Page 633 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

he had only non-working speakers inside his van and
no other component parts for a sound system.
The Appellant will state that he did not commit any
criminal offences on 25th May 2014. The Appellant
will state that the premises were not broken into as
alleged but were being legally used as a home. The
Appellant will state that the occupation was legal by
virtue of section 144 LAPSO notice being clearly
displayed and this is within the law.
The Appellant will state that no Licensing
authorisation was required as there was no music being
played or intended to be played.
The Appellant will state that he did not engage in any
acts of Anti-social behaviour as defined by section 1 of
the Act.
The Appellant requests disclosure of the CCTV of the
persons breaking into the premises, the CRIS and
details of any persons arrested for criminal damage /
burglary.
The Appellant will state that he did not break any laws
on 25th May 2014, nor did he engage in any acts of
anti-social behaviour.
1
418,
The Appellant will state that the description of events on
this day has been altered and recorded in a biased way
towards him.
The Appellant requests full details of the original
intelligence report inputted on 25th May 2014 and also
reasons why there was a need to update this report on
19th June 2014. The Intelligence report should not be
allowed in evidence under the hearsay rules as it is
prejudicial to him. The report has been amended.
(A) PROGRESS WAY 6th, 7TH AND 8TH JUNE 2014
The Appellant disputes any involvement whatsoever in
the event at Progress Way.
The Appellant accepts that he approached the gates on
the 08th June 2014 with a view to dropping off house
keys to a friend that had been left at his house on an
earlier date. The Appellant did not enter the premises /
venue at Progress Way.
The Appellant did not provide any sound equipment,
speakers, generators to any person inside Progress Way.
The Appellant will state that he is being wrongly accused
of organising this rave / event. The Appellant will state
his brother is also wrongly named as being involved. The
Appellant will state that his brother was severely
disabled at the time and in a wheelchair following a very
serious road traffic accident which the police are aware
off.