Page 638 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 2nd Half

2. Tynemouth Dr, Progress way Distance as the Crow
Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 1.700 Miles
X. 534375 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. 198125 Transport: 1.808 Miles
3. 899 Great Progress way Distance as the Crow
Cambridge Road, X. 534380 Flies: 1.354 Miles
Enfield Y. 195513 Distance by Land
X. 534396, Transport: 1.450 Miles
Y. 197692
4. Albury Walk Progress way Distance as the Crow
X. 535375 X. 534380 Flies: 4.105 Miles
Y. 202125 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Transport: 4.619 Miles
5. Crown Road Progress way Distance as the Crow
Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 0.751 Miles
X. 534960 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. 196240 Transport: 1.021 Miles
6. 93 Broadlands Progress way Distance as the Crow
Ave, Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 0.874 Miles
X. 534981 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. 196790 Transport: 1.537 Miles
7. Lincoln Road, Progress way Distance as the Crow
Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 0.302 Miles
X. 534152 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. 195940 Transport 0.372 Miles
8. Woodstock Progress way Distance as the Crow
Crescent, Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 0.201 Miles
X. 534657 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. 195453 Transport 0.795 Miles
9. Leighton Road, Progress way Distance as the Crow
Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 0.231 Miles
X. 534144 Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. 195627 Transport 0.641 Miles
10. Mayfield Crescent, Progress way Distance as the Crow
Enfield X. 534380 Flies: 0.239 Miles
X. Y. 195513 Distance by Land
Y. Transport 0.692 Miles
The above table lists some of the locations that are from the CADs giving
distance in mileage, the appellant’s contention in relation to the 999 calls
made to police by members of the public is that those calls, cad numbers
are of fabricated evidence. Either the police have been making calls from
different various locations, with one location in particular, “outside of the
gates to Progress Way. The proposition advanced by the appellant, in
response to part of his submission to the court is that the material contained
in the CADS has been fabricated by police officers. In the prosecutions
view, patently they have explained that this would be absurd behaviour of
police officers while on duty, for this reason. There is such a large volume
of material contained in the Asbo application created by Steve Elsmore and
other officers that this would require an extraordinary conspiracy on the
part of the police to achieve. In the applicant’s defence this is not