Page 326 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 3rd Half

Address Empress State Building, 22nd Floor, Lillie Road, London, SW6 1TR
'Setting the bar and upholding standards without fear or favour’
From: Newman Jamie M ‐ HQ Directorate of Professional Standards
Sent: 16 August 2017 12:20
To: 'Lorraine Cordell
lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk
Subject: RE: Our meeting today.
Hello Lorraine,
Many apologies again for my delayed reply, it’s been a busy week or so. I’ve had no response
from PC G, the letter was sent recorded delivery. So far, there’s nothing to say he no longer
resides at the address etc. I’ll keep you updated on that front. As it stands, should PC G
choose to not assist then presently there is little we could do to compel him to provide an
account in the furtherance of the investigation.
3550,
I note all of your comments in your email, I can assure you they will be taken into account
when I come to write my report. Re PC G’s current occupation, I note your views. All I can
say is that my review of the evidence will be objective and governed by the information
available to me. If you’ve any questions for me at this stage, as ever, please do put them to
me.
Kind regards
Jamie Newman | Serious Misconduct Investigation Unit (SMIU) | Directorate of Professional
Standards |
Met Phone 786675
Telephone 0207 161 6675
Email Jamie.newman@met.pnn.police.uk
Address Empress State Building, 22nd Floor, Lillie Road, London, SW6 1TR
'Setting the bar and upholding standards without fear or favour’
From: Lorraine Cordell
mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent: 07 August 2017 17:31
To: Newman Jamie M ‐ HQ Directorate of Professional Standards
Jamie.Newman@met.pnn.police.uk
Subject: RE: Our meeting today.
Dear Jamie
Thank you for the update reply. Due to never seeing PC G statement written after what
happened on the day, and never having access to any documents since, I rely on what was
said in court from PC G and also the 1st report after the 1st investigation that the DPS did,
which you are now redoing due to what the IPCC said. PC G stated there was no notebook in
court; he stated Mr Cordell was arrested due to him not giving his details so they could be
confirmed he stated Mr Cordell had said he was homeless. But Mr Cordell knew there was a
notebook he saw PC G writing in it on the day he was arrested, and knew he had given his
details as if he had not how would PC G have been able to speak to the insurance companies.
In the Crown Court Appeal in went a lot deeper my son had a barrister and he knew what to
ask. When PC G got into trouble after the audio tapes was played and the judge got really
upset due to knowing that PC G had not told the truth the Judge asked for all documents the
police office had replied on in this case. PC G passed a statement to the judge he had in his
hand that he had been using in court. The judge was not happy with the statement as there
was no date and timed marked, PC G said to the Judge that the statement he was using was a
copy, it was my son barrister said there seemed to be a time on the back. My son's barrister
had also PC G about the ticket issues and PC G said he did