Page 634 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

The Appellant questions the accuracy and truthfulness of
the statements, CADS etc served in support of the above.
The Appellant questions why some of the CAD reports
have been redacted. The Appellant believes that the
CAD's may well confirm the names of the real
organisers, vehicle registrations etc that will confirm no
vehicle belonging to the Appellant being inside the
venue. The Appellant also questions the chronological
sequence of the CAD reports due to the time stamps.
CAD Num Date Time Page
CAD 2637 07/06/2014 08:18 Page 191 to 195

CAD 2672 07/06/2014 08:16 Page 196 to 198

CAD 3005 07/06/2014 09:22 Page 203 to 205

CAD 3037 07/06/2014 09:20 Page 179 to 183
CAD 10481 07/06/2014 22:47 Page 233 to 237

CAD 10506 07/06/2014 22:44 Page 238 to 241

The Appellant believes that some of the complainants
are police officers and no civilians. The Appellant
believes that some of the Cads' may relate to completely
different areas but are being added incorrectly and linked
to Progress Way.
2
419,
In the interests of a fair hearing the Appellant requests
all Cad's cross linked and referred to should be served
in an unedited format. All Cad's that do refer to a
different location should be removed from the
Respondent's bundle as they are too prejudicial.
The Appellant will state that this is yet another
example of the police manipulating the evidence to
paint him in a bad light. The Appellant strongly
believes that the police are presenting their evidence to
persuade the court that he was an organiser of this
event.
The statements presented are unreliable and
prejudicial. The Appellant will state that he cannot
possibly have a fair hearing as a result to a breach of
regulations inclusive of his Human Rights one of
which is article six his right to having a fair hearing
will be violated due to the way the Respondent is
selecting editing and presenting Cad's. The Appellant
specifically requests that the redacted CADS be served
unedited or excluded from the Respondent's bundle.
The Appellant will state that he is being deliberately
targeted by the police as was his younger brother.
Neither organised any event at Progress Way.