Page 338 - tmp

In short how could the property have been stolen in May 2013 if it had already been stolen in Feb 2013 as
the invoice is the same?

Also the damage to the building from Feb 2013 seems to have been added to the costs to the May 2013
but yet Simon has not been charged with the party in Feb 2013.

It seems they have mixed both cases together and Simon is taking the blame for all of it within the costs.

The Crown does need to give us all the information to the Feb 2013 case including pictures so we can see
ourselves the damage to the building and they need to tell us if anyone was changed in Feb 2013 and
what was the outcome.

If the crown does not do this then this is an unfair trail they will be holding as to Simon case.

Also we need to see all the insurance claims to see the total costs of damage in Feb 2013 and also for the
claim in May 2013 and the reasons as to why both cases have been linked together by the insurance
company.

Also where is the insurance claim for the items within the warehouse that was meant to have been taken
as so far I can only see a claim for the damage to the building?

Any claim would need to include a list of the items that where taken and would need to be replaced.
Someone cannot just come up with a figure of a cost for items that where taken and so far it seems as if
that has what has been done in both cases Feb 2013 and May 2013.

Lorraine / Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: 28 November 2013 19:54
To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'
Subject: RE: CPS response to secondary disclosure and confirmation of conference

Hi Josey

316