Page 1640 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

Dear Josie I do not understand why it is not in my best interests for you to serve the
suggested amendments that I made in relation towards the letter you proposed sending to Ms
Sally Gilchrist.
The reason I do not understand is:
1. Mr Morris advice on
4th April 2016
was the same as what I had explained to
yourself when the case had started dated
12th September 2014
as received on receipt by yourself and by
method of email’s and them emails referred to
the respondent's application of an Asbo order
quoting “That a case should not rely, solely, on
hearsay” as mine seems to do by the police
officers.
Most of the hearsay got reported to be third
party and therefore carry less weight.
2. I want to show the true facts about the case
as I am the one who is suffering because of
untrue cut-and-paste facts that represent the
basics of the respondent's case and that singed
evidence being off fabricated police statements,
as detailed in the amendments towards your
letter to Sally Gilchrist, whom is already in
receipt of such evidence but refuses to act upon
such intelligence in accordance off the law and
you advise me to ignore this even low I suffer.
3. I understand a lot of the matters that should
get dealt with at court will be.
4. I still argue for a speedy and fair trial: and
feel that when a judge asks the respondent to
reply by a set date such as the
01/08/2016
as the judge HHJ PAWLAK has ordered for it
to happen then it must.
5. The respondent should do so within the time
duration as dated
01/09/2016
and agreed with the judge and then received
with the correct response, as has not happened
6. I was awaiting the reply since
00/02/2016
from an ongoing civil application that got dated
13th August 2014
so, to get a fair trial.
7. After waiting on the
01/09/2016
with no response I waited till the
02/09/2016