Page 1653 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

32. However I do understand and take note, that all resident parties contained within the
respondent’s bundle, were held on single occasions and in places of residence and were
not held as a running commercial business by myself or by any other to my knowledge. I
have also read that any person is entitled to have a house or resident party in private air
under the licensing act 2003 or where they reside. To my understanding, each accused
incident in the respondent’s bundle is a place of residence and was in fact different people
holding their own private parties at their places of residence.
33. Aloe there may have been complaints in regard to issues of concern about them house
parties I was not the occupier of any of the accused locations; neither was I the hire of
equipment and surely not the organizer.
34. I was establishing a hire company around the dates of the accused events and have
provided evidence of the work I had been committing myself to. I was not trading at the
time and whenever hiring out equipment I do with due care and responsibility, however I
do not accept responsibility for other people's actions when hiring out such equipment in
good faith. I do take legal action for any persons when breaking my terms and conditions.
I do not hire out equipment to any person without being in the constraints of the law and
in good business practice or without the correct ID.
35. On one occasion I did hire out a sound system in good faith on a pro Bono basis, this
being of the understanding that no laws were being broken and as a Ltd company acting
responsible. I know that I should not be liable for them persons actions when hiring out
equipment and having the correct protocols in place as I clearly do.
36. I do not feel that it is right for the respondent to obtain criminal punishments such as
section 63 of the crime and disorder act 1994 and for that section to be then imposed
against my freedom of movement and many other Human Right that have been breached
by being pro-claimed under wrongful civil proceedings, as for a multitude of incorrect
procedures and legislation that I have occurred, for instance I have no previous nature
offences of a similar sort as required by law when applying a standalone Asbo on a
person’s statue, as I do feel I should of have had the right to challenge the allegations
under a true Criminal investigation, especially when
749,
37. referring to the organisation of illegal raves as the respondent has clearly headlined the
offence to be.
RE: SIMON CORDELL V. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE
METROPOLIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPOSITION OF AN ASBO - 26TH
SEPTEMBER 2016 AT 10:00 AM
I write even further with concerns regarding: Your issues of concern dated 08/09/2016 that
was received by email at the time:
06:00pm,
So as towards the letter drafted by yourself and amended by myself is the response as detailed
below, with the listed concerns.
1. I understand that the correct protocols for the offences I am being accused of should be
carried out in a manner to be of a high professional standard as required by law, so for me to
be able to defend myself.
2. I am therefore not happy with the issues of police corruption not being addressed, by you
self and all other legal persons, as I know I cannot stand a fair trial or appeal without them
issues being rectified first and this is why the amendments have been made to your letter to
Sally Gilchrest Hurst.
3. I have suffered since 2014 for conditions that have been wrongfully imposed upon myself
and still awaiting an appeal.