challenge the
allegations under a true Criminal investigation, especially when referring to
the organisation of illegal raves as the respondent has clearly headlined the
offence to be. RE: SIMON CORDELL V. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE
METROPOLIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPOSITION OF AN ASBO – 26TH SEPTEMBER 2016 AT
10:00 AM I write even further with concerns regarding: Your issues of concern
dated 08/09/2016 that was received by email at the time:
06:00pm, So as towards the letter drafted by yourself and
amended by myself is the response as detailed below, with the listed concerns.
1. I understand that the correct protocols for the offences I am being accused
of should be carried out in a manner to be of a high professional standard as
required by law, so for me to be able to defended myself. 2. I
am therefore not happy with the issues of police corruption not being
addressed, by you self and all other legal persons, as I know I can
not stand a fair trial or appeal without them issues being rectified first and
this is why the amendments have been made to your letter
to Sally Guill Hurst. 3. I have suffered since
2014 for conditions that have been wrongfully
imposed upon myself and still awaiting an appeal. 1.1 As my acting solicitor
about:blank 3/4
2487