Page 540 - 2. 2013 New 26-05-21 No Table

and also
May 2013
they were delivered to Marks wholesale which is a big shop, so how did they get to the address the
parties were held in I am sure Marks wholesale would have storage space and it does seem very funny
that they would move items that were ordered to sell at one of his large shops?
3. There has never been a list of items that Mr petal said was taken in May just an invoice so is Mr
Petal saying that all the items on the list was taken at the party in
May 2013
4. So far, we do not even know the list of items that were taken in
Feb 2013
and seeing at Mr petal seems to be using the same invoice for both dates there should be 2 lists of
items that were taken
5. what was the cost of the damage to the building in
Feb 2013
as it seems from the emails Mr Petal has listed from his insurance, they have put both claims into one
which in fact would then go over to the date Simon hired his sound system out in
May 2013
6. Why did the insurance company does not pay the
Feb 2013
claim out till after the claim in
May 2013?
Why did they only pay out after the?
May 2013
claim is it due that someone was arrested, and they could put both claims over to the court case of
Simon. As if you look at the dates of the insurance part it does not make any sense as the last date
shows April 2013 yet it says they are paying out both claims, how could they pay out both claims
when the party in May had not even happened yet. Or is it the case there was a next party after
Feb 2013
and before
May 2013.
7. What was the costs of damage to the building in Feb 2013 and the value of the items taken.
8. What was the damage to the building in
May 2013
and the value of the items taken.
316,
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