Page 723 - 6. 2016 Diary 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

This is an updated statement further to the statement of Mr Simon Cordell Dated 24th day of
February.
In reference to the 12th Jan 2013 Canary Wharf
• This date in question has been add to the applicants bundle as a reference as to the
Limitation Act 1980. Which states a case must be applied six months prior from the date of
the incident. Please take note to Mr Simon Cordell’s last statement dated the 24/02/2015; he
was in fact taken to The Royal London Hospital.
In reference to the 07th April 2013, Blakey’s House
07/04/2013 = In Steve Elsmore Statement dated 11/08/2014
In regard to 07/04/2013 = Please read Mr Simon Cordell’s last statement dated the
24/02/2015. He states that he did not attended any premises on this date to rave, Mr Cordell
did not involve himself in the organization of any illegal rave this was his friends housing
estate and was on a Sunday, nor did he supply equipment on said date.
Mr Simon Cordell will State; “that he was not rude to police, but he did feel like he could
not even go out for the day with some of his friends, without getting stopped and searched by
members of the police.
It is also noted that the caller was very clear that they saw a flat screen TV being put into Mr
Cordell’s van, which is confusing to why when the police searched the van they found no TV,
but did in fact find two of his off road motor bikes, which is not included in Steve Elsmore
statement. The police did checks on Mr Simon Cordell’s
Off Road Motor Bikes but this is also not stated, but should show’s up on the seizer notice, as
Mr Simon Cordell did ask the police office to take careful note of the two off road motor
bikes, as due to the high value of them.
Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did get a bit upset when the police said they were
going to seize his van, as he did have insurance in place to be able to drive the van in
question, but there was an error on the MID database. Miss Cordell had been trying to help
her son resolve the issue concerning his insurance policy not showing on the mid data base
alongside with members of their local police force and his insurance company KGM too,
together they had tried to work out why Mr Simon Cordell was showing as uninsured. There
was information noted as intelligence on the police National Computer stating this I had
asked the police to check on their systems due to this, but they would not they just wanted to
seize Mr Simon Cordell’s van without checking, so he knew he was being wrongfully
accused at this point, as he had done nothing wrong and he did have insurance to be driving
and had paid a lot of money for his insurance. He states he did not get upset in the manner
that the police have said he did and that he does not mean to come across as rude to police. In
this case he was just trying to explain the error on the system.
723
498,
STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc
In addition, the prosecution offered no evidence in respect of the charges that were brought
even though they were reliant on police witnesses. Mr Simon Cordell had been wrongfully
arrested for not having insurance when he was insured to drive. He also did not cause any
Anti-Social Behaviour on this date in question.
There are no CAD’s for this date, but yet they was meant to be, a CAD referring to the
pacific details that should be relating to a person stating, that they believed a burglary was in
progress and of the 999 caller stating that they had seen a person who was putting a flat
screen TV into Mr Simon Cordell’s van.
In reference to 24th May 2013 police station