Page 1849 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

case, but the definition of the word rave does make
this illegal and this can clearly be seen from the
Respondent original application bundle.
The inaccurate data that is within the Respondent
original application namely my son’s PNC and
statements of police which is relied on in the
Respondent original application bundle, the large
concern that the Respondent has refused to unedited
the CAD’s and intelligence reports they rely on in
their original application bundle, why there was a
need to update original intelligence reports, why no
CAD reports was included for the 6th June 2014 in
the original application, why there are so many
missing CAD’s, why the police refuse to admit in
the lower court that CAD’s they had in their
original application bundle clearly relates to an
illegal rave in Crown Road and CAD’s from that
have been placed in the Respondent original
application bundle. (Please see freedom of
information request to Enfield council in the
Appellants bundle page 274 to 284 which clearly
shows this) why they refuse to disclose information
held on the police public order unit Scotland Yard
systems and why Steven Elsmore did not ask DS
Val Tanner from the police public order unit in
Scotland Yard to write a statement after he spoke to
her
2
433
why Steven Elsmore deleted emails that was sent to
DS Val Tanner and received from DS Yal Tanner
and he only felt the need to do an updated statement
dated 26/06/2015 in regards to this what did he ask
DS Val Tanner and what was he told?
Why a statement was never asked from, from DS
Chapman of the public order unit Scotland Yard
who when he spoke to Miss Lorraine Cordell on the
phone checked their system and told Miss Lorraine
Cordell that Mr Simon Cordell name was only
listed on their systems once and that was the day he
was arrested on the 19th July 2014, so how Steve
Elsmore can put in his updated statement that the
public Order Unit hold no information about Mr
Simon Cordell and Enfield is beyond me.
Why there are no pocketbooks of any police
officers in the Respondent original application
bundle.
Why the Respondent original application that we
collected on the 23/09/2016 from the solicitor’s
officer that was served by the Respondent in