Page 640 - 5. 2015 New 26-05-21 No Table

Please find the attached witness statement of Lorraine Cordell which we will be applying to
introduce as evidence on which we will seek rely. We will make this application to the court
tomorrow.
Yours faithfully,
MICHAEL CARROLL & CO

10
The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue:
505. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Public complaint by your son Simon Cordell /
Page Numbers: 1851,1852
1851
From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: 09 March 2015 02:21
To: 'Vicki.McQueen@met.pnn.police.uk
Subject: RE: Public complaint by your son Simon Cordell
Dear Victoria McQueen
My son had his appeal on the 05/03/2015 which he won; the judge was not happy with the
police officer as it
was proved he did in fact lie, the judge did in fact tell the police office not to leave the court
building. And in fact
we did not show all the facts we did have the complaint will need updating to show this
police officer lied to 2
judges and in fact got my son convicted wrongly by lying to the 1st hearing judge and got my
son banned from
driving and points and a fine, and within his statement which the judge noted had not been
dated and the fact
there were no 101 books for the officer for this day. The ticket was also lost by the police that
was issues on the
day the police officer started this which was on the 14/11/2014.
The judge sitting at the court was not happy, and in fact stopped the hearing as he could
clearly see what the
police officer had done. the judges went out and when they came back, they told my son he
had won his case,
the judge then spoke to the CPS about having the real statement and documents from the
police officer that day
and that the audio files needed to stay on file. he also told the CPS he was not happy about
the police officer
and this had to be passed on to the right person. Which the CPS said he would do.
We are not happy about what this officer did and the cost it has caused my son and stress to
his heath, my sons
insurance was going to close his insurance down for no reason only due to what the police
office said, days
making calls to the police stations trying to prove my son did in fact have no tools in his van
on that day, him
having to go to the compound where the van was taken to just so they could call his insurance
company to prove
there were not tools that would have made my son's insurance void, all this due to the police
actions on that day
for no reason why did he need to lie, days going to court and hearing a police officer lie in 2
courts. I will again be