Page 1030 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

Def.
I have just got given possession of some new info from
Facebook, that is not in the bundles before the court, but
should be. It shows information that suggests that Mr.
Cordell never organised the accused events and that other
people did, nothing to do with the defendant.
DJ:
Interim ASBO made case by being well?
Nah!
DEF:
This evidence shows that rave on
6th 7th 8th June 2014
was nothing to do with w/d. Miss Cordell mother has
carried out her own investigations as she was not happy
with results of investigating officer / so/s and now this is
a large bundle to get through this late.
If the material can get viewed by the DJ and then if
(Possible metered) then DJ can decide on the
admissibility of the evidence.
DJ.
Producing material, however relevant, 10 minutes before
a trial is not acceptable.
Met Police: 1st Statement
DEF.
Has applied for an ASBO Order and Inspector Hamill is
to lead.
Witness 1—Inspector Hamill—11.15am
Statement in tab 9-lead
DEF XEX.
Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but
never got done by me.
The rave was taking place indoors.
Officer have not spoken to the owners of the venue.
I only see the D on the Saturday in the evening of the 7th
Saturday.
Officer did not go inside; the gates were closed.
I saw no vehicles.
D’S Van registration got known to the police, but I would
not know.
There were vehicles parked, but I did not notice whether
the defendant's van was there.
He was not aware of people squatting in that building.
R v Cordell -- 2 Hearsay of officers continues.
D @ venue but officer is not present here today.
There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that
day.
Phone calls received were not relating to Crown
Road Rave on that day.
On the day in question phone calls related to this:
particular, rave. (Progress Way.)