Page 662 - tmp

yet people believe the police in everything they say.

I know you have said PC G's current occupation; I
can assure you it would have no bearing on this
matter whatsoever.

Maybe I see it another way his occupation is Head of
Criminal Justice, Centre for Social Justice, cant you
see the irony in this he is trying to find justice for
people, but what he did in this case was never
justice at his own hands, the DPS never served
justice for my son, yet they knew PC G had lied in
this whole case, and that PC G took it to the courts
and again never told the truth and perjury himself
two times in a court of law. PC G seems to think this
is acceptable he still applied for his job roll where he
is working to make sure justice is fair for all. I am
sure if he had admitted to breaking the law in what
he did he would not be in the position he is in now I
do find this very relevant that is how I feel and my
son does.

Best Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Jamie.Newman@met.pnn.police.uk
[mailto:Jamie.Newman@met.pnn.police.uk]
Sent: 07 August 2017 09:44
To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk
Subject: RE: Our meeting today.

Morning Lorraine,

Firstly, apologies for my delayed reply! I had intended to
reply much sooner.

I think I’m correct in saying that the necessity for your
son’s arrest was associated with PC G’s uncertainty as to
the address provided. This is something I’ll discuss in the
report.

Can I ask, from where did you get the impression that
your son’s name was not in PC G’s pocketbook?

To reiterate, I’d be more than happy share documents
with you at the end of the investigation. As per the
Police Reform Act, subject to the harm test. Was there
any particular reason you’d want them sooner? I expect
the investigation to conclude in October incidentally.

I was intending on giving PC G three weeks, what are
your thoughts on that?

Re PC G’s current occupation, I can assure you it would
have no bearing on this matter whatsoever.

3640