Page 1007 - Driving Ban Simulation 1
P. 1007

Willesden Harrow magistrates!


       Willesden
       The Willesden one seems to have been reheard at court on the 26/01/2015 without  us knowing again he was
       found guilty, but they put this case under a new case number looking at the letter so all the documents that were
       sent before was not with the court file I would have through .Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon
       Thames Crown Court The dates of conviction were the 26/11/2014 Wimbledon magistrate’s court.  Appeal
       date is 05/03/2015 at 10:00 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court
       GLBRENTMCENQ 011403134612
       North West and West London Magistrates' Courts Administration Centre
       Sharon. Burns - Met Police

        1
        The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue: 02
        Conference Notes
        / Page Numbers: N/a
       ➢  I had to attend at the Courthouse for the Willesden magistrates Court case!


                                                                     06/03/2015
                                                                     07/03/2015
                                                                     08/03/2015
                                                                     09/03/2015
                10
            •  The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue:
                505. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Public complaint by
                your son Simon Cordell /
                Page Numbers: 1851,1852
                Broadsure Insurance / KGM Policy / Lloyds Bank /
                Canopius!


        10
        The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue:
        505. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Public complaint by your son Simon Cordell /
        Page Numbers: 1851,1852
        1851
        From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]
        Sent: 09 March 2015 02:21
        To: 'Vicki.McQueen@met.pnn.police.uk
        Subject: RE: Public complaint by your son Simon Cordell
        Dear Victoria McQueen
       ➢  My son had his appeal on the 05/03/2015 which he won; the judge was not happy with the police officer as
          it
       ➢  was proved he did in fact lie, the judge did in fact tell the police office not to leave the court building.
       ➢  And in fact, we did not show all the facts we did have the complaint will need updating to show this police
          officer lied to 2 judges and in fact got my son convicted wrongly by lying to the 1st hearing judge and got
   1002   1003   1004   1005   1006   1007   1008   1009   1010   1011   1012