📜 The Lead-Up to the Events — A
Legal Narrative by Simon Paul Cordell
🗓️ Timeline of Key Dates
- 04/08/2025 —
1. Documented:
Initial arrest and GPS tag fitted under questionable circumstances.
2.
Emails Sent to and back from Highbury
& Islington Court for bail condition variation.
3.
Taken to Hospital due to police assault
against me
- 05/08/2025 —Emails Sent to and back from
Highbury & Islington Court for bail condition variation.
- 06/08/2025 —Emails Sent to and back from
Highbury & Islington Court for bail condition variation.
- 08/08/2025 — Documented: Ongoing
monitoring and procedural confusion.
- 14/08/2025 — Documented: Wrongful
arrest, tag mismanagement, and forced removal from Wood Green Police
Station.
- 15/08/2025 — Alleged tag breach due to
power outage (2am–10pm).
- 17/08/2025 — Alleged failure to answer
door; disproven by note and call logs.
- 20/08/2025 — Serco delivers replacement
charger after police failed to return original.
- 25/08/2025 — Tag replaced again due to
charging fault.
- 26/08/2025 — Arrested again for breach
and alleged assault; no caution, no interview, no evidence.
My Statement: I prepared
this statement at home following the incident that occurred. It was written in
response to what I believe was a failure to uphold a fair legal process. My
MG11 statement was initially submitted via email to my solicitors, as
referenced in the documentation below. It was formally acknowledged and
accepted by my legal representatives in the following email: [insert email
reference], dated [insert date and time] and this was before I received the
statement of the prosecuting team: [insert date and time]
It
has been explained to me that this has now been submitted to the prosecting
team as well. But this is not true!
|
|
|
WITNESS STATEMENT Criminal
Procedure Rules, r 16.2; Criminal Justice Act 1967, s. 9 The
Civil Procedure Rules 1998 URN Statement
of: Mr. Simon Paul Cordell Age if
under 18: (if over 18 inserts ‘over 18’) Occupation:
News Reporter! |
|
This statement (consisting of [00] page(s) each signed by me) is true to
the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is
tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have willfully
stated in it anything which I know to be false, or do not believe to be true. Signature: (witness) Date: I, Mr Simon Paul
Cordell, of 109 Burncroft Avenue PO BOX EN3 7JQ. I WILL SAY AS
FOLLOWS MG11 Statement – Simon Cordell Date of Incident: 03/07/2025 Background I am a secure tenant living on the
ground floor of Address: 109 Burncroft
Avenue Enfield En3 7jq. Since 2006. One of my neighbours,
Rebecca O’Hare who I believe is illegally subletting a council flat on the
second floor since late 2017 or early 2018, has made false allegations to the
police claiming I harassed her. This is entirely untrue. I have never knocked on her door or
initiated contact. Since she moved in, she has persistently targeted me with
behaviour that is malicious, distressing, and harmful. I have multiple
exhibits of evidence proving she is the aggressor. These are documented on my
website Horrificcorruption.com, and I am currently pursuing legal action
against council and police staff who have enabled this mistreatment. Rebecca is aware of my documentation and
uses this knowledge to try and discredit me before I release the full truth.
Her actions are part of a broader attempt to suppress evidence of corruption
and abuse. Events Leading Up to the Incident On 28/06/2025, I underwent hernia
surgery at North Circular Private Hospital. The recovery left me bedridden,
unable to bend, walk properly, or sleep comfortably. On 02/07/2025, I
contacted the hospital due to concerns about swelling and pain. They advised
me to wait a few more days and monitor the symptoms. On 03/07/2025, around 6pm, I became
hungry and ordered approximately £45 worth of Indian food via Just Eat. I
timed my exit to the communal hallway precisely when the delivery driver
arrived, as I avoid lingering there due to Rebecca’s history of harassment. I
do not stand in my own corridor out of fear—she has banged on the kitchen
wall, used her flat to negatively affect my home and belongings, and violated
my right to a private life. While watching the delivery driver
arrive, I saw Rebecca drive past in a grey 2025 car with no L plates. I had
never seen her drive before and do not believe she owns the vehicle or holds
a valid UK driving licence. I reported this to the police, but they showed no
interest. I have exhibited prove with mutable other witness
of mine who are all happy to attend court to give evidence to this effect
about her. The police or council refuse to investigate or arrest Rebbeca and
leave her to continue her evil crimes against me. I have reported this to the
council due to the safety of her looking after her own children that she gave
birth to since she moved into the block of flats I rent in, and this is due
to her own bad decisions. On this day 03/07/25 I had been in doors after my
operation at North Circular Private Hospital. I had been for a hernia
operation on the 28/06/2025, this operation left me bedridden and unable to
bend over and pick things up, stand up straight, laydown comfortably, walk,
couth, talk, sleep, without serios pain, in fact I believed the operations
had gone wrong. Interaction with Delivery Driver The driver handed me the food, but the
bag felt light. I ran back out and called him to return. We spoke while he
tried to reach his office to resolve the missing items. During this time, I
saw Rebecca enter the car park and interact with another neighbour who waved
at her. That neighbour then walked past me, greeted me, and witnessed Rebecca
re-enter the building and walk past me without any verbal exchange. I did not speak to her or acknowledge
her. I simply documented the event in my diary, as I always do. She knows I
record everything, and this is why she is trying to set me up—before I
release the full evidence. Eventually, the delivery driver
confirmed the till receipt had not printed the full order. He returned with
the missing items and additional food, bringing the total value to around
£60. I went back inside, while still in my pyjamas, and began dishing up the
food. The car park is 400-500 yards away and I can’t
access it from my front block without taking a 3–4-minute walk. As she walked
past me, she was giving me dirty looks, but I just refused to acknowledge
her. Eventually, the delivery driver got through to his boss and found out
that the till receipt hadn't printed the complete order. I had paid £24 and
received a 20% discount, plus I had an £8 token, so I was expecting £45 worth
of Indian food. I was happy, but I didn’t receive it all. The driver then
went back and returned with the missing items and even more, making it worth
£60 in total. I finally got back inside and started to dish it up, which was
about an hour and a half after I saw Rebecca last. Police
Arrival – Full Account Approximately 90 minutes after I had returned
inside and begun eating my meal, I heard aggressive banging at my front door.
Due to the force used, I approached with caution and asked who it was. A
female voice—who I now know to be a police officer—shouted, “Open the door
now.” I asked her to identify herself and explain the reason for her
presence. She replied, “It’s the police, open the door now.” I stated clearly that I had done nothing wrong
and asked what this was about. She claimed I had been “harassing my
neighbours.” I responded with the following facts:
The officer appeared agitated and instructed a
male colleague to retrieve a battering ram to break down my door. As he
rushed off, I tried to explain that I was behind the door and was attempting
to slide my medical note under it. I had recently undergone hernia surgery
and was still in pyjamas, unable to move quickly. I held the medical note in my hand and pleaded
with them not to break the door, explaining the risks involved. Despite this,
the male officer smashed the door open with the ram, striking me in the head.
I stumbled back but managed to stay upright, still holding the medical note
in both hands, raised in the air. Seeing me unarmed and in clear distress, the male
officer threw the ram to the floor, then abruptly pulled out his stun gun and
aimed it directly at my face. I saw the red targeting light in my line of
sight and feared for my life. I pleaded with him to calm down, saying:
Instead of de-escalating, it seemed as if he
discharged the stun gun in all his rage and then used it as a blunt weapon,
striking me across the head. His female colleague, who had initiated the
entire incident, assisted him and ignored my screams of pain and concern. She
grabbed the medical note from my hand, threw it to the floor, and shouted,
“You’re not getting an ambulance,” as I pleaded for one. She then wrapped restraints around my legs,
causing severe pain to my stitches and surgical site. Together, they threw me
to the floor like a rag doll, showing no regard for my head or the risk of
further injury. At one point, the male officer deliberately punched me in the
stomach—directly where I had been operated on—causing me to scream in agony
and again beg for an ambulance. They refused repeatedly. Eventually, other officers arrived and entered my
flat. They witnessed the assault firsthand, with their own eyes and body
cameras. They heard me pleading for medical help and saw the brutality. These
new officers intervened, told the original two to leave my flat, and took
over. They treated me like a human being, listened to
my requests, and agreed to remove the leg restraints. They allowed me to
secure my flat and walked me outside. I believed I was being taken to an
ambulance—but instead, they said no ambulance was coming and that I was going
in a police van. I sat down outside the flats, knowing their
actions would worsen my medical condition. Neighbours began to gather,
including the gentleman who had waved earlier. I pleaded with the female
officer to reconsider and release me, but she refused and repeated, “You’re
not getting an ambulance.” Multiple neighbours offered to make statements,
saying I had done nothing wrong and that Rebecca was the one causing problem.
They told police they were lying and insisted an ambulance had been called
and would arrive in five minutes. The police, realizing they were in trouble,
had no choice but to wait. I explained again that this was a civil matter. I
had not left the flats, and there was no immediate danger. The proper course
of action would have been to give Rebecca a diary, advise her to contact the
council, and issue me a warning. If I breached it, then arrest me. But none
of that happened. Instead, I was arrested for harassment under the
1997 Act. I shocked the officer by quoting the Act and its requirements,
which were clearly not met. 🚑 Hospitalisation and Custody
Timeline Eventually, the police were forced to call an
ambulance, but said it refused to attend for me, but my neighbours called one
and said it will be here in 5 minutes. I was taken to hospital and kept there
for 24 hours due to the severity of my injuries. I Exhibit the Response from the hospital as Exhibit:
111 “Under arrest please present - Had argument with
his neighbours this evening police called - put to the ground by police at
time felt “pop” sensation to stitches. Had surgery done 2 days ago for hernia
repair see oh testicular pain Worse to R side since assault PMH ASTHMA hernia
repair psychosis LAS OBS!” Even the doctors reported this as an “Assault!” I arrived at the police station around 6:00 AM
the following morning. I was officially booked in at approximately 8:00 AM. I
was told that my custody time would start from that point, meaning they had
24 hours from then to either release me or call a custody inspector to extend
my detention. I had been arrested under the Protection from
Harassment Act 1997, and after speaking to doctors and explaining what
had happened, I was deemed fit for interview. I still required an appropriate
adult to be present. During the interview, the officer began asking
questions unrelated to the arrest—specifically about alleged harassment of
police officers. My solicitor immediately intervened, stating that the
officer had no legal right to ask those questions, as I had not been arrested
for that. He was correct. ⏱ Midnight to Morning – Illegal Detention At midnight, an inspector came to my cell and spoke to me through the
flap. I told him about the fraudulent entries in my PNC record and explained
how they had been manipulated by court and police review teams. He said, “If
what you’re saying is true, then that must be true,” but added that he
couldn’t help me. He told me I would be released “in a
minute”—likely between 2:00 and 3:00 AM. But no one released me at that time.
By 4:00 AM, I realised I was being held illegally. The officers on duty were
clearly waiting for the next shift at 7:00 AM to release me, rather than
doing it themselves. This meant they were knowingly holding me for an
extra 8 hours without legal justification. I understood that this delay would
prevent them from re-bailing or re-interviewing me, as the custody clock
would expire. They would have no choice but to take no further action
on the case. I confronted the officers, saying, “You’re
holding me illegally under this CAD number from 12 to 8, knowing there’s no
case to answer and you’re going to drop the charge.” They realised I was
right and became visibly concerned. They knew they weren’t conducting any
investigation—because the incident had occurred two days earlier, and their
notebooks and evidence had already been collected. 📞 Denial of Contact and Legal Rights I repeatedly used the buzzer in my cell, asking to speak to my mother
and aunt—both of whom were my appropriate adults. The police refused, saying
it was “too late” and that they were sleeping. I pleaded with them,
explaining that my family had instructed me to call them and were expecting
to pick me up. My aunt later confirmed she had called the
station multiple times but was told she wasn’t allowed to attend. They said
they would call her when I was ready—but they never did. Around 4:00 AM, officers came to my cell and took
me to the custody desk. Without re-arresting me or conducting a new
interview, they dropped the original harassment charge. But instead of
releasing me, they fabricated a second charge—claiming I had
threatened to blow up a car. I had not been interviewed about this new
allegation. My solicitor had already been sent home after the first interview
(around 7–8 PM), and when I requested, he be called back, I was told he was
“sleeping” or “not picking up.” No duty solicitor was provided as a
replacement. I was denied my appropriate adult again. Instead,
the custody officer put me on the phone with someone they had chosen to act
as my adult. I objected, saying, “This is wrong—you must call my family.” My
request was refused. I was formally charged with the new offence,
despite explaining clearly that it was baseless and that I had been denied my
legal rights. I was returned to my cell and locked in. 📢 Speaking Out and Exposing Fraud This deeply upset me. I began speaking aloud, explaining everything I
knew to be true including the fraud in my PNC record, where conviction
entries had been manipulated by court and police review teams. I knew the
entire station could hear me, but I couldn’t be sure what they were doing
about it. I gave detailed instructions on how to verify the
records using their own systems and my website. I remembered most of the data
by heart and recited it clearly. I gave them detailed instructions on how to check
the records on their computers and my website as I remember most of it now of
by heart. 🚔 Transfer to Court and Criminal Record Revelation Later that morning, police officers came to my
cell and informed me I was being taken to court. I was escorted to the
custody desk, where I saw a G3 jailer preparing to place me in a van. He was
holding handcuffs, ready to restrain me. I refused to go with him and instead approached
the custody officer directly. I stated clearly, “I’m not leaving the
station.” In response, the custody officer proposed a deal. He said, “If you
get on the van and leave my station without causing any problems, I’ll show
you the results of the internal checks I’ve done on your criminal record.” I asked what he meant. He explained that he had
heard everything I’d been saying about the fabricated entries in my PNC
record and had conducted internal checks to verify my claims. I agreed to
the deal. He turned his computer screen toward me and
showed me my criminal record. He confirmed that I was right: the entries had
been fraudulently created. He pointed out that the courts were closed on the
dates listed for convictions 41, 42, and others I had previously exposed. He
acknowledged that I was correct about all entries prior to my first reprimand
warning and confirmed that the ones my mother had identified—and that Highbury
& Islington Courts had agreed were missing from their registry—were
indeed not legitimate. He then kindly asked me to leave the station. I was placed in the van and transported to court.
The custody officer clearly knew that the refusal of bail had been
based on errors. I had never been arrested in relation to the alleged victim
before, and I had not been found guilty of any offence in over 25 years. |
|
Signature: Signature witnessed by: |
|
|
On 02/08/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
This is the day the alleged
incident took place that did not! Taken to hospital! |
On 03/08/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
In Hospital then taken to Wood
Green Police station! |
On 04/08/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
Taken
to Highbury and Islington
Magistrates Court! Cps
had no Case Files Sent to them by the police? No
Solicitor or barrister was in the court due to having other commitments! |
On 05/08/2025: 1st email
1st
Email Sent
|
Email I sent Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Lorraine Cordell
<lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> Date: 5 August 2025 at 08:56:58 BST To: northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk Subject: Re: urgent Simon Cordell To whom it may concern My son was in court yesterday to see if bail
would be granted. The court bailed him to his sister’s address, but this
address is not livable it’s got bad mold, there is no electric local code for
cooking on a list of other issues. Something needs to be done regarding this bail
address urgently. I will wait to hear from you. Regards Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell Sent from my iPhone https://mail.yahoo.com/d/search/name=Lorraine%2520Cordell&emailAddresses=lorraine32%2540blueyonder.co.uk&listFilter=ALL&contactIds=01… 1/1 |
2.
Email Received
|
|
>>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Lorraine Cordell
<lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> >>> Sent: 05 August 2025 08:57 >>> To: northlondonmc <northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk> >>> Subject: Re: urgent Simon Cordell >>> To whom it may concern >>> My son was in court yesterday to see
if bail would be granted. The court bailed him to his sister’s address, but
this address is not livable it’s got bad mold, there is no electric local
code for cooking on a list of other issues. >>> Something needs to
be done regarding this bail address urgently. >>> >>> I will wait to hear from you. >>> >>> Regards >>> Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon
Cordell |
|
|
>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> On 5 Aug 2025, at 09:25, northlondonmc
<northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk> wrote: >>>
Good Morning, >>> Please be advised in regards to
amending the bail address and changing the conditions a new address will need
to be given to assist the court. The court would also suggest having the
defendant's solicitors make the request. >>> Many Thanks, >>> Daniel Sullivan >>> Admin Officer >>> Willesden Magistrates Court >>> Address: 448 High Road, London NW10
2DZ |
On 06/08/2025: 2nd email
2.
Email Received
|
|
----Original Message----- >> From: Lorraine Cordell
<lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2025 1:43
AM >> To: northlondonmc
<northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk> >> Subject: Re: urgent Simon Cordell >> Good morning >> Thank you for the reply the address he
will be staying at is >> ***
Durante Road >> Ponders end >> Enfield >> EN3 >> Regards >> Lorraine Cordell |
|
|
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: northlondonmc
<northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk> >> Sent: 06 August 2025 08:48 >> To: DIB-London
<DIB-London@justice.gov.uk> >> Subject: FW: urgent Simon Cordell >> Application to vary bail >> Many Thanks, >> Daniel Sullivan >> Admin Officer >> Willesden Magistrates Court >> Address: 448 High Road, London NW10 2DZ |
|
|
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: NoreplyLondonqueries
<NoreplyLondonqueries@justice.gov.uk> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2025 9:04
AM >> To: northlondonmc
<northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk> >> Cc: London Magistrates
<london.magistrates@cps.gov.uk> >> Subject: FW: urgent Simon Cordell >> Good morning >> Please list for an application to vary
bail >> Kind regards >> Ms. A Bennett >> Duty Legal Adviser >> North East London Local Justice Area >> Web: www.gov.uk/hmcts >> For information on how HMCTS uses
personal data about you please see: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter |
|
|
>> On 6 Aug 2025, at 10:26,
northlondonmc <northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk> wrote: >> >>
Good Morning, >> >> This matter has been listed for the 8th
at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court for the application to be considered. >> Many Thanks, >> Daniel Sullivan >> Admin Officer >> Willesden Magistrates Court >> Address: 448 High Road, London NW10 2DZ |
On 07/08/2025: 3rd
email
|
|
3. Email Sent Subject: Introduction and Submission of Documents
From:
Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To:
tuckers@tuckerssolicitors.com Date:
Thursday 7 August
2025 at 19:59 BST Dear
Dina, I
hope this message finds you well. My name is Simon Paul Cordell, and I'm
writing to introduce myself and express my gratitude for your services. Attached
to this email, you will find my MG11 form, along with important documents
including a letter of consent for my upcoming holiday, a letter regarding a
change of bowel for my father, and a letter of instructions. Please
let me know if there is anything else you require from me at this time. Thank
you once again for your assistance. Best
regards, Simon
Paul Cordell These
files are complete but still having minor amendments but feel free to serve
them as they are! Weblink:
nova1.ddns.net/Si1/
If
pdfs are required, I am happy to provide them Ready for court Tomorrow.
Thanks again Mr. Simon Paul Cordell. |
|
|
Letter to Jude’s from Simons Dad
|
|
|
Impact Statement Regarding Wrongly Imposed Bail Conditions Submitted by: Mr. Simon Paul Cordell I am
writing this statement to express the serious emotional, professional, and
logistical impact that the current bail conditions have had on me, my family,
and my work. These conditions were imposed despite the fact that I have not
been found guilty of any offence in the law eyes for over 25 years, and I
believe they are based on incorrect and misleading information. Family Concerns and Police Involvement My
parents and close family members are deeply concerned about the way I have
been treated by government officials, particularly the Metropolitan Police.
Due to past experiences and perceived misconduct, they are unwilling to allow
me to my home unless I allow police officers to escort me there. This has
created a situation where I am legally permitted to attend my property with
police support, but emotionally and practically unable to do so. The tension
and mistrust surrounding police involvement have made it impossible for my
family to support me in this way and leaves me without my legal rights to a
private and family home as I have done it up for me and my partner to have a
child within. My living necessities and home comforts as well as legal and
work interest have al been tarnished unfairly as I am an innocent man and
could have proved this if arrested and interviewed over this charge. Home Security and Access Issues My
front door has been partially sealed by the police using two inadequate
locks, leaving my property insecure and vulnerable. I am unable to access my
home to retrieve essential items such as clothing, medication, and personal
belongings. This has left me physically uncomfortable and emotionally
distressed, especially as I am recovering from recent surgery and require
proper rest and care. Professional Disruption and Business Impact I am
the founder of HorrificCorruption.com, a company that has recently
developed a groundbreaking digital publishing model—akin to the futuristic
newspaper seen in Back to the Future. This innovation represents a
major leap forward in digital content delivery, and we are in the final
stages of preparing it for global patenting. However, due to the current
legal restrictions and the risk of exposing sensitive company information, we
have had to partially halt live development. This delay threatens not only
our intellectual property but also the future of our business. Additionally,
I have scheduled meetings and responsibilities at my home related to the
installation of a high-value 20x20 Apex summer house, which has been in
planning for several years. The inability to access my property is
jeopardizing this long-term investment and the strategic growth of my
company. Emotional and Physical Toll The
cumulative effect of these restrictions has been devastating. I am recovering
from surgery, unable to access basic comforts, and facing unnecessary legal
pressure. My family is distressed, my home is insecure, and my professional
life is being disrupted at a critical moment. These bail conditions are not
only unjust—they are actively harming my wellbeing, my relationships, and my
future. |
|
|
Subject: Urgent Request for Legal Support and Disclosure of
Evidence To: tuckers@tuckerssolicitors.com From: Simon Paul Cordell Date:
[Insert Date] Dear Tuckers Solicitors, I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to
formally request your legal assistance regarding a recent incident that I
believe constitutes a serious breach of my human and legal rights. I am seeking your support in obtaining the following
materials related to my case:
I am prepared to provide a comprehensive witness
statement and supporting documentation, including medical records and legal
exhibits. I also have the badge number of the officer in charge—PC3454NA
(RYAW)—and two corroborating witness statements confirming misconduct. In brief, the situation involves an unlawful entry,
excessive force during arrest (including the use of a stun gun while I was
holding a medical note), and detainment without legitimate cause. The initial
charges were dropped, yet a new charge was introduced without any further
arrest or interview. This sequence of events appears to be an attempt to
retroactively justify an unjust detainment. I am deeply concerned about:
These actions violate my rights under the Human
Rights Act, including the right to liberty, security, and a fair trial. I
urgently request your guidance on how to challenge the bail conditions and
initiate a formal complaint or legal action against the officers and
authorities involved. I am willing to meet at your earliest convenience to
discuss this matter further. Please advise on any additional disclosures or
steps I should take to ensure full transparency and accountability. Thank you for your attention and expertise in
handling this sensitive issue. Sincerely, Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft
Avenue PO BOX EN3 7JQ [Phone Number] [Email Address] |
|
|
Dear Judge’s I respectfully request
consideration for permission to travel to Turkey to complete my dental
surgery. The procedure, already in progress, was scheduled and partially paid
for prior to my detainment, with significant expenses incurred totaling
£1,600. Given the circumstances and my confidence in a favourable
outcome, I assure you my request is in no way an attempt to evade justice. It
would be deeply distressing to face further delays in my necessary treatment
due to these legal proceedings. I’m committed to complying with all court
directives and would return promptly for any required proceedings. I humbly
seek your understanding and approval for this request. Respectfully, Mr. Simon
Paul Cordell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 08/08/2025: I went to Court on this day!
|
|
|
|
|
I
went to Court on this day due to bail conditions being change! |
On 09/08/2025:
|
|
For
the Initial Arrest:
04/08/25 |
|
|
Statement from Simon
Paul Cordell – Regarding Bail Review Hearing and Procedural Violations On the day of my bail review hearing, I
attended court to request a change to the conditions that had been imposed on
me. My mother had already contacted the court by email to explain that my
sister’s address was not ready due to the judge’s short-notice decision. As a
result, I was staying at my nan’s home, which was a temporary and necessary
arrangement. and once at the court on the 8th and
without any police harassment or setups I arrived at the Highbury and Islington court, I met
with my solicitor and asked her to obtain a full explanation for why bail had
previously been denied. I have never been arrested twice for the
same matter, and the allegations made by Rebecca O’Hyra are false. This was
acknowledged by the judge herself, who stated in court that I had not been in
trouble for the past 25 years—something clearly reflected in the outdated and
misleading convictions they attempted to hold against me. I had sent my solicitor a link to my
correspondence archive, which included:
Despite this, my solicitor claimed she could
only address the change of address at that hearing. However, she did apply
for and successfully obtained permission for me to travel to Turkey. While I
appreciated that outcome, I was disappointed that she did not challenge the
broader legal injustice I am facing. She told me that the rest of my
documents could be presented “another time,” which delayed the opportunity to
correct the record and stop the unlawful process I am currently trapped in. I also raised the issue that I had not been
re-arrested or interviewed for the new allegation, even though the original
charge of harassment (from 1997) had been dropped. This violates several key
legal standards:
Furthermore, I was denied the right to have
a solicitor present during key custody decisions. The custody officer and the
officer in charge of the case both dropped the initial charge, yet no further
arrest or interview was conducted. This is a breach of due process and an
abuse of legal procedure. The judge and prosecutor were respectful and
granted all that was requested of them, but the solicitor failed to act on
the full scope of evidence I had prepared. When leaving the court, I spoke
with a kind staff member at the assistance window. I explained to her that my
PNC (Police National Computer) record had been fraudulently altered,
and she confirmed that I was correct in stating that the court was not open
at the time the form was served. She advised me to submit the form I had been
given by her colleagues previously. This entire situation has caused serious
emotional, professional, and logistical harm. The bail conditions have
prevented me from accessing my home, medication, and business materials. They
have disrupted my recovery from surgery and jeopardized the development of my
digital publishing system, which is currently undergoing patent preparation. I am now preparing to submit a full bundle
of evidence to the court, including my MG11 statement, impact statement, and
correspondence archive. I will also be pursuing formal complaints and legal
remedies to challenge the procedural violations and restore my rights. For anyone seeking further context, I have
documented the full case and supporting materials at: And I have now found the form online that I
was given to sort the PNC Files, as I can’t scan it in. Weblink: acc001c-and-s-eng.docx The
GPS conditions that were also imposed were
changed and the Tag has been fitted ever since. We were given the date of the
8th to re attend the court so the conditions can be re reviewed
and the afterwards finalized From
the 04/08/2025 I never heard from the court but my mother agreed to contact
them on and she stayed in communication with them until the 06/08/2025 about
my bail conditions address. The court reviewing team who my mother went to in
regards to my PNC Record being fabricated and in error, in the year of 2013
and 14, who are in agreement to those errors being errors all understand that
I am making a claim against them and have used there
powers entrusted in them to dismiss of me unjustly mutable time through the
years of the intel being acknowledge and this is illegal: Key Offences in UK Law 1. Perverting the
Course of Justice
2. Assisting an
Offender
3. Misconduct in Public
Office
I
can prove this be the records they write themselves and the goss misconduct caused in the legal proceedings that are
covered up and cause me to suffer…. Daniel
Sullivan, Admin Officer, Willesden Magistrates Court, Address: 448 High Road,
London NW10 2DZ Understood
in his emails that I would have no place to live due to what was said and
knew this would be from the 04/08/2025 – till the 08/08/2025 while on
court GPS bail conditions, he knew we had done the right thing by contacting
them but fail to update the records accordingly so, this caused the GPS
tagging company to execute a warrant that was
unfair and unneccerery, His statement in the email
is as follows: “This matter has been
listed for the 8th at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court for the application
to be considered.”
And failed to swtate that I would be at another
address due to the Courts reviewing teams own protocols and formalities
allowing this intel to not be correctly updated means that I was wrongly
latter penalized. Time and date of the email are as follows: 6 Aug 2025, at 10:26,
northlondonmc <northlondonmc@justice.gov.uk |
On 10/08/2025: 4th
5th email
|
|
For
the Initial Arrest:
04/08/25 |
||||||||||||||
|
|
5. Email
Received 8/10/25,
11:47 AM (9,714
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Please see attached Id:COR10388/00001
From: Zaynah Dar (darz@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Sunday 10 August 2025 at 09:47 BST
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
4. Email Received-Attachment - Hearing Outcome = “Let
- Client - Hearing Outcome.docx”
Private
& Confidential Mr. Simon Cordell Email: re_wired@Ymail.com
Dear Simon Your
Case Highbury
Corner Magistrates' Court Next
Hearing Date: 13th October 2025 at 10:00 for Trial I write further to your
attendance at Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court on 8th August 2025, to
confirm the outcome of that hearing. Zaynah Dar of Tuckers Solicitors
advocated for you and submitted your bail variation application. One variation to the
condition of residency was granted. The other condition of a
temporary lift to your condition of residency was unable to be granted as the
Court require confirmation of the dates you intend to go to Turkey and return
for your dental procedure. The Court advised that once they receive confirmation
of dates, then they would be in a position to hear this variation. Bail Status You were granted
conditional bail on the conditions summarised below. If you breach any of
your bail conditions, you may be liable to further arrest and the court would
have the power to remand you into custody until the conclusion of the case.
You must also attend court on that occasion, failure to do so could result in
a warrant being issued for your arrest. You could then be brought back to
court, in custody, and you could face a further offence of failing to
surrender for which you could be fined, imprisoned or both. The court would
also have the power to remand you into custody until the conclusion of your
case:- • You must remain living at 280 Durant Road, EN3 7AZ. • You must not contact directly or indirectly Rebecca O'Hare. • You must not enter or attend at - Burncroft Avenue except 1x to
recover prop with police. • GPS tag. Please do not hesitate to
contact us should you require any further information. Yours sincerely
Zaynah
Dar |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
On
11/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
12/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
13/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 14-08-2025: Another-Case + I called Serco to report the charger missing—likely taken
by police!
|
|
|
Statement of
Events – 14th August 2025 & a Brief description of case build up! I remain subject to
bail conditions that I believe unlawfully restrict my legal rights, as
previously outlined in my case documentation. These restrictions appear to
stem from misapplications of the Bail Act 1974 and the Sentencing and Bail
Act 2022, and were influenced by the following breaches:
What I have request
so far but cannot be acknowledged until legal aid is granted is the
following: --
Arrest and Detention – 03/08/2025 I was wrongly
arrested on 03/08/2025
on suspicion of harassment, allegedly linked to events dating back to 1997
and still taking a place till date of the 15/08/2025. These claims
involve Rebecca O’Hare since late 2017 and onwards and are thoroughly
documented in my personal diary, which is publicly hosted on my website. I
have compiled extensive evidence supporting my account, including video
recordings, written statements, and legal correspondence for her illegal
actions she takes against me and my property. It is my firm
belief that Rebecca has been unlawfully enabled by certain government
officials to harass and intimidate me within my own home, often in
coordination with other neighbors. I am not alone in this assertion—multiple
individuals are prepared to testify in court regarding her actions and the
broader pattern of misconduct that has affected my living conditions. Rebecca is aware
that I have been documenting her behaviour, with videos audio recordings,
text, mostly from inside my own home and all at the Enfield councils request
due to the diary they asked me to fill in but now won’t accept and I believe
this has prompted retaliatory actions, including even more false allegations
and fabricated reports. These have been communicated to police, council
authorities, and neighbourhood teams and prior courts all of whom have been
repeatedly informed of the situation. I currently hold over 200 records
detailing her conduct and my attempts to seek lawful protection from her and
other’s but all requests made by me and others have consistently wrongly been
denied. The arrest on 03/08/2025 was
triggered by yet another false telephone report made by Rebecca, consistent
with a pattern of fabricated complaints previously disproven by myself and
others and her hatred allowed the police to act yet again in gross misconduct
against me, this has become a life endangering situation for me that is
unjust and unmoral off officials persons who aid in these crimes against me
while abuse their powers of trust and this also includes other civil persons
apart from Rebbeca O’Hare, who have also take apart alike. The abuse of police
power started from the second of their arrival, the hammering with their
fists on my front door in a way to intimidate a person to run in self-defense
so they can chase you like pray, never caused me to run out of my backdoor. I
stood my ground and asked who was present and what they wanted. Me in my
Pajamers and with a medial note in my had led to the door being broken in. in
was badly assaulted with the use of a stun gun that was used to hit me across
the head rather than be discharged at me after it laser was directed directly
into my eyesight ready to kill me. Lead to the woman officer who had been at
the door and refused to hold any fair police values entered and joined in
with her male assistant who she had ordered to do as he had done by breaking
the door down unnecessarily and continuing with his own illegal action, he
used more than bruit force after breaking the door down he was like a man on steroids
ready to commit a crime. The police body cams will prove all of this. I was
refused an ambulance and shouted at for asking for one as they took my
medical note for post-surgery two-day prior onto the floor. More police
offices rushed to their assistance but realised the force and told the
officers to leave. I see the female officer outside and she was refusing to
take statement of my neighbours who see what happened and new I was innocent,
ki questioned her doing so and she refused to change her stance and this was
while the cameras were still rolling. It took my neighbours to call the
ambulance as the police were lining up and saying I’m not that important to
the ambulance people and for that reason they won’t attend, this was a lie to
cover up the truth. I was taken to
hospital and keep till there 04/08/2025 later transferred to Wood Green Police Station,
where I was booked in at approximately 8:00 AM. I was interviewed in the
presence of both an appropriate adult and my solicitor, who departed
following the interview around 7:00 PM. Taken to Hospital At approximately
midnight, while still in custody, a police sergeant informed me that the case
would be dropped and I would be released shortly. However, it became clear
that the permitted detention period was being misused. I was going to held
from 8:00 AM on the 4rd until 8:00 AM on the 5th then released
only upon staff changeover and without charge. This extended detention
exceeded lawful custody hours, particularly from midnight to 8:00 AM. Throughout my time
in the cell, I voiced my concerns repeatedly to the custody officer and other
staff, both verbally and via the intercom. I maintained a fair and reasonable
tone, but my requests were ignored for hours. When communication was
eventually permitted, I was told my appropriate adult was asleep and the
police would not disturb them and these hours. The same response was given
when I requested access to legal counsel. I was also denied the right to
speak with a duty solicitor. Ultimately, the
harassment case was dropped. However, at the custody desk, I was informed of
this in a manner that bypassed my own decision-making. A phone call was made
to a government-based scheme that allowed them to obtain their own
appropriate adult without my consent or my mandated appropriate adults
consents, despite prior arrangements for my release being agreed with them
for them to pick me up. I had made clear that my appropriate adult must be
contacted for pick-up regardless of the time. I was also refused bail due to
an error: the alleged victim claimed I had been prosecuted or arrested twice
before due to her. I challenged this and directed the custody officer to my
criminal record, which confirms I have not been arrested or found guilty in
the past 25 years, and have never been arrested due to her but he again
refused right and set the laws illegally against me. Later another police
sergeant who had changed shifts proposed deal with me and in turn I agreed,
and he explained the errors I =found in my criminal record were fabricated I
have prior documented this down in more detail my mg11 statement and due to
all I left the police station in a secure van to go to Highbury and Islington
on Magistrates Court. Court Proceedings – 04/08/2025 I was taken to
Highbury and Islington Court under circumstances I believe involved coercion,
as detailed in my MG11 statement. I was denied the right to speak or explain
the circumstances of my arrest. Despite managing to raise my concerns more
than once, the court refused to initiate an inquiry into my truthful account.
Instead, I was granted bail to my sister’s address with a GPS tag and
prohibited from entering Burncroft Avenue. Although the judges
appeared to grasp the essence of my concerns, they declined to address them
and imposed further restrictions. I believe this outcome was influenced by
manipulation related to my background and communications made to the court
regarding entries in my criminal record, entries that are not held in the
Courts registry’s and are currently being challenged through the appropriate
channels. The court refused to address these discrepancies and instead placed
me under unlawful restrictions. These prior
communications may have led court staff to misrepresent the case against me,
without any lawful evidence. It appears the case is being used recklessly as
leverage to fabricate a criminal record, following multiple failed attempts
in the past—attempts that relied on inaccurate PNC/ACRO intelligence, as well
as frauded official government documents, developed to set me up completely. Bail Address
and Compliance Following the court
hearing, my mother contacted the court via email to explain that my sister’s
home was not suitable for me to stay in. She requested authorisation for me
to reside at my grandmother’s address. We received two email confirmations
from Highbury and Islington Court approving this change, along with a new
court date of 08/08/2025 for finalisation of my bail conditions. Since arriving at
the bail address, I have remained fully compliant and have not returned to
Burncroft Avenue. Events of 14/08/2025 Ongoing
Impact of Unjust Bail Conditions and Fabricated Judicial Records To maintain focus
and productivity, I have been organising my legal documentation and assisting
with home improvements. These efforts have helped me remain grounded despite
the ongoing impact of unjust bail conditions and curfews, restrictions
imposed through decisions made by police, judiciary, and prosecuting teams.
Many of these decisions relate to cases I have successfully contested over
the course of my life. One such injustice
involves an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) issued by Highbury &
Islington Court, which I can now prove was heavily forged and unlawfully
granted. This ASBO resulted in a wrongful eight-year curfew, which overlapped
with the COVID-19 pandemic. I am now 43 years old and have been subjected to
curfew restrictions since the age of 15, as reflected in my criminal record
and its numerous NFA (No Further Action) entries. The situation worsened
significantly from the age of 32, with the continued involvement of Highbury
& Islington Court. I have been effectively locked down ever since, most
recently out of fear of retaliation stemming from gross misconduct by
officials. These restrictions
were imposed for crimes I did not commit, based on flawed case reviews and
decisions made by the same court. Notably, the court has acknowledged that
several of the cases used to justify these restrictions do not exist in their
own registries. But now, with more time to examine the documentation provided
to us, I can confidently assert that the entire record has been fabricated,
either by individuals within the court’s reviewing team or by police
personnel involved in case preparation. Fabricated
Records, Judicial Acknowledgment, and the Destruction of Family Life This pattern of
falsified documentation, unlawful curfews, and systemic obstruction has
denied me basic freedoms and severely disrupted my family life. During one
hearing, the judges themselves acknowledged, on record and in direct address
to the prosecutor—that I had not been convicted of a crime or offence for
over 25 years. This admission, while accurate, further highlighted the
contradiction between my actual record and the fabricated narrative being
used to justify ongoing restrictions. It undermined my legal standing and
exposed a clear violation of procedural fairness that must be addressed. These prolonged and
unjust restrictions have denied me the opportunity to build a stable family
life, including relationships with a partner, wife, and siblings. The flat I
currently reside in was renovated in preparation for a partner. Yet despite
this, I can clearly demonstrate that two injunction orders and two housing
possession orders were fabricated against me and facilitated in part by
individuals such as Rebecca O’Hare, who actively victimised me throughout my
legal process. The emotional and
physical toll of this victimisation has been devastating. Rebecca and others,
through coordinated harassment and interference in my private life, inflicted
severe psychological stress on both me and my partners. As a direct result of
this sustained abuse, I lost three unborn children across three separate
relationships. These events occurred since she moved into the flats and
copycatted other victimising me. She moved in between late 2017 and 2018,
shortly after Rebecca moved into the area. The pattern of behaviour was not
incidental, it was deliberate, malicious, and carried out as if it were a
form of entertainment or sport, and government officials refused to arrest
her no matter who or what we exhibited of her illegal actions and others,
that took place against me and other persons. These actions
amount to torture, both psychological and procedural, mental torture and
physical torture are two of a kind and protected under our Human Rights and
due to official persons actions, this represents a gross abuse of legal
systems, housing frameworks, and human rights. The cumulative impact has been
the erosion of my ability to live freely, safely, and with dignity. In addition, the
police have continued to construct a false mental health record, despite
there being no formal diagnosis of any mental health condition and another
officially frauded document was handed to the judges in these proceeding of
such a kind. After being
deliberately fabricated by themselves. This has been
deliberately done with intent for years now and still hold no legal bases
against me in fact it proves fraud the other way and is well documented by
myself due to the illegal crimes committed in the past when the Government
bodies involved acted in a joint circular coordination with the neighbourhood
watch team, Enfield Council, and certain neighbours resulting in a further
five years of unlawful processes. Then the COVID-19 pandemic compounded these
restrictions, isolating me even more. This situation is
unjust, and I believe it must be formally addressed and rectified due to
these proceedings. Wrongful
Arrest – 14/08/2025: A Breakdown of Safeguards At approximately
6:00 AM on 14th August 2025, I began decorating the property I
am housed in and what is an act of personal discipline and respect for myself
and elders, which is what allows me to focus under illegal imposed,
restrictive bail conditions. While working alone, I heard a knock at the front
door. Upon answering, I was confronted by two female police officers and one
male officer. Their urgency and physical positioning suggested a clear intent
to enter without consent, raising immediate concerns about the legality and
motive behind their visit. When asked why they
were there, they stated I was wanted for breach of electronic tag conditions.
I calmly explained that this must be an error. I had attended Highbury &
Islington Court on 8th August 2025, where I was granted permission to
reside at my grandmother’s address from 4th August onward. This was confirmed
via email correspondence between my mother and the court. Despite offering to
show them this evidence—including solicitor letters received that morning and
documentation available on my website—they refused to engage. One female
officer attempted to push her way into the property. I ensured her safety
while closing the door to prevent unlawful entry. Their refusal to listen
prompted me to secure the front windows, fearing forced access. Before I could
retrieve my phone to contact my mother, I heard a loud bang at the door.
Concerned about damage, I shouted that I would open it voluntarily. I did so
immediately, just before they attempted to kick it again. Once inside, the
officers attempted to restrain me without offering a clear explanation or
acknowledging any of the evidence I presented. I demanded clarity. The female
officer repeated that I was wanted for breach of tag due to not being present
at my sister’s address on the 5th and 6th of August. I explained again
that I had been granted permission to stay at my grandmother’s address since
the 4th, and that this was confirmed by the court. I showed them the tag
installed on my leg and offered to present all supporting documentation. They
refused to engage. It became clear I
was being deliberately misrepresented and unlawfully detained. I stated this
directly to the officers as they placed me in the police van. I asked how
they had located my current address unless they had accessed CAD records or
been informed of the second bail address. I pointed out they were executing
an outdated warrant, despite my residence at this address only being
disclosed in court on 08/08/2025. After being placed
in the police van, I asked why the officers had not contacted the tagging
company to verify my location. The lead officer did not respond. Upon arrival
at the station, it was evident that the female arresting officer, who had
acted as the primary instigator, had heard everything I said both at my bail
address and during transport. She rushed into the station immediately upon
arrival, while the second female officer and the male officer, who had
remained more passive throughout, escorted me from the van and placed me on a
bench in the police car park. While seated, I
engaged in conversation with the male officer. He reiterated what he had said
earlier at my front door: that the situation did not seem right. He
acknowledged that the warrant was issued for the 5th and 6th of August 2025,
and repeatedly stated that my electronic tag had been installed on the 11th.
I asked him how he knew that, and he claimed I had told him. I clarified that
I did not know the exact date of installation—only that it occurred after the
08/08/2025 court hearing. A custody officer
approached us at the bench. I explained the situation in full, believing he
was there to assess whether further action was appropriate. He informed me
that I would likely be placed on a secure van by lunchtime and taken to
court. I objected, stating that this was unnecessary and could be resolved
immediately by contacting my solicitor or the court directly. He responded
with a remark similar to the sergeant’s earlier comment—that if police alone
managed such matters, they might be better handled. I disagreed and
outlined the failure of all four safeguards meant to protect individuals in
my position:
The custody officer
listened but did not act. The sergeant who had previously dismissed my
concerns walked past and, without further comment, instructed the arresting
officer to “put him in there.” I was placed in a temporary holding cell to
await further processing. Later, a new
custody officer brought me to the booking desk. He treated me fairly and
appeared to recognise the inconsistencies. He stated that the computer showed
I was barred from both my new bail address and Burncroft Avenue. I challenged
this, stating that it was fabricated and contradicted the court’s own
communications. He replied that he was simply reading what was on the system
and could not verify external sources. I asked him to contact my solicitor
firm—he knew who they were—but refused, stating he could not trust
information from them. While this
conversation was ongoing, I noticed the same sergeant who had previously set
me up without interview or lawful arrest. He was now behind the desk,
appearing to begin his shift. I addressed him directly, stating: “You are the
sergeant who set me up the other morning.” He did not respond. I waited until
he was no longer busy and repeated myself. Still no reply. Frustrated, I
raised my voice and stated clearly: “You must answer me, considering your job
title.” He finally replied, confirming: “Yes, I am the officer from the other
day.” I then explained the consequences of his actions—that his misconduct
had led to my unlawful arrest, the illegal placement of a monitoring tag
around my leg, and the denial of legal representation. I asked whether he had
deliberately orchestrated my presence at the station. He did not respond. Video Link Hearing and Custody Exit – 14/08/2025 I was held in a cell and later informed that I would
not be taken to court in person. Instead, a video link hearing would be
conducted—further distancing me from the opportunity to present my case
directly and transparently. As I was escorted through the station toward the
video link room, I passed the custody desk where the officer responsible for
my unlawful detention was seated. I spoke aloud, stating clearly that he had
caused me immense suffering and that I would be filing a formal complaint
against him. I was then brought into the video link room, where I saw three
judges, a court clerk, and the prosecutor. I had no legal representation. A voice addressed me, and when I asked who it was, I
was told it was the court clerk. I showed the tag on my leg to all present
and explained that I had not been arrested for the original charge, and that
I had complied fully with all judicial orders. I addressed the prosecutor
directly, stating that the case was unmerited and unjust. I was told politely
to listen. The court informed me that I was being released and
must attend trial on the 13th of September. I objected, stating that the
process was unfair and that the hearing had failed to address the misconduct
and procedural breaches. The court was then dismissed. Upon exiting the video link room, I was brought back
to the custody desk where the same officer—who had orchestrated my unlawful
arrest and detention on 04/08/2025—was present. I spoke loudly so that all
could hear: “You are not booking me out or handling this case. Get someone
else to do it.” I reminded him of his actions and stated again that I was
logging a formal complaint. He laughed. The custody officer who had earlier approached me at
the bench stood behind him. The officer responsible for my detention held my
property bags and said, “If you don’t leave now, we will force you.” I
replied, “That is illegal.” They then physically grabbed me by the arms and
forcibly escorted me out of the station. Once outside, the officer placed my property bags on
the pavement and walked back into the station. No paperwork was provided. I
was left alone, without documentation, legal support, or acknowledgment of
the events that had just occurred. I called my family, who came to collect me and
brought me back home. |
On
15/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
16/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 17/08/2025: I received a note through the door!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
18/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 19/08/2025: 6th email
|
|
|
|
|
6. Email Sent 8/19/25, 3:14 PM (9,793
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Re: Subject: Introduction
and Submission of Documents
From: Rewired
(re_wired@ymail.com) To: tuckers@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Tuesday 19 August 2025 at 15:12 BST Subject: Submission of Proof of Benefits and Case
Files for Representation Order Dear Andrew Dalton, I am writing in response
to your letter dated 13 August 2025 regarding my upcoming trial at High
Corner Magistrates' Court on 13 October 2025. Please find “Attached” the following documents as requested: ·
A copy of my driving license · Multiple screenshots from my Universal Credit portal, including: o The most recent benefit letter
from the Department for Work and Pensions o A recent
statement showing the last benefit payment received · Confirmation of my National Insurance Number: JH653811D · My complete set of Case Files (8 of 8), prepared and attached
This includes my MG11
witness statement, impact statement, correspondence with solicitors, and
supporting documents relevant to the Representation Order, at your review and
control. 1)
Tuckers@tuckerssolicitors-com-Urgent.pdf 2)
WITNESS STATEMENT Mr. Simon Paul Cordell.pdf 3)
Impact Statement Regarding Wrongly Imposed Bail Conditions.pdf 4)
Letter to my Solicitors At Court 08-08-2025.pdf 5)
permission to travel to Turkey.pdf 6)
Letter to Jude’s from Simons Dad.pdf 7)
09-08-2025-Day-After-Court.pdf 8)
The 14th 0f August 2025 2.pdf All Emails Sent So Far: 1)
Email Sent.pdf “Mother to Court Changed of address request!” 2)
Email Received.pdf “Courts Reply Granting The change of
address till the 8/08/25!” 3)
Email Sent.pdf “Myself to tuckers
solicitors’ representing solicitor for the 8/08/25!” 4)
Email Received-Attachment - Hearing Outcome.pdf 5)
Email Received.pdf “Tuckers solicitors confirming the hearing
outcome!” Please confirm receipt
and advise if any further documentation is required. https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/2?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 1/2 8/19/25, 3:14 PM (9,793 unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo
Mail Kind regards, Simon Paul Cordell On Thursday 7 August 2025
at 19:59:28 BST, Rewired
<re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Dear Dina,
Attached to this email,
you will find my MG11 form, along with important documents including a letter
of consent for my upcoming holiday, a letter regarding a change of bowel for
my father, and a letter of instructions. Please let me know if
there is anything else you require from me at this time. Thank you once again
for your assistance. Best regards, Simon Paul Cordell These files are complete
but are still having minor amendments but feel free to serve them as they
are! Weblink: nova1.ddns.net/Si1/ If pdf's are required i am happy to provide them Ready for court Tomorrow.
Thanks again Mr. Simon Paul Cordell. Legal Aid.rar 4.7 MB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/2?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 2/2 |
On 20/08/2025: Serco delivered a new charger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 21/08/2025: 7th
email + 8th email
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
8. Legal Aid Chasing provision of proof of benefits
(1)
Private &
Confidential Simon Cordell Dear Simon Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court - 13/10/2025 10:00 - Trial We wrote to ask you to
provide us with proof of your benefits. We have not received the
documentation from you and so write to request that you provide us with proof
of your benefits. That may include any
of the following:
We must also have your
National Insurance Number on our file.
If you have not provided that already please provide it without delay. Once we have proof of
your benefits we will be entitled to exercise the powers devolved to us by
the Legal Aid Agency to grant a Representation Order (legal aid) in your
case. A Representation Order is
the authority to be paid from public funds for the work undertaken on your
case. Please respond to this
letter as a matter of urgency. Yours sincerely Andrew Benington Tuckers Solicitors LLP |
||||||||
|
|
8.Received 8/21/25, 8:17 AM (9,798
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Id:COR10388/00001 Legal
Aid Chasing provision of proof of benefits From: CaseRatio
(caseratio@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Thursday 21 August 2025 at 00:13 BST Hello Simon Cordell, Please find the
attached document. https://www.caseratio.co.uk/matter/matterfilecover/COR10388/00001
100 kB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?reason=invalid_cred&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9tYWlsLnlhaG9vLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJu3… 1/1 |
||||||||
|
|
9. Email Sent 8/21/25, 8:21 AM (9,798
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Re: Id:COR10388/00001
Legal Aid Chasing provision of proof of benefits From: Rewired
(re_wired@ymail.com) To: caseratio@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Thursday 21 August 2025 at 07:59 BST Hello i
sent the email to this email: tuckers@tuckerssolicitors.com ... at this time
and date: Tue, 19 Aug at 15:12, I
have prior used to chat with yourselves and i will
forward it again now. Subject: Submission of Proof of Benefits and Case
Files for Representation Order Dear Andrew Dalton, I am writing in response
to your letter dated 13 August 2025 regarding my upcoming trial at High
Corner Magistrates' Court on 13 October 2025. Please find “Attached” the following documents as requested: ·
A copy of my driving license · Multiple screenshots from my Universal Credit portal, including: o The most recent benefit letter
from the Department for Work and Pensions o A recent
statement showing the last benefit payment received · Confirmation of my National Insurance Number: JH653811D · My complete set of Case Files (8 of 8), prepared and attached
This includes my MG11
witness statement, impact statement, correspondence with solicitors, and
supporting documents relevant to the Representation Order, at your review and
control. 1)
Tuckers@tuckerssolicitors-com-Urgent.pdf 2)
WITNESS STATEMENT Mr. Simon Paul Cordell.pdf 3)
Impact Statement Regarding Wrongly Imposed Bail Conditions.pdf 4)
Letter to my Solicitors At Court 08-08-2025.pdf 5)
permission to travel to Turkey.pdf 6)
Letter to Jude’s from Simons Dad.pdf 7)
09-08-2025-Day-After-Court.pdf 8)
The 14th 0f August 2025 2.pdf All Emails Sent So Far: 1)
Email Sent.pdf “Mother to Court Changed of address request!” 2)
Email Received.pdf “Courts Reply Granting The change of
address till the 8/08/25!” 3)
Email Sent.pdf “Myself to tuckers
solicitors’ representing solicitor for the 8/08/25!” 4)
Email Received-Attachment - Hearing Outcome.pdf 5)
Email Received.pdf “Tuckers solicitors confirming the hearing
outcome!” https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?reason=invalid_cred&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9tYWlsLnlhaG9vLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJu3… 1/2 8/21/25, 8:21 AM (9,798 unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo
Mail Please confirm receipt
and advise if any further documentation is required.
Kind regards, Simon Paul Cordell On Thursday 21 August 2025 at 00:13:25 BST,
CaseRatio <caseratio@tuckerssolicitors.com>
wrote: Hello Simon Cordell, Please find the
attached document. https://www.caseratio.co.uk/matter/matterfilecover/COR10388/00001 Legal Aid.rar 4.7 MB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?reason=invalid_cred&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9tYWlsLnlhaG9vLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJu3… 2/2 |
||||||||
|
|
|
On
22/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
23/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
24/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 25/08/2025: Serco replaced the tag due to charging faults.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 26/08/2025: Eight Police Officers!
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
🚪
The Arrest That Wasn’t an Investigation On 26/08/2025, eight police officers arrived
at my bail address. My father answered the door, but they pushed past him
aggressively, ignoring his attempts to speak. Their entry was forceful
and intimidating—heavy-handed with both of us. I
was in the front room, turning my back to rush inside when one officer
grabbed me and forced my hands behind my back. A second officer—Black
in appearance—joined him, and together they pushed me face-first to the
ground. With my hands restrained behind me, it was physically impossible
for me to have slapped or assaulted anyone. Despite
this, I was accused of assaulting the officer. No caution was given.
No interview was conducted. I was taken to Wood Green Police Station,
where the same custody officer from 04/08/2025 and 14/08/2025
processed me again. This officer had previously mishandled my tag fitting and
arrest procedures. And
then it clicked: “I
now remember where I know the sergeant from who keeps doing this to me. He is
the one that set me up before—back in my diary entry dated 10/05/2021, documented
in New parts 30-06-21 need to put in diary (Auto Recovered).docx.” That
earlier incident also involved an alleged assault against a police officer,
with no caution given, no explanation of evidence, and a blunt
accusation followed by a ride to the station. Back
in custody on the 26th, the officer who claimed I assaulted him never
returned to complete the charge. Instead, he reviewed his bodycam footage
privately, and I was held for 18 hours without access to a solicitor.
Eventually, my father was brought into the cell, and I was told I’d be
charged with breach of tag and assault—despite no interview, no caution, and
no evidence. ⚖️
Court Without Evidence At
court, the situation unraveled further:
This
delay and deferral violated multiple legal standards. 📄
Breach of MG05 Offence Report Protocol The
MG05 Offence Report is a mandatory form under the Manual of
Guidance, required for any first hearing at a magistrates’ court. It
must:
Home
Office Guidance (Published 26 February 2025): None
of this was done. The absence of the MG05 meant:
Criminal casefiles - forms,
standards, and file structure 🧠
Procedural Breaches and Legal Implications
Under
PACE Code C, any suspect must be cautioned before questioning. Under CPIA
1996 and Attorney General’s Guidelines on Disclosure, evidence
must be disclosed before court. Under the Director’s Guidance on Charging,
CPS cannot proceed without a complete file. 🔍
The Pattern of Neglect This
wasn’t a one-off. It was a systemic failure:
Even
the GPS tag breach was based on misinformation:
All
of this is documented—calls, timestamps, custody logs, and court transcripts.
If they won’t document the truth, I will. You can find the evidence at horrificcorruption.com.
|
On 27/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 28/08/2025: 9th
email + 10th email
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
6. Email
Received + 10. Received 8/29/25,
6:37 PM (9,860
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Request proof of benefits Id:COR10388/00002
From: Legal Aid (Shared) (legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Thursday 28 August 2025 at 15:35 BST Dear Simon Please see below Kind Regards Rosie Yates
100 kB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1/messages/56669/AN6EnUMpFKToUlDKixGfLFN1Tns:2?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB&messagePreview=1 1/1 |
||||||||
|
|
10. Legal Aid Chasing provision of proof of benefits
(1).docx
Private & Confidential Simon
Cordell 280 Durant Road EN3 7AZ Dear Simon We wrote to ask you to
provide us with proof of your benefits. We have not received the
documentation from you and so write to request that you provide us with proof
of your benefits. That may include any
of the following:
We must also have your
National Insurance Number on our file.
If you have not provided that already please provide it without delay. Once we have proof of
your benefits we will be entitled to exercise the powers devolved to us by
the Legal Aid Agency to grant a Representation Order (legal aid) in your
case. A Representation Order is
the authority to be paid from public funds for the work undertaken on your
case. Please respond to this
letter as a matter of urgency. Yours sincerely Chloe Birkhead Tuckers Solicitors LLP |
||||||||
|
|
|
On 29/08/2025: 12. Email Sent!
|
|
12. Email Sent |
|
|
8/29/25, 6:35 PM (9,860
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Re: Request proof of
benefits Id: COR10388/00002 From: Rewired
(re_wired@ymail.com) To: legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Friday 29 August 2025 at 18:35 BST Dear Tuckers Solicitors, I’m writing to clarify
the sequence of emails I’ve sent regarding my case, as I want to ensure all
submitted documents have been received and properly reviewed. I
initially sent my full submission to tuckers@tuckerssolicitors.com
on Tuesday, 19 August at 15:12,
including my driving license, Universal Credit screenshots, MG11 witness
statement, impact statement, and supporting documents for the Representation
Order. I
then replied to a separate thread from Case
Ratio, unaware at the time that it was automated. My replies were sent
on: • Thursday, 21 August at 00:13
• Thursday, 21 August at 07:59 • Thursday, 21 August at 14:34 I later received a
message from Lucia stating: “Please
ignore this email, it was sent by mistake by robot.” I had already
responded before realizing it was system-generated. The email i sent
is as below: and legal aid documents
are attached in WinRAR! Subject: Submission of Proof of Benefits and Case
Files for Representation Order Dear Andrew Dalton, I am writing in response
to your letter dated 13 August 2025 regarding my upcoming trial at High
Corner Magistrates' Court on 13 October 2025. Please find “Attached” the following documents as requested: ·
A copy of my driving license · Multiple screenshots from my Universal Credit portal, including: o The most recent benefit letter
from the Department for Work and Pensions o A recent
statement showing the last benefit payment received · Confirmation of my National Insurance Number: JH653811D · My complete set of Case Files (8 of 8), prepared and attached
This includes my MG11
witness statement, impact statement, correspondence with solicitors, and
supporting documents relevant to the Representation Order, at your review and
control. 1)
Tuckers@tuckerssolicitors-com-Urgent.pdf 2)
WITNESS STATEMENT Mr. Simon Paul Cordell.pdf 3)
Impact Statement Regarding Wrongly Imposed Bail Conditions.pdf 4)
Letter to my Solicitors At Court 08-08-2025.pdf 5)
permission to travel to Turkey.pdf 6)
Letter to Jude’s from Simons Dad.pdf https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 1/2 8/29/25, 6:35 PM (9,860 unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo
Mail 7)
09-08-2025-Day-After-Court.pdf 8)
The 14th 0f August 2025 2.pdf All Emails Sent So Far: 1)
Email Sent.pdf “Mother to Court Changed of address request!” 2)
Email Received.pdf “Courts Reply Granting The change of
address till the 8/08/25!” 3)
Email Sent.pdf “Myself to tuckers
solicitors’ representing solicitor for the 8/08/25!” 4)
Email Received-Attachment - Hearing Outcome.pdf 5)
Email Received.pdf “Tuckers solicitors confirming the hearing
outcome!” Please confirm receipt
and advise if any further documentation is required.
Kind regards, Please confirm which
thread you are working from and whether any further documentation is
required. Kind regards, Simon Paul Cordell On Thursday 28 August 2025 at 15:35:56 BST,
Legal Aid (Shared) <legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com>
wrote: Dear Simon Please see below Kind Regards Rosie Yates Legal Aid.rar 4.7 MB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 2/2 |
|
|
|
On
30/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
31/08/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 01/09/2025: 13. Received till the 25. Received!
|
|
13. Received |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 2:58 PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail RE: Request proof of
benefits Id:COR10388/00002 From: Legal Aid (Shared)
(legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 10:44 BST Thank you, I was emailing from your 2nd the new matter from last week that you were arrested on unaware that
you had emailed us from your other file. I have checked the evidence and added that to you file, however the
screenshots of the payments don’t show your name, if you log on to the UC
portal – go to Payments and click on the last date it should bring a page
showing your name & address and how much you were paid, if you can
screenshot and email this I would be grateful. Kind Regards Rosie Yates From: Rewired Sent: 29 August 2025 18:36 To: Legal
Aid (Shared) Subject: Re: Request proof of benefits Id:COR10388/00002 Dear
Tuckers Solicitors, I’m writing to clarify the sequence of emails I’ve sent
regarding my case, as I want to ensure all submitted documents have been
received and properly reviewed. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
14. Email Sent |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Re: Request proof of
benefits Id:COR10388/00002 From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 11:22 BST Thank you for you response
and i have attached the requested! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
15. Received |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
RE: Request proof of
benefits Id:COR10388/00002 From: Legal Aid (Shared) (legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 11:29 BST Perfect thank you, can you confirm how
much PIP you get a month as well Kind Regards Rosie Yates |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
16. Email Sent |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Re: Request proof of benefits Id:COR10388/00002 From: Rewired
(re_wired@ymail.com) To: legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025
at 11:38 BST Hi, the answer is: Pip
+£558.40 Also, i
get DWP EESA + 281.10. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
17. Received |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
RE: Request proof of
benefits Id:COR10388/00002 From: Legal Aid
(Shared) (legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1
September 2025 at 11:48 BST Many Thanks Simon |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
18. Received! 18. Let - Client
Legal Aid Granted - Devolved Powers - RO MC through to CC (1) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 3:03 PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Please see attached Id:
COR10388/00002 From: Legal Aid (Shared)
(legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025
at 11:53 BST
76.2 kB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 1/1 18. Let - Client Legal
Aid Granted - Devolved Powers - RO MC through to CC (1)
Private &
Confidential Mr Simon Cordell Email: re_wired@Ymail.com Dear Simon Re: Your Case
Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court Next Date of Hearing: 11th November 2025 at
09:30 Highbury Corner
Magistrates' Court - 11/11/2025 09:30 -
Trial We are writing to inform you that we are entitled to
exercise the powers devolved to us by the Legal Aid Agency to grant a
Representation Order (legal aid) in your case. A Representation Order is the authority to be paid
from public funds for the work undertaken on your case. This letter is purely
to provide confirmation of the legal aid position. I can confirm that you have provided me with the
necessary evidence for your benefits. Yours sincerely Rosie Yates Tuckers Solicitors
LLP
Representation Order In accordance with the
Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, you are granted
legal aid for magistrates' court proceedings in relation to the offences
listed below. This order covers work
by a litigator only (including advice and assistance regarding an appeal
against conviction or sentence but excluding the actual appeal proceedings). This order
automatically extends if your case is or has been committed to the Crown
Court for sentencing to cover work by a litigator and junior advocate in
respect of the Crown Court proceedings. It does not, however, cover work in
the Crown Court if your case is committed or sent there for trial. If this
happens, a further application will need to be made, and this will be
assessed by the Legal Aid Agency. The
litigator/Solicitor appointed is: Chloe Birkhead Tuckers
Solicitors
LLP 39
Warren
Street, London, W1T 6AF Tuckers Solicitors LLP- On behalf of the Director of
Legal Aid Casework Offences
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
19. Email Sent |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 3:05 PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Re: Please see attached Id:COR10388/00002
From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:08 BST Subject:
Urgent Clarification – Legal Aid Coverage for First Arrest (04/08/2025) To:
legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com From:
re_wired@ymail.com Date: 01 September 2025 Dear
Tuckers Solicitors, I
am writing to urgently clarify the scope of the legal aid granted under
reference COR10388/00002. From
your latest response, it appears that legal aid has been approved for the
fourth and most recent incident. However, I originally submitted
documentation with the understanding that this application was intended to
cover the first wrongful arrest on 04/08/2025. There
seems to have been a miscommunication, possibly during exchanges with Emil
Freeds, regarding which incident the legal aid applies to. I complied fully
and submitted supporting documents, but it now appears that the first case
may not have been included or processed correctly. Please
confirm whether the legal aid granted also covers the first
arrest, as both incidents are directly connected. If it
does not, I request that this be urgently reviewed and amended to ensure full
representation. Let
me know if any further documentation is needed to resolve this. Kind
regards, Mr. Simon Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 11:53:31 BST, Legal
Aid (Shared) <legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
20. Received
--Not in File 20. Received
Attachments Here! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 3:06
PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail You case papers Id:COR10388/00001 From: Andrew Benington
(beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:35 BST Hi The charge is Threat to Damage or Destroy
Property. On 2/8/25 threatened Rebecca
O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle belonging to her intending that she
would fear that the threat would be carried out. The issue in your case is very simple. Did you threaten to blow up your neighbours
car or not. This is your word against
hers. The rest of the statements from police officers are
immaterial. They do not reference the
case at all. I have included them
from completeleness. Best Regards Andrew Benington
Andrew Benington Magistrates Court Solicitor T: 07789830152 M: 07789830152 39, Warren Street,
London, W1T 6AF Mail: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net www.tuckerssolicitors.com
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy
22.2 MB Let_to_Client_Magistrates_Court_Trial_Advice.docx 107.3 kB Rebecca_O_hare_pdf.pdf 258.8 kB PC_Wilson_Wallis_pdf.pdf 376.9 kB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 1/2 9/8/25, 3:06 PM (9,927 unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo
Mail
554.9 kB Rebecca_O_HARE_2nd_pdf.pdf 122.5 kB PC_Chan_pdf.pdf 272.8 kB PC_Williams_pdf.pdf 134.2 kB Case_Summary_pdf.pdf 183.5 kB Defendant_Notice_of_Grant_of_Bail_pdf.pdf 54.4 kB Simon_CORDELL_Pre_Cons_pdf.pdf 39.8 kB PC_obsiye_pdf.pdf 264.7 kB Simon_CORDELL_Charges_pdf.pdf 179.8 kB signature-transparent-bg_bd3b4ec2-9608-4754-bd6a-54dd565a5306.png 11.3 kB https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 21. Received Attachments 2/2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
21. Received |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 3:05 PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail RE: Please see attached
Id: COR10388/00002 From: Legal Aid (Shared) (legalaid@tuckerssolicitors.com) Date: Monday 1 September 2025
at 12:42 BST Dear Simon to clarify we
have legal aid for the following cases; File COR10388/00001 –
Case Reference 01YE1267925 - Trial 13/10/2025 File COR10388/00002 –
Case Reference 01YE1300125 – Trial 11/11/2025 We done have any file for
any wrongful arrest cases. Kind Regards Rosie Yates |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
22. Email Sent |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 3:08
PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Re: You case papers Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 13:38 BST Subject: Re: Case COR10388/00001 – Threat to Damage or Destroy Property Dear Andrew, Thank you for sending over the case papers as i requested. I’ll take some time to review the correspondence and
documents in full, and I’ll be back in touch with you shortly to continue our
discussion. Best regards, Simon
Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:35:40 BST, Andrew
Benington <beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi The charge is Threat to Damage or Destroy
Property. On 2/8/25 threatened Rebecca
O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle belonging to her intending that she
would fear that the threat would be carried out. The issue in your case is very simple. Did you threaten to blow up your neighbours
car or not. This is your word against
hers. The rest of the statements from police officers are
immaterial. They do not reference the
case at all. I have included them
from completeleness. Best Regards Andrew Benington
Andrew Benington Magistrates Court Solicitor T: 07789830152 M: 07789830152 39, Warren Street,
London, W1T 6AF Mail: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net www.tuckerssolicitors.com https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 1/2 9/8/25, 3:08 PM (9,927 unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo
Mail
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 2/2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
23. Email Sent |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9/8/25, 3:08
PM (9,927
unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo Mail Re: You case papers Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired
(re_wired@ymail.com) To: beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 14:40 BST Subject: Request for Full Disclosure – Case of 04/08/2025 Dear Andrew I am writing regarding the recent disclosure I
received for the case dated 04/08/2025. I am currently reviewing the
documents provided, but I have noticed that the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC,) which is a
standard CPS form outlining the prosecution’s case summary, has not been
included. I have received this form in previous cases, and would apricate it
as disclosed for this cases matter. Please confirm whether the IDPC has been generated
for this case, and if so, kindly provide it as part of the disclosure bundle. Additionally, I would like to formally request the
following materials, which are critical to my defence: Police officer notebooks from the date of
the incident Body-worn camera footage from all attending
officers This footage is particularly important, as it
captures not only my account of events but also the presence and comments of bystanders and neighbours who
witnessed the situation. The arresting officer’s refusal to take their
statements of them, despite being prompted on camera, forms part of a broader
pattern in how these cases have been handled against me and demonstrates my
innocence as to their said version of events. These materials are essential to establishing the
full context of these ongoings and ensuring procedural fairness. Please will
you kindly confirm as to when and how I can expect to receive them,
considering the circumstances or if further steps are required to obtain
access. Kind regards, Mr. Simon Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 13:38:58 BST, Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: Case COR10388/00001 – Threat to Damage or
Destroy Property Dear Andrew, Thank you for sending over the case papers as i requested. I’ll take some time to review the correspondence and
documents in full, and I’ll be back in touch with you shortly to continue our
discussion. Best regards, Simon
Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:35:40 BST, Andrew
Benington <beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi The charge is Threat to Damage or Destroy
Property. On 2/8/25 threatened Rebecca
O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle belonging to her intending that she
would fear that the threat would be carried out. https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 1/2 9/8/25, 3:08 PM (9,927 unread) – re_wired@ymail.com – Yahoo
Mail The issue in your case is very simple. Did you threaten to blow up your neighbours
car or not. This is your word against
hers. The rest of the statements from police officers are
immaterial. They do not reference the
case at all. I have included them
from completeleness. Best Regards
Andrew Benington Magistrates Court Solicitor T: 07789830152 M: 07789830152 39, Warren Street,
London, W1T 6AF Mail: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net www.tuckerssolicitors.com
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1?.intl=uk&.lang=en-GB 2/2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
24. Email Sent |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
RE: You case papers
Id:COR10388/00001 From: Andrew Benington
(beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 18:38 BST All the documents in the IDPC have been forwarded to you as separate
documents. The officers’ notebooks are
irrelevant as there is Body Worn Video. If you know of any witness who can support your denial that you spoke
those words to your neighbour then please provide
any details you can. Best Regards
Andrew Benington Solicitor T: 07789830152 M: 07789830152 CJSM: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy From: Rewired
<re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: 01 September
2025 14:41 To: Andrew
Benington <BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com> Subject: Re: You case
papers Id:COR10388/00001 You don't often get email from re_wired@ymail.com. Learn why this is important Subject: Request for Full
Disclosure – Case of 04/08/2025 Dear Andrew I am writing regarding the recent disclosure I
received for the case dated 04/08/2025. I am currently reviewing the
documents provided, but I have noticed that the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC,) which is a
standard CPS form outlining the prosecution’s case summary, has not been
included. I have received this form in previous cases, and would apricate it
as disclosed for this cases matter. Please confirm whether the IDPC has been generated
for this case, and if so, kindly provide it as part of the disclosure bundle. Additionally, I would like to formally request the
following materials, which are critical to my defence: Police officer notebooks from the date of
the incident Body-worn camera footage from all attending
officers This footage is particularly important, as it
captures not only my account of events but also the presence and comments of bystanders and neighbours who
witnessed the situation. The arresting officer’s refusal to take their
statements of them, despite being prompted on camera, forms part of a broader
pattern in how these cases have been handled against me and demonstrates my
innocence as to their said version of events. These materials are essential to establishing the
full context of these ongoings and ensuring procedural fairness. Please will
you kindly confirm as to when and how I can expect to receive them,
considering the circumstances or if further steps are required to obtain
access. Kind regards, Mr. Simon Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 13:38:58 BST, Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: Case
COR10388/00001 – Threat to Damage or Destroy Property Dear Andrew, Thank you for sending over the case papers as i requested. I’ll take some time to review the correspondence and
documents in full, and I’ll be back in touch with you shortly to continue our
discussion. Best regards, Simon
Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:35:40 BST, Andrew
Benington <beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi The charge is Threat to Damage or Destroy
Property. On 2/8/25 threatened Rebecca
O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle belonging to her intending that she
would fear that the threat would be carried out. The issue in your case is very simple. Did you threaten to blow up your neighbours
car or not. This is your word against
hers. The rest of the statements from police officers are
immaterial. They do not reference the
case at all. I have included them
from completeleness. Best Regards Andrew Benington Andrew Benington Magistrates Court Error! Filename not Solicitor specified. T:
07789830152 M: 07789830152 39, Warren Street, London, W1T 6AF Mail: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
25. Received |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
RE: You case papers
Id:COR10388/00001 From: Andrew Benington
(beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com) To: re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 1 September 2025 at 18:38 BST All the documents in the IDPC have been forwarded to you as separate
documents. The officers’ notebooks are
irrelevant as there is Body Worn Video. If you know of any witness who can support your denial that you spoke
those words to your neighbour then please provide
any details you can.
Andrew Benington Andrew Benington Solicitor T: 07789830152 M: 07789830152 CJSM: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy From: Rewired
<re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: 01 September
2025 14:41 To: Andrew
Benington <BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com> Subject: Re: You case
papers Id:COR10388/00001 You don't often get email from re_wired@ymail.com. Learn why this is important Subject: Request for Full
Disclosure – Case of 04/08/2025 Dear Andrew I am writing regarding the recent disclosure I
received for the case dated 04/08/2025. I am currently reviewing the
documents provided, but I have noticed that the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC,) which is a
standard CPS form outlining the prosecution’s case summary, has not been
included. I have received this form in previous cases and would apricate it
as disclosed for this case’s matter. Please confirm whether the IDPC has been generated
for this case, and if so, kindly provide it as part of the disclosure bundle. Additionally, I would like to formally request the
following materials, which are critical to my defence: Police officer notebooks from the date of
the incident Body-worn camera footage from all attending
officers This footage is particularly important, as it
captures not only my account of events but also the presence and comments of bystanders and neighbours who
witnessed the situation. The arresting officer’s refusal to take their
statements of them, despite being prompted on camera, forms part of a broader
pattern in how these cases have been handled against me and demonstrates my
innocence as to their said version of events. These materials are essential to establishing the
full context of these ongoings and ensuring procedural fairness. Please will
you kindly confirm as to when and how I can expect to receive them,
considering the circumstances or if further steps are required to obtain
access. Kind regards, Mr Simon Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 13:38:58 BST, Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: Case
COR10388/00001 – Threat to Damage or Destroy Property Dear Andrew, Thank you for sending over the case papers as i requested. I’ll take some time to review the correspondence and
documents in full, and I’ll be back in touch with you shortly to continue our
discussion. Best regards, Simon
Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:35:40 BST, Andrew
Benington <beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi The charge is Threat to Damage or Destroy
Property. On 2/8/25 threatened Rebecca
O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle belonging to her intending that she
would fear that the threat would be carried out. The issue in your case is very simple. Did you threaten to blow up your neighbours
car or not. This is your word against
hers. The rest of the statements from police officers are
immaterial. They do not reference the
case at all. I have included them
from completeleness. Best Regards Andrew Benington Andrew Benington Magistrates Court Error! Filename not Solicitor specified. T:
07789830152 M: 07789830152 39, Warren Street, London, W1T 6AF Mail: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM:
BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net www.tuckerssolicitors.com
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On 02/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
No
Access to computer, cloths and anything else normal. = Family Issues. |
On
03/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
04/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
05/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
06/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
07/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
08/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 09/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
Si-Notes:
Due
to being on bail conditions I can not to go to my home I can not use my
computer consol and have been locked out of the servers remotely to obtain
files. This is a unfair disadvantage when my evidence is at my home. The
severs can not be moved due to ip and other
formalities that would be impossible to undertake. I have key evidence of
Rebecca O’Hare and the true ongoings. |
On
10/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
11/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
12/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
13/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
14/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 15/09/2025: 26. Email-Sent + 27. Email-Received + “I would like to meet with you in order to discuss your case.”
|
|
26. Email-Sent |
|
|
Re: You case papers
Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com)
To:beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 15 September 2025 at 10:09 BST I've had to send this email twice as i sent
it to an older reply and will also forward it to www.tuckerssolicitors.com To: Andrew Tuckers Solicitors 39 Warren Street London W1T 6AF Tuckers Solicitors 39 Warren Street London W1T 6AF Date: 15 September 2025 Subject: URN 01YE1300125 – Trial Attendance, Disclosure Requests, and Legal
Grounds for Dismissal Dear Andrew, I am writing to formally request your attendance at
my upcoming trial hearing scheduled for 13
October 2025 at Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court, to support
cross-examination and ensure procedural fairness. Due to bail conditions prohibiting me from residing
at my home address, I have faced significant barriers in accessing my legal
documentation, computer equipment, and case files. Legal aid was only
recently confirmed, and I currently hold one
formal statement, but I do not
have access to a scanner at present. I am actively preparing my defence
and compiling directions, which I will email
across shortly once complete. However, due to time constraints and the
trial date drawing closer, I am sending
this email as a substitute until the full bundle is ready. ⚖ Request
for Attendance at Trial Your presence is essential to support
cross-examination of the officers involved and to ensure my defence is
properly represented. I also request that the following individuals be formally summoned to attend court for
cross-examination: PC Chan (1405NA) PC Obsiye (NA22L) PC3454NA (RYAW) – Arresting officer Female officer involved in forced entry and restraint – Name to be confirmed via custody logs Rebecca O’Hare – Alleged victim, whose testimony contains contradictions and must be
examined Neighbour witnesses – Who observed the
incident and are willing to testify 📹 Mandatory Disclosure of Body-Worn Camera Footage Please apply for full disclosure of all body-worn
camera footage from the officers listed above. This footage must be treated
as working exhibits, as it is
critical to establishing the truth of what occurred, including: 1. Excessive force during arrest 2. Denial of medical assistance despite visible injury 3. Refusal to take witness statements from neighbours 4. Fabrication of procedural records and timeline
inconsistencies ⚖ Legal Grounds for Dismissal for Arrest [1] –
04/08/2025 I request that you pursue dismissal of the
proceedings on the following grounds: I was not lawfully arrested or interviewed for the
new charge I was denied access to an appropriate adult and
legal adviser during key custody decisions The charge was fabricated post-release, without
re-arrest or legal process The bodycam footage
and witness statements contradict the police narrative and prove misconduct 🧾 Named
Statements & Timeline Manipulation Statement 1 – PC Chan (1405NA) Dated 01/08/2025
yet describes events from 02/08/2025.
This is a temporal impossibility, proving the statement was backdated. Statement 2 – PC Obsiye
(NA22L) Dated 02/08/2025,
referencing CAD 6844/02AUG25, but
contradicts PC Chan’s account and omits lawful grounds for entry. Statement 3 – Officer Unknown Dated 30/08/2022
yet references the 2025 incident.
This is either a clerical error or a deliberate attempt to retrofit a
narrative. Charge Sheet Manipulation The original allegation was for harassment, later swapped for criminal damage—without interview, caution, or lawful rearrest.
This violates PACE 1984 and CPIA 1996. 🗂 Additional Legal Requests Please initiate the following disclosures and
actions to support my defence: Full Custody Record Disclosure – Including booking times, inspector reviews,
medical assessments, and legal access logs CAD and Call Log Records – For all calls made by Rebecca O’Hare, neighbours, and internal
police communications Tagging Company Records – Installation date, breach alerts, and correspondence with
police/court Medical Expert Statement – Verifying injuries sustained and long-term impact Formal Complaint to IOPC – Regarding excessive force, denial of care, and procedural
misconduct Judicial Review Preparation
– If fabricated records or unlawful restrictions are upheld 📁 Case
Preparation Summary ✅ Materials
Already Sent These documents have been submitted to Tuckers
Solicitors for their review: MG11 Witness Statement – Dated 04/08/2025, detailing the incident and procedural violations Impact Statement – Outlining the emotional, professional, and logistical harm caused
by bail conditions Request for Disclosure – Previously submitted to Tuckers Solicitors, seeking key evidence
and records Medical Records – Confirming injuries sustained during arrest and hospitalisation 🛠 Materials
In Progress (To Be Sent Shortly) These items are being prepared and will be submitted
once scanning and formatting are complete: Digital Evidence Repository – Hosted at horrific-corruption-files.webhop.me Neighbour Witness Statements – From individuals who observed the incident and are willing to
testify
Nine convictions listed on my PNC record do not
exist in Highbury & Islington’s registry Convictions 1,
2, 3, 4, and 9 occurred before my
first reprimand date, making them procedurally invalid The alleged
convictions could not have occurred on
the same day as the plea date, based on ACRO and PNC printout timestamps The file is marked “No Further Action”, and most entries relate to non-criminal matters or mistaken identity
These findings support my claim that I am an innocent victim of identity confusion, caused by systemic negligence and misconduct by
police and court review teams The mishandling of my personal data constitutes a breach of GDPR 📌 Additional
Requests in Progress These formal requests are being initiated or are
pending response: PNC Record Challenge – Addressing fabricated entries acknowledged by custody officers Full Custody Record Disclosure – Including booking times, inspector reviews,
medical logs, and legal access history CAD and Call Log Records – For all calls made by Rebecca O’Hare, neighbours, and internal
police communications Tagging Company Records – Installation date, breach alerts, and correspondence with
police/court Medical Expert Statement – Verifying the physical and psychological impact of the assault Formal Complaint to IPCC / IOPC – Regarding excessive force, denial of care, and
procedural misconduct Request for
Judicial Review – To challenge the legality of the proceedings and
fabricated records! I trust you will take the necessary steps to ensure
this case is handled with the seriousness and transparency it demands. Please
confirm your attendance and initiate the required disclosure applications and
summonses as soon as possible. Yours sincerely, Simon Paul Cordell 280 Durant Road Enfield, EN3 7AZ DOB: 26/01/1981 Email: re_wired@ymail.com On Monday 15 September 2025 at 10:05:48 BST, Rewired
Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: To: Andrew
[Surname if known] Tuckers Solicitors 39 Warren Street London W1T 6AF Date: 15 September
2025 Subject: URN 01YE1300125 – Trial Attendance, Disclosure Requests, and Legal
Grounds for Dismissal Dear Andrew, I am writing to formally request your attendance at
my upcoming trial hearing scheduled for 13
October 2025 at Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court, to support
cross-examination and ensure procedural fairness. Due to bail conditions prohibiting me from residing
at my home address, I have faced significant barriers in accessing my legal
documentation, computer equipment, and case files. Legal aid was only
recently confirmed, and I currently hold one
formal statement, but I do not
have access to a scanner at present. I am actively preparing my defence
and compiling directions, which I will email
across shortly once complete. However, due to time constraints and the
trial date drawing closer, I am sending
this email as a substitute until the full bundle is ready. ⚖ Request for
Attendance at Trial Your presence is essential to support
cross-examination of the officers involved and to ensure my defence is
properly represented. I also request that the following individuals be formally summoned to attend court for
cross-examination: PC Chan (1405NA) PC Obsiye (NA22L) PC3454NA (RYAW) – Arresting officer Female officer involved in forced entry and restraint – Name to be confirmed via custody logs Rebecca O’Hare – Alleged victim, whose testimony contains contradictions and must be
examined Neighbour witnesses – Who observed the
incident and are willing to testify 📹 Mandatory Disclosure
of Body-Worn Camera Footage Please apply for full disclosure of all body-worn
camera footage from the officers listed above. This footage must be treated
as working exhibits, as it is
critical to establishing the truth of what occurred, including: 1. Excessive force during arrest 2. Denial of medical assistance despite visible injury 3. Refusal to take witness statements from neighbours 4. Fabrication of procedural records and timeline
inconsistencies ⚖ Legal Grounds for
Dismissal for Arrest [1] – 04/08/2025 I request that you pursue dismissal of the
proceedings on the following grounds: I was not lawfully arrested or interviewed for the
new charge I was denied access to an appropriate adult and
legal adviser during key custody decisions The charge was fabricated post-release, without
re-arrest or legal process The bodycam
footage and witness statements contradict the police narrative and prove
misconduct 🧾 Named Statements &
Timeline Manipulation Statement 1 – PC Chan (1405NA) Dated 01/08/2025
yet describes events from 02/08/2025.
This is a temporal impossibility, proving the statement was backdated. Statement 2 – PC Obsiye
(NA22L) Dated 02/08/2025,
referencing CAD 6844/02AUG25, but
contradicts PC Chan’s account and omits lawful grounds for entry. Statement 3 – Officer Unknown Dated 30/08/2022
yet references the 2025 incident.
This is either a clerical error or a deliberate attempt to retrofit a
narrative. Charge Sheet Manipulation The original allegation was for harassment, later swapped for criminal damage—without interview, caution, or lawful rearrest.
This violates PACE 1984 and CPIA 1996. 🗂 Additional Legal Requests Please initiate the following disclosures and
actions to support my defence: Full Custody Record Disclosure – Including booking times, inspector reviews,
medical assessments, and legal access logs CAD and Call Log Records – For all calls made by Rebecca O’Hare, neighbours, and internal
police communications Tagging Company Records – Installation date, breach alerts, and correspondence with
police/court Medical Expert Statement – Verifying injuries sustained and long-term impact Formal Complaint to IOPC – Regarding excessive force, denial of care, and procedural
misconduct Judicial Review Preparation
– If fabricated records or unlawful restrictions are upheld 📁 Case
Preparation Summary ✅ Materials Already
Sent These documents have been submitted to Tuckers
Solicitors for their review: MG11 Witness Statement – Dated 04/08/2025, detailing the incident and procedural violations Impact Statement – Outlining the emotional, professional, and logistical harm caused
by bail conditions Request for Disclosure – Previously submitted to Tuckers Solicitors, seeking key evidence
and records Medical Records – Confirming injuries sustained during arrest and hospitalisation 🛠 Materials In Progress
(To Be Sent Shortly) These items are being prepared and will be submitted
once scanning and formatting are complete: Digital Evidence Repository – Hosted at horrific-corruption-files.webhop.me Neighbour Witness Statements – From individuals who observed the incident and are willing to
testify
Nine convictions listed on my PNC record do not
exist in Highbury & Islington’s registry Convictions 1,
2, 3, 4, and 9 occurred before my
first reprimand date, making them procedurally invalid The alleged
convictions could not have occurred on
the same day as the plea date, based on ACRO and PNC printout timestamps The file is marked “No Further Action”, and most entries relate to non-criminal matters or mistaken identity
These findings support my claim that I am an innocent victim of identity confusion, caused by systemic negligence and misconduct by
police and court review teams The mishandling of my personal data constitutes a breach of GDPR 📌 Additional Requests in Progress These formal requests are being initiated or are
pending response: PNC Record Challenge – Addressing fabricated entries acknowledged by custody officers Full Custody Record Disclosure – Including booking times, inspector reviews,
medical logs, and legal access history CAD and Call Log Records – For all calls made by Rebecca O’Hare, neighbours, and internal
police communications Tagging Company Records – Installation date, breach alerts, and correspondence with
police/court Medical Expert Statement – Verifying the physical and psychological impact of the assault Formal Complaint to IPCC / IOPC – Regarding excessive force, denial of care, and
procedural misconduct Request for
Judicial Review – To challenge the legality of the proceedings and
fabricated records! I trust you will take the necessary steps to ensure
this case is handled with the seriousness and transparency it demands. Please
confirm your attendance and initiate the required disclosure applications and
summonses as soon as possible. Yours sincerely, Simon Paul Cordell 280 Durant Road Enfield, EN3 7AZ DOB: 26/01/1981 Email: re_wired@ymail.com On Monday 1 September 2025 at 18:38:25 BST, Andrew
Benington <beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: All the documents in the IDPC have been forwarded to you as separate
documents. The officers’ notebooks are
irrelevant as there is Body Worn Video. If you know of any witness who can support your denial that you spoke
those words to your neighbour then please provide
any details you can.
Best Regards Andrew Benington Andrew Benington Solicitor T: 07789830152 M: 07789830152 CJSM: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy From: Rewired
<re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: 01 September
2025 14:41 To: Andrew
Benington <BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com> Subject: Re: You case
papers Id:COR10388/00001 You don't often get email from re_wired@ymail.com. Learn why this is important Subject: Request for Full
Disclosure – Case of 04/08/2025 Dear Andrew I am writing
regarding the recent disclosure I received for the case dated 04/08/2025. I
am currently reviewing the documents provided, but I have noticed that the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case
(IDPC,) which is a standard CPS form outlining the prosecution’s case
summary, has not been included. I have received this form in previous cases
and would apricate it as disclosed for this case’s matter. Please confirm
whether the IDPC has been generated for this case, and if so, kindly provide
it as part of the disclosure bundle. Additionally, I
would like to formally request the following materials, which are critical to
my defence: Police officer notebooks from the date of
the incident Body-worn camera footage from all attending
officers This footage is
particularly important, as it captures not only my account of events but also
the presence and comments of bystanders
and neighbours who witnessed the situation. The arresting officer’s
refusal to take their statements of them, despite being prompted on camera,
forms part of a broader pattern in how these cases have been handled against
me and demonstrates my innocence as to their said version of events. These materials are
essential to establishing the full context of these ongoings and ensuring
procedural fairness. Please will you kindly confirm as to when and how I can
expect to receive them, considering the circumstances or if further steps are
required to obtain access. Kind regards, Mr Simon Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 13:38:58 BST, Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: Case
COR10388/00001 – Threat to Damage or Destroy Property Dear Andrew, Thank you for
sending over the case papers as i requested. I’ll take some time
to review the correspondence and documents in full, and I’ll be back in touch
with you shortly to continue our discussion. Best regards, Simon Cordell On Monday 1 September 2025 at 12:35:40 BST, Andrew
Benington <beningtona@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi The charge is
Threat to Damage or Destroy Property.
On 2/8/25 threatened Rebecca O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle
belonging to her intending that she would fear that the threat would be
carried out. The issue in your
case is very simple. Did you threaten
to blow up your neighbours car or not.
This is your word against hers. The rest of the
statements from police officers are immaterial. They do not reference the case at all. I have included them from completeleness. Best Regards Andrew Benington Andrew Benington Magistrates Court Error! Filename not Solicitor specified. T:
07789830152 M: 07789830152 39, Warren Street, London, W1T 6AF Mail: BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM:
BeningtonA@tuckerssolicitors.com.cjsm.net www.tuckerssolicitors.com
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy |
|
|
27.
Email-Received |
|
|
Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Nicole Windele
(windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com) To:re_wired@ymail.com Date: Monday 15 September 2025 at 14:44 BST Dear Simon, I am the paralegal assistant to Andrew with your
case. I would like to meet with you in order to discuss
your case. I am happy to do this either in person at our office in Warren
Street or via teams. Please could you let me know if you have
availability for a meeting early next week. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards,
Nicole Windele Criminal Defence Paralegal 39 Warren Street
London, , W1T 6AF Mail: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net www.tuckerssolicitors.com
Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy
·
signature-transparent-bg_bd3b4ec2-9608-4754-bd6a-54dd565a5306.png
11.3 kB |
|
|
|
On
16/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
17/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
18/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
19/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
20/09/2025: “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 21/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
server 2 |
On 22/09/2025: 22-Days-till-Cour! + Draft Files
|
|
|
|
|
Fixing Case Files Thanks, Simon.
Based on your confirmed file order and the structure of your evidence
repository, here’s the final,
comprehensive email draft to send to Andrew
Benington at Tuckers Solicitors. This version includes: •
Confirmation of
your willingness to join a Teams meeting •
Explanation of your
technical setup and limitations •
Request for trial
postponement •
Clear instructions on how to use the files •
Highlighting system (orange and green) •
Direct reference to
the correct file structure and repository Subject: Urgent: Request for Disclosure, Trial Extension
& Review of Case Files Dear Mr. Benington, I hope this message finds you well. Following your recent invitation to a Microsoft
Teams meeting, I would like to confirm my willingness to participate. While I
am not very familiar with Teams, I do have Anydesk remote access available
and am happy to provide access to my files during the meeting. This will
allow me to demonstrate the volume and structure of exhibits I have compiled
in support of my defence. Due to my current bail conditions, I am reliant on
others to assist with technical access to my systems. Unfortunately, none of
these individuals possess the qualifications necessary to support the legal
and evidentiary aspects of my case. As a result, progress has been slow and,
I believe, unfairly hindered. I am deeply concerned that with only 22 days
remaining until trial, there is insufficient time to complete the necessary
case files and allow my legal defence team to properly review them. I
respectfully request that we postpone the trial date to ensure that all
materials can be properly prepared and assessed. Temporary
Case Files Repository I have created a
temporary web link to host key documents while my servers undergo repair: horrific-corruption-files.webhop.me/1Test This repository contains structured folders and
files that demonstrate: •
Procedural errors •
Fabricated criminal record entries •
Misconduct by authorities •
Audio and written evidence supporting my defence How to Use the Files Each file is named and ordered to guide you through
the evidence chronologically and thematically. Sinead Statement 2014 Files to do with Rebeca Court order for emergency transfer that council refuse to act upon,
allowing for me to be victimised in my own home with their deliberate
interventions. Please begin with the ACRO comparisons, followed by
CPS disclosures, and then supporting evidence such as emails, recordings, and
legal letters. File Order & Purpose: 1. 1-Combined-2017-2020-2021-WorkOut-Code-4-PNC (.docx
& .pdf) a
Simplified versions of the ACRO report showing
manipulated entries. Use these to compare against official disclosures. 2. 1. Emails (Folder)
a
Contains my correspondence with legal entities,
including requests for disclosure and trial dismissal. These show my
consistent efforts to engage with the process and highlight delays. 3. 2. Orig-Mod CORDELL Simon Paul
01YE1300125 Initial Details Pros Case pdf.pdf a
Annotated CPS disclosure showing how a breach of
bail allegation was used to escalate the case unfairly. 4. 3. Acro 2021 PNC_9799378V CORDELL SIMON PAUL
MOD-31-01-2024.pdf a
Original ACRO report with highlighted markers for
comparison. 5. 4. CORDELL Simon Paul 01YE1300125 Initial Details Pros
Case pdf.pdf a
Breakdown of the conviction printout showing
multiple errors. 6. 5-New-Pre-Action-Conduct-Letter-12-05-25 -V1.pdf a
Evidence of fraudulent record keeping and procedural
violations. 7. 6. 02-09-24 -Court-Highbury-PNC (Folder) a
Contains one of over 200 recordings related to cases
where I was allegedly set up. 8. 7. Acro-Return-Workout (Folder) a
Dissects the ACRO record, exposing fabricated
entries and timeline manipulation. 9. 7. RequestPoliceAcroMarkers.pdf a
Highlights specific markers used in the police
record that are inconsistent or misleading. 10. 7. This one--ReturnWorkout2of3Workouts (Folder) a
Contains part 2 of the ACRO analysis, correcting
arrest and disposal records. 11. 8. Title 115-Rebbeca -Key (.docx & .pdf) a
Documents how Rebecca O’Hare and others have
targeted me unlawfully, supported by exhibits collected by myself, family,
and supporters. Orange & Green Highlights Explained To assist with navigation and analysis, I’ve used a
color-coded system throughout the documents: •
Orange Highlights: Mark entries that appear to be fraudulently created
or backdated. These disrupt the timeline and often sit in the wrong
chronological section. They are key to proving manipulation of my criminal
record. •
Green Highlights: Indicate entries that were deleted or suppressed in
later versions of the record. These show how legitimate information was
removed to support a false narrative. Each highlighted section is cross-referenced with
supporting documents and recordings to establish a pattern of abuse and
procedural misconduct. I would appreciate it if you could confirm receipt
of this message and advise whether a telephone number is available for direct
contact. I believe a brief conversation would help clarify the urgency and
complexity of the situation. Thank you for your continued support and attention
to this matter. Kind regards, Simon Paul Cordell ----------------- Legal Grounds for Dismissal of Charge: “Threats to Cause Criminal Damage” Defendant: Mr. Simon Paul
Cordell Court: Highbury Corner Magistrates’
Court Trial Date: 13 October 2025 Charge: Threats to cause criminal damage
(allegedly made on 02/08/2025) Legal Basis: Criminal Damage
Act 1971, Section 2 1. No Interview, No
Arrest, No Caution •
The alleged threat
was never investigated through proper channels. •
No re-arrest, no
caution, and no interview were conducted for this new charge. •
This violates the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
(PACE) and Code C, which
guarantee the right to legal representation and proper interview procedure. 2. Charge Fabricated
After Custody Expired •
The original
harassment charge was dropped. •
The new charge was
introduced after the custody clock
expired, without legal basis. •
This is a breach of
Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998
(right to a fair trial) and PACE
custody rules. 3. Sole Witness
Statement Is Invalid •
The only statement
against Mr. Cordell is from Rebecca O’Hare. •
This statement was
originally submitted for a different
case (harassment), and includes references to prior dates and incidents that were already resolved with No Further Action (NFA). •
Using this
statement for a new charge is procedurally improper and violates the CPS Code for Crown Prosecutors, which
requires: o
Sufficient
admissible evidence o Public interest o Procedural fairness 4. No Immediate Risk
or Threat •
The alleged
incident occurred 90 minutes before
police arrived. •
Mr. Cordell was
indoors, recovering from surgery, in pyjamas, and
physically incapacitated. •
There was no confrontation, no damage, and no verbal exchange with the alleged victim. •
This fails the
legal test for “threats to cause criminal damage,” which requires: o
A clear and credible threat o Intent to
intimidate o No lawful excuse 5. Police Statements
Pre-Date the Incident •
Several police
statements were created before the
alleged incident occurred, indicating fabrication or premeditated
misconduct. •
This undermines the
integrity of the investigation and may constitute perverting the course of justice. 6. Medical Incapacity •
Mr. Cordell had
undergone hernia surgery days prior. •
He was unable to
walk, bend, or speak without pain. •
This makes the
alleged threat physically implausible
and legally unsustainable. 7. Denial of Legal
Rights •
Mr. Cordell was
denied access to: o
His solicitor
during key custody decisions o His appropriate adult o Medical assistance •
These are
violations of PACE, Code C, and Article 3 of the Human Rights Act (protection from inhuman or
degrading treatment). 8. PNC Record Proven
to Be Fabricated •
Internal checks by
custody officers confirmed fraudulent entries in Mr. Cordell’s Police
National Computer (PNC) record. •
These entries were
used to justify bail refusal and escalate charges. •
The court itself
acknowledged that Mr. Cordell had no
convictions in over 25 years, contradicting the fabricated record. Conclusion: Trial Must Not Proceed The charge of
“threats to cause criminal damage” is legally unsound, procedurally invalid,
and unsupported by admissible evidence. The case is built on a single
recycled witness statement, fabricated police records, and unlawful custody
practices. Proceeding to trial under these conditions would constitute a
miscarriage of justice and expose the court to liability for reckless
sentencing of an innocent man. Recommended Action •
Immediate dismissal of the charge
under Section 2 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 •
Formal adjournment of trial pending
full review of procedural breaches •
Disclosure order for all body-worn
footage, custody logs, and internal communications •
Judicial inquiry into the
fabrication of PNC records and unlawful detention |
On
23/09/2025: 21-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
24/09/2025: 20-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
25/09/2025: 19-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 26/09/2025: 18-Days-till-Cour! + 28. Email-Sent-Now! +
29. Received + 30. Email-Sent!
|
|
28. Email-Sent-Now |
|
|
Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To:windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Friday 26 September 2025 at 12:09 BST •
Confirmation of my
willingness to join a Teams meeting! •
Explanation of my
technical setup and limitations! •
Request for trial
postponement! •
Clear instructions
on how to use the Case files developed! •
Formal request for
confirmation of case compliance regarding my legal instructions submitted to
Tucker Solicitor Firm, including a detailed list of completed actions. •
Date and time
agreement for first legal meeting to take place! "As detailed
Below!" Subject: Urgent: Request for Disclosure, Trial Extension & Review
of Case Files Dear Mr. Benington, I hope this message finds you well. Following your recent invitation to a Microsoft Teams meeting, I would
like to confirm my willingness to participate. While I am not very familiar
with Teams, I do have Anydesk remote access available and am happy to provide
access to my files during the meeting. This will allow me to demonstrate the
volume and structure of exhibits I have compiled in support of my defence. Due to my current bail conditions, I am reliant on others to assist
with technical access to my systems. Unfortunately, none of these individuals
possess the qualifications necessary to support the legal and evidentiary
aspects of my case. As a result, progress has been slow and, I believe,
unfairly hindered. I am deeply concerned that with only “18 Days Remaining Until
Trial,” there is insufficient time to complete the necessary case files
and allow my legal defence team to properly review them. I respectfully
request that we explore the possibility of postponing the trial date to
ensure that all materials can be properly prepared and assessed. a. Due to the 18
days left till trial, I am available at your earliest convenience please set
any date or time and I will be available! Temporary Case Files Repository I have created a temporary web link to host key documents while my
servers undergo repair: https://horrificcorruption.com/Server2/Another-Police-Case-03-08-2025/index01a.asp This repository contains structured folders and files that
demonstrate: •
Procedural errors •
Fabricated criminal
record entries •
Misconduct by
authorities •
Audio and written
evidence supporting my defence such as: “10. Saheed-Statement” alongside
with other most important documentation. Each file has been carefully named and sequenced to guide you through
the evidence both chronologically and thematically. Please note that this
archive is still in the early stages of development, and further updates will
follow. I would be grateful if you could confirm receipt of this message and
advise whether a direct telephone number is available for contact. A brief
conversation would help clarify the urgency and complexity of the situation. Additionally, I kindly request written confirmation—by email—of which
items from my disclosure request have been completed. This includes: •
Attendance records
for the alleged victim and involved police officers •
Working exhibits
such as police body-worn camera footage •
Printouts or scans
of original police pocket notebooks Thank you for your continued attention and support. Kind regards, Simon Paul Cordell Legal Grounds for Dismissal of Charge:
“Threats to Cause Criminal Damage” Defendant: Mr. Simon Paul Cordell Court: Highbury Corner Magistrates’
Court Trial Date: 13 October 2025 Charge: Threats to cause criminal damage (allegedly made on
02/08/2025) Legal Basis: Criminal Damage Act 1971, Section 2 Summary of Legal Failures 1.
No Interview, No
Arrest, No Caution •
The alleged threat
was never investigated through proper channels. •
No re-arrest, no
caution, and no interview were conducted for this new charge. •
This violates the
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and Code C, which guarantee the
right to legal representation and proper interview procedure. 2.
Charge Fabricated
After Custody Expired •
The original
harassment charge was dropped. •
The new charge was
introduced after the custody clock expired, without legal basis. •
This is a breach of
Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (right to a fair trial) and PACE
custody rules. 3.
Sole Witness
Statement Is Invalid •
The only statement
against Mr. Cordell is from Rebecca O’Hare. •
This statement was
originally submitted for a different case (harassment) and includes
references to prior dates and incidents that were already resolved with No
Further Action (NFA). •
Using this
statement for a new charge is procedurally improper and violates the CPS Code
for Crown Prosecutors, which requires: a.
Sufficient
admissible evidence b.
Public interest c.
Procedural fairness 4.
No Immediate Risk
or Threat •
The alleged
incident occurred 90 minutes before police arrived. •
Mr. Cordell was
indoors, recovering from surgery, in pyjamas, and
physically incapacitated. •
There was no
confrontation, no damage, and no verbal exchange with the alleged victim. •
This fails the
legal test for "threats to cause criminal damage,” which requires: a.
A clear and
credible threat b.
Intent to
intimidate c.
No lawful excuse 5.
Police Statements
Pre-Date the Incident •
Several police
statements were created before the alleged incident occurred, indicating
fabrication or premeditated misconduct. •
This undermines the
integrity of the investigation and may constitute perverting the course of
justice. •
Mr. Cordell had
undergone hernia surgery days prior. •
He was unable to
walk, bend, or speak without pain. •
This makes the
alleged threat physically implausible and legally unsustainable. 7.
Denial of Legal Rights •
Mr. Cordell was
denied access to: a.
His solicitor
during key custody decisions b.
His appropriate
adult c.
Medical assistance •
These are
violations of PACE, Code C, and Article 3 of the Human Rights Act (protection
from inhuman or degrading treatment). 8.
PNC Record Proven
to Be Fabricated •
Internal checks by
custody officers confirmed fraudulent entries in Mr. Cordell’s Police
National Computer (PNC) record. •
These entries were
used to justify bail refusal and escalate charges. •
The court itself
acknowledged that Mr. Cordell had no convictions in over 25 years,
contradicting the fabricated record. Conclusion: Trial Must Not Proceed The charge of “Threats To Cause Criminal Damage” is
legally unsound, procedurally invalid, and unsupported by admissible
evidence. The case is built on a single recycled witness statement, fabricatec police records, and unlawful custody
practices. Proceeding to trial under these conditions would constitute a
miscarriage of justice and expose the court to liability for reckless
sentencing of an innocent man. •
Immediate dismissal
of the charge under Section 2 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 •
Formal adjournment
of trial pending full review of procedural breaches •
Disclosure order
for all body-worn footage, custody logs, and internal communications •
Judicial inquiry
into the fabrication of PNC records and unlawful detention! Kind
regards again! Mr.
Simon Paul Cordell On Thursday 25 September 2025 at 10:57:17 BST, Nicole Windele <windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Dear Simon, Further to the email below, please could you
let me know a date and time you would be available for a meeting regarding
your case.
Nicole Nicole Windele Paralegal CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net From: Nicole Windele <WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com> Sent: Monday, September
15, 2025 14:43 To: re_wired@Ymail.com <re_wired@Ymail.com> Subject: Your Case - Meeting
Id:COR10388/00001 Dear Simon, I am the paralegal
assisting Andrew with your case. I would like to meet with
you in order to discuss your case. I am happy to do this either in person at
our office in Warren Street or via teams. Please could you let me
know if you have availability for a meeting early next week. I look forward to hearing
from you. Kind regards, Nicole Nicole Windele Criminal
Defence Paralegal 39
Warren Street London, , W1T 6AF Mail:
WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com CJSM:
WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net
Notices: Disclaimer |
Privacy |
|
|
29. Received |
|
|
Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Nicole Windele (windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com) Date: Friday 26 September 2025 at 12:32 BST Hi Simon, Thank you for getting back to me. We can have an appointment at our office in
Warren Street if this would be easier for you? Let me know and we can arrange
a date. Kind regards, Nicole
Paralegal CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: Friday,
September 26, 2025 12:09 To: Nicole Windele
<WindeleN@tuckerssolidtors.com> Subject: Re: Your
Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 ·
Confirmation
of my willingness to join a Teams meeting! ·
Explanation
of my technical setup and limitations! ·
Request
for trial postponement! ·
Clear
instructions on how to use the Case files developed! ·
Formal
request for confirmation of case compliance regarding my legal instructions
submitted to Tucker Solicitor Firm, including a detailed list of completed
actions. ·
Date
and time agreement for first legal meeting to take place! "As detailed
Below!” Subject: Urgent: Request for Disclosure, Trial
Extension & Review of Case Files Dear Mr. Benington, I hope this message
finds you well. Following your recent invitation to a
Microsoft Teams meeting, I would like to confirm my willingness to
participate. While I am not very familiar with Teams, I do have Anydesk
remote access available and am happy to provide access to my files during the
meeting. This will allow me to demonstrate the volume and structure of
exhibits I have compiled in support of my defence. Due to my current bail conditions, I am
reliant on others to assist with technical access to my systems.
Unfortunately, none of these individuals possess the qualifications necessary
to support the legal and evidentiary aspects of my case. As a result,
progress has been slow and, I believe, unfairly hindered. I am deeply concerned that with only “18
Days Remaining Until Trial,” there is insufficient time to complete the
necessary case files and allow my legal defence team to properly review them.
I respectfully request that we explore the possibility of postponing the
trial date to ensure that all materials can be properly prepared and
assessed. a. Due to the 18 days left till trial, I am available at your
earliest convenience please set any date or time and I will be available! |
|
|
30. Email-Sent |
|
|
Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Friday 26
September 2025 at 18:28 BST Dear Nicole, Thank you for your message. Due
to ongoing police harassment and safety concerns, I am currently limiting
travel and prefer to stay indoors. Additionally, my mother, who usually
supports me, is very unwell at the moment. Therefore, I would prefer to have
the meeting online via Teams. I am available early next week and look forward
to discussing the case with you. Kind regards, Simon On Friday 26 September 2025 at 12:32:50 BST, Nicole Windele <windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi Simon, Thank you for getting back to me. We can have an appointment at our office in
Warren Street if this would be easier for you? Let me know and we can arrange a date. Kind regards, Nicole Nicole Windele
CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy From: Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2025 12:09 To: Nicole Windele <WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com> Subject: Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 •
Confirmation
of my willingness to join a Teams meeting! •
Explanation
of my technical setup and limitations! •
Request
for trial postponement! •
Clear
instructions on how to use the Case files developed! •
Formal
request for confirmation of case compliance regarding my legal instructions
submitted to Tucker Solicitor Firm, including a detailed list of completed
actions. •
Date
and time agreement for first legal meeting to take place! "As
detailed Below!” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
27/09/2025: 17-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
28/09/2025: 16-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 29/09/2025: 15-Days-till-Cour! + 31. Email-Sent + 32.
Received + 33. Email-Sent!
|
|
31. Email-Sent |
|||
|
|
Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 29 September 2025 at 16:15 BST Hello Nichole, I hope you’re well. Could you
please contact me on my mobile phone so we can arrange the meeting? The trial
date is approaching quickly, and I’m becoming concerned about how soon it is.
My contact number is 07864 217519. Thank you, Simon On Friday 26 September 2025 at 18:28:49 BST, Rewired
Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Dear Nicole, Thank you for your message. Due to ongoing police
harassment and safety concerns, I am currently limiting travel and prefer to
stay indoors. Additionally, my mother, who usually supports me, is very
unwell at the moment. Therefore, I would prefer to have the meeting online
via Teams. I am available early next week and look forward to discussing the
case with you. Kind regards, Simon On Friday 26 September 2025 at 12:32:50 BST, Nicole
Windele <windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi Simon, Thank you for getting back to me. We can have an appointment at our office in
Warren Street if this would be easier for you? Let me know and we can arrange a date. Kind regards, Nicole Nicole Windele
CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net Notices: Disclaimer | Privacy From: Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2025 12:09 To: Nicole Windele <WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com> Subject: Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 •
Confirmation
of my willingness to join a Teams meeting! •
Explanation
of my technical setup and limitations! •
Request
for trial postponement! •
Clear
instructions on how to use the Case files developed! •
Formal
request for confirmation of case compliance regarding my legal instructions
submitted to Tucker Solicitor Firm, including a detailed list of completed
actions. •
Date
and time agreement for first legal meeting to take place! "As
detailed Below!” |
|||
|
|
32. Received |
|||
|
|
Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Nicole Windele (windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com) Date: Monday 29 September 2025 at 20:12 BST Hi Simon,
Notices: Disclaimer
|
Privacy From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2025 4:15:29 PM To: Nicole Windele <WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com> Subject: Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 Hello Nichole, I hope you’re well. Could you please
contact me on my mobile phone so we can arrange the meeting? The trial date
is approaching quickly, and I’m becoming concerned about how soon it is. My
contact number is 07864 217519. Thank you, Simon On Friday 26 September 2025 at 18:28:49 BST, Rewired
<re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Dear Nicole, Thank you for your message. Due to
ongoing police harassment and safety concerns, I am currently limiting travel
and prefer to stay indoors. Additionally, my mother, who usually supports me,
is very unwell at the moment. Therefore, I would prefer to have the meeting
online via Teams. I am available early next week and look forward to
discussing the case with you. Kind regards, Simon On Friday 26 September 2025 at 12:32:50 BST, Nicole
Windele <windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi Simon, Thank you for getting back to me. We can have an appointment at our office in Warren
Street if this would be easier for you? Let me know and we can arrange a date. Kind regards, Nicole Nicole Windele
CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net |
|||
|
|
33. Email-Sent |
|||
|
|
Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Monday 29 September 2025 at 20:31 BST Subject:
Meeting Confirmation & Urgent Action on
Prior Case Directions and Dismissal Grounds Dear Nicole, Thank you for confirming
availability. I will attend the meeting on Wednesday at 2:30pm. While
I would have preferred Tuesday to allow more time, I’ll make Wednesday work. Thursday
is also possible, if necessary, though I must express concern—it would
leave only 13 days until trial, which is deeply troubling given the
unresolved issues. I must also raise a serious concern: the
directive outlined in “03. Email Sent.pdf: ‘Mr. S. P. Cordell Case
Directions!’ dated 07th August 2025” and the more recent “26.
Email-Sent.pdf: ‘Tuckerssolicitors.com’ dated 1st September 2025” clearly
requested urgent intervention with the court regarding trial attendance,
disclosure failures, and legal grounds for dismissal under URN 01YE1300125.
These were not casual suggestions—they were formal, time-stamped
communications that should have triggered immediate action, alongside the
other Case directions that i sent to yourselves as
can be read here: https://horrificcorruption.com/Server2/Another-Police-Case-03-08-2025/0.%20A- Webpage%20Folder%20Path%20Listing/output2.doc.pdf Given the gravity of the procedural breakdowns
already documented, I respectfully urge your team to act before our
meeting. The evidence and correspondence already submitted are more than
sufficient to justify a formal application to the court. It is not acceptable
that this remains unaddressed, especially when the consequences of delay
could result in a biased or unjust outcome. Please treat this as a matter of priority. I
am relying on your firm to safeguard my position and ensure that the court is
made fully aware of the risks to a fair trial. Kind regards, Simon Paul Cordell On Monday 29
September 2025 at 20:12:32 BST, Nicole Windele <windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com> wrote: Hi Simon, Would you be able to do either Wednesday or
Thursday this week at 2.30pm? Nicole Nicole Windele
CJSM: WindeleN@tuckerssolicitors.com.CJSM.net Notices:
Disclaimer |
Privacy From: Rewired Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2025 4:15:29 PM To: Nicole Windele <WindeleN@tuckerssolidtors.com> Subject: Re: Your Case - Meeting Id:COR10388/00001 Hello Nichole, I hope you’re well. Could you please contact me on my
mobile phone so we can arrange the meeting? The trial date is approaching
quickly, and I’m becoming concerned about how soon it is. My contact number
is 07864 217519. Thank you, Simon |
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
On 30/09/2025: + 14-Days-till-Cour! + 34. Received + 35.
Sent re_wired@Ymail.com has accepted!
|
|
34. Received |
|
|
|
|
|
35. Sent |
|
|
Accepted: Meeting with Simon Cordell From: re_wired@Ymail.com (re_wired@ymail.com) To: windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Tuesday 30 September 2025 at 10:19 BST re_wired@Ymail.com has accepted When Wednesday,
01 October 2025 01:30 pm to 03:00 pm (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time - Dublin / Edinburgh /
Lisbon / London Where Microsoft Teams Meeting
|
|
|
|
On
01/10/2025: 13-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
01/10/2025: 12-Days-till-Cour! : “Empty!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 02/10/2025: 11-Days-till-Cour! + First Meeting with
solicitor + 36. Draft-Minutes-of-the-Meeting-02-10-25 + 37. Sent!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36. Draft-Minutes-of-the-Meeting-02-10-25 |
|
|
Recording
(27) Transcribed by
TurboScribe.ai. Go
Unlimited to
remove this message. (0:00 - 1:40) It's 2.29, first attempt 25, and we're going into
the meeting again because the timer seems to be wrong. I say 2.30, she said
2.15, then fell down and said 1.30. We need to have a time- lapse and things
like that. I don't know, I seem to have it. (1:43 - 1:52) I've got access to a call. I'm supposed to, but I'm
inside a level. I don't know if it's on or off. (2:12 - 2:48) Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. (2:48 - 3:27) Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. (3:36 - 3:45) Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. (3:45 - 8:43) There's going to be a
telephone call to check in. No one has responded to your request, please try
again. Hmm. (8:43 - 9:04) Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. (9:06 - 9:15) So, Andrew is the one who will be doing the trial,
but I'm just helping them to prepare for the trial. Yeah. That's perfect. (9:17 - 9:28) I think you did meet with Andrew when you were at
court, was it? Was Andrew there? No, I've not met anybody. I've just met one
lady. I've never met anybody. (9:28 - 10:05) The first time that I was arrested, I was brought to
the court, and when I was brought to the court in the sector secure, I was
brought up, someone come downstairs, and he said he was acting for this hold.
He quickly made me sign some bit of paper, he wouldn't even let me speak, and
then he disappeared, and then there was no one in the court representing me.
They granted me bail on my own, but what they said is that the CPS paperwork
wasn't then, there was no CPS paperwork, so they were quite shocked for this
case to have gone ahead, but that was for obvious reasons, because they
swapped the charge, and I was never arrested, I've never been arrested for
this charge, I've never been interviewed. (10:05 - 11:00) You yourselves come to the police station, I've been
nicked for harassment, the statement, a girl's done a statement which she
supplied a video for, which was for January, now that statement, once I'd
been interviewed with your solicitor firm, they've left, and I was supposed
to, I said, the police officer's come out, he's dropped the harassment
charge, and then he's just charged me with another charge, like I'm for
threats, and I wasn't arrested, interviewed, I asked if a USOC can be called,
they refused for a USOC to be called, and everything, and then I was taken in
a secure van, I was brought to the police station, to the courts, and the
courts didn't even have no paperwork there, there was no solicitor in the
court, and the CPS would have had the paperwork had they reviewed the case
and agreed for that second charge to be submittable for court. So, like I've
not been interviewed, I've not been anything for this charge. So unfair. (11:01 - 11:22) But what we see from this is, you were interviewed
on the 3rd of August, and you provided a prepared statement. For harassment.
Which said, so you were arrested for a sexual, a public disorder. (11:22 - 12:00) No I wasn't, no I wasn't, madam, honestly, I was
arrested for harassment, 1997, I promise you that, and your solicitor firm,
in the interview room, made me do a prepared statement, which I was well
happy with him doing, I took his legal advice, and that statement read, oh,
we was only talking about harassment, in the interview tape, the police
officers tried to question me about other things, and even the solicitor said
he's not been arrested for these things, and you're not allowed to talk to
him for as long as you want. So, the prepared statement says, I did not use
any threatening words towards my neighbour, I did
not threaten to blow up her car, and I did not cause her any harassment,
alarm or distress. Right? Yes, that's possible, yes. (12:00 - 12:21) And there's things that erode, there's things that
erode the car. Yeah, so that's what this trial is for, is for them, making
threats to blow up her car. No, no madam, no, I was, when I was first on the
site, and the lead in my house, the police come in, and the only charge said
to me was for harassment in 1997. (12:21 - 12:55) I was brought to the police station, and when I was
speaking to the solicitor, he said to me, what I'm being accused of is being
verbally aggressive in January, yeah, in January of this year, and that
they've supplied a video for that, for me being aggressive, which is the
first incident which they need for harassment. He said the second element is
the second of the eight, which is the newest incident, supposedly. And then
he said to me to do a prepared statement about the harassment, and about the
alarm harassment I'm supposed to have called on the 1st of January, and for
this. (12:55 - 13:11) So we've done that, and we talked about it. Now if
we even look at her statement, this alleged victim's statement, who's made it
up, she lied in the beginning of her statement. What she says is, oh look, I
have, I've threatened to do these different things, and say these things, I
promise that never happened, yeah. (13:11 - 13:38) The reason that she, I can explain why she's said
this before, but she's done stuff to me, and I've recorded them, and put that
in my website. So, in the video that you have, I've transcribed it now, and
what I say to her, as upset as I was, because she's recorded half the video,
she's told me, I've said to her, go to my website horrificcorruption.com, and
you can see the videos of what you've been doing to me illegally, and me
writing to the council, yeah. And because I've transcribed it up, yeah. (13:39 - 13:53) And now, she says to me, go away, go away. So, I
walk away, I listen to what she's saying, but I'm still very upset in our
argument. So that's why the citizen said to me to explain about me being
further aggressive, I said I wasn't further aggressive, and I wasn't this,
and it was for harassment. (13:54 - 14:11) Even the police, even in the CPS case paperwork, it
says I was arrested for harassment. But then, they sent that paperwork to the
CPS, and the CPS said there's not enough evidence to charge, because the
videotape doesn't prove, the videotape proves she's lying. Yeah, I was going
to say, the video is quite irrelevant. (14:12 - 14:27) It doesn't prove anything, it doesn't show anything.
Yeah, but this ain't an harassment case, and it
shouldn't be admissible, because it's something to do with the First
Attorney, it's putting me in a bad light for something that's been no further
action. But the video, the video is what's being irrelevant, it doesn't show
anything. (14:27 - 16:12) No, but, I understand that, but as a solicitor, or a
bastard, or a legal, a legal, a legal officer, you should understand that no
one can go in, no jury should be allowed to be told all this stuff about me,
if they wanted to even get my convictions in, they have to put an
application, yeah, but she can't talk about stuff about me from the last
year, or stuff that I've already proved, I was found not guilty for that at
the police station, so why is she allowed to have all of this stuff that I've
not been found guilty about at the beginning of her statement, because it was
made for an harassment case, and now it's admissible, because it makes me,
they're talking about something completely different that I've already won,
and she's lying. What is she referring to? She's referring to the videotape,
it's from the 1st of January, yeah, now the latest incident is from the 8th,
so now, the initial charge of harassment means two incidents, so yeah, the
1st was allowed into it from January, and so was the 8th, but the police, no
further action that at the police station, now they've used the same
statement, and in that same statement she talks about the 1st that has
already been no further action, that's inadmissible in court, she can't put
me in a bad light for something that they've already said that there's no
evidence towards, she's only allowed to talk about today, this incident,
which is the 8th, in her statement, the first three quarters of it's all to
do with the 1st, because it was made for harassment, then the bottom half of
it's to do with this incident, her statement is inadmissible, as well as the
police officers who forwarded their statements and made up that this happened
on the 1st, and that they'd done their statements on the 2nd, if that makes
sense madam. I get what you're saying, but, I wouldn't say that her
statement's inadmissible, because she's not saying that you have been
convicted of an offence and done X, Y, Z. No, she's lying about me to do with
saying that I'm not being prosecuted or charged for having an offence, I've
had a fair process. (16:13 - 16:33) But, obviously, your statement, her whole statement
talks about things, about what you have allegedly done, obviously in your
view, you haven't- I've been found not guilty for that. No, no, no, I'm not,
you haven't been found- Yes, I was found not guilty for harassment, I was
found not guilty for the 1st of January at the police station. Yeah, no
further action, yeah. (16:33 - 16:45) Yes, that's what being found not guilty means. Yeah,
that means that there was no evidence, so, I'm sorry madam, I understand
fully what you're saying. Being in an NSA simply means that there is not
enough evidence for them to charge you. (16:45 - 17:01) Madam, can I ask- Wait, wait, don't bother, let me
finish. It doesn't mean that you are guilty, it doesn't mean that you're not
guilty of offence, it just means that the police don't have enough evidence
to charge you. Okay, I understand what you're saying there fully. (17:01 - 17:12) Wait, wait, hold on, hold on. So, she is allowed to
say in her statement that this and that happened. It's essentially, it's your
word- No, no, madam, I understand madam. (17:12 - 17:23) She's not saying in her statement that, oh, he did
this to me, and we went to court, he was found guilty. That's not what she's
saying. She said that she's not allowed to say that, but that's not what
she's saying. (17:23 - 18:10) No, madam, what she's saying is- He did this to me
in January, and he also did this to me in August, that's what she's saying.
Yeah, but what that statement is saying is that for a case that she already-
I know that you've got a client, for instance, madam, yeah? Because I fully
appreciate what you're saying, I can understand the principle of the law by
what you're saying, yeah? But you've got to look at it as if you're looking
at it from a barrister's side, not from a solicitor's side, and how a
barrister should see it in the court book. And what the law actually states,
it states that she can't- You can't have someone that's been nicked for
something in the past, yeah, for like for something called A, and then he's
been nicked for something to do with B, and then just because that person
knows something to do with A, the first case, and now she's got a case to do
with B, she can't just mention the first case, A, because that becomes
hearsay. (18:11 - 18:18) The case hasn't been
proven, the case isn't about that. The beginning of her statement can't be
based on that, in that sense. It is, it is. (18:18 - 18:19) It is. It is. It is. (18:19 - 18:26) It is. It is. I'll have a witness statement that's
coming to court. (18:26 - 18:35) The only good evidence that there is, is her
statement. The video, the witness, doesn't show anything. The video doesn't
show anything. (18:36 - 18:50) The video doesn't help her. It doesn't do anything.
The only evidence that they have, that we have is her statement, the video,
and then the body was from when you were arrested. (18:50 - 18:58) That's all we have. I understand that. She can say
in her statement, oh, he's done this to me, blah, blah, blah. (18:58 - 19:19) But she can't say, oh, he's done this to me, blah,
blah, blah. What am I actually being, what am I actually being, what am I
actually being, being, what am I actually being questioned about? Is that a
car that's been blown up, or am I actually being questioned about something
that's been, the police said that there's no evidence that they can talk
about or even prosecute. The police can't prosecute me for it. (19:19 - 19:39) What the basis of the trial is, is about you saying
about blowing up a car. So why are we talking, why is she allowed to talk,
the three quarters of her first statement about something that the police
have said they don't even have enough evidence to charge me with anyway, and
you use her family not guilty for? No, you haven't been found guilty. She's tampering
with my reputation. (19:39 - 19:52) No, you haven't, you haven't. If you went to court
and you were found not guilty, then okay, we can then say, actually you can't
speak about that because he went to a court of law and was found not guilty
in a court of law. Just because you've been NSA'd,
it doesn't mean that you're not guilty. (19:52 - 20:03) Someone can be NSA'd for
something today and tomorrow, the police can get more evidence, and they can
charge you for that offence. Just because you're found NSA'd.
Yeah, I understand. (20:04 - 20:20) If further evidence comes to light, you can be
re-questioned and re-interviewed, which is understandable. But this dating
court is not about the first. This dating court is not about, and the first
should not be allowed to be talked about in this court of law. (20:20 - 20:39) In this date, all that should be allowed to be
talked about is this date, and I believe that because her statement tampers
both of them, she's trying to paint me in a bad light for something that they
already know that they shouldn't be doing. It should be thrown out. But I have to take your legal, because you're the
legal person here, and I respect what you're saying, and I have to follow
that. (20:39 - 21:30) I just feel that way enough, but maybe you might
understand why I feel that way. What you're saying, but obviously, that is
something that, so obviously, Andrew will be the one who's speaking for, and
obviously, once I speak to you today, I'm going to say Andrew is, like, you
know, saying things to be said to me, and I will say, you know, you're not
very happy about what the first part of her statement is about, about her
speaking about the... She's lying. Which Andrew can then, when Andrew's
cross-examined her, so Andrew, obviously, she'll go for the stand, she'll
say, blah, blah, blah, and then Andrew, the sister who will be doing the
trial, will then go up to her and cross-examine her and be like, well, you
know, are you sure this happened, or if this happened, what happened when it
was deceased, was it because of an NSA person, that means that there wasn't
enough evidence, et cetera, things like that. (21:30 - 22:12) Do you get what I'm trying to say? So, Andrew's the
one who's going to sort of grill her and be like, well, this didn't have to
do it. I understand that, and I'm grateful that he'll do that for me, do you
know? But honestly, I'm an innocent person, so I would like to put that
forward to you, and I would like to bring it to the point, me being innocent,
like an MO, a reason why someone would do this to me or her statue, I don't
know this person, I've never met her yet, like in that sense, but I had a lot
of issues with her over the last five years, and my other neighbours, and
what we... But you know what he said about the video? Yeah, and you know what
I'm saying? Obviously, I've seen a video, and you're saying something about a
website. Yeah, this is the point. (22:12 - 23:11) My website's called horrificcorruption.com, and in
that website, if you scroll down, there's a green web link, and if you click
on that, you can see the cases that I've been fighting against, yeah? And you
can see that my whole criminal record was folded inside of it, so my whole
record is now being contended against, and it should be deleted, yeah? From
96 to today's date, every entry in my record is folded, yeah? By the
reviewing teams from Highbury Court and the Metropolitan Police. So when I
get brought to Highbury Court, I'm in between two reviewing teams that are
grabbing me, and I can see them updating, like in my convictions, they have a
TV, like a chat room where they talk about your bowel conditions, so the
police will update your bowel conditions, and then the court will update, and
you can see them setting me up, because they both know that I've got another
case against the pair of them, and my whole record gets deleted, yeah? And
that they're in a lot of trouble, but I'm just stuck in between. It wasn't me
that brought the case, my mum worked out saying to be in my record and
brought it to them. (23:11 - 23:50) And now I've just been trapped in this ever since,
yeah? But see, like this lady now, her MO is, like Michael's reasoning, it's
the video itself. In that video, I can seem a bit upset, yeah? But
considering what's been done to me, me and my mum had to write to the
council, because she kept attacking me with other neighbours, yeah? So, in
the video, you're upset, why were you upset? What happens is, in my flats, in
my flats, I've been badly getting attacked for the last five years, and she's
one of the people that's been victimising me. Now, she's tapping in her
kitchen on the floors of me, and I'm sitting in my house being attacked. (23:51 - 24:17) Now, I've got hundreds of video recordings of her
doing this to me, yeah? And I've got loads of witnesses happy to attend court
that will prove what she's been doing to me. Now, my mum, rather than me, go
and knock on any of my neighbours' doors and get
myself into any trouble, I... She taps on what though? She goes to the
kitchen wall, she starts tapping like that on the kitchen wall, and that
bangs through my kitchen and into my front room. So, like, I can sit there, and they start banging the pots on
the walls at me. (24:17 - 24:44) Now, this can be proof because I've got loads of
videos to prove it, yeah? But now, rather than me go and get myself into
trouble, in 2014, I told my mother what was going on and showed her, and she
wrote to Enfield Council for me. Now, she wrote to the Neighbourhood Watch
Team, and I've got those emails now, and she was explaining to them. Over one
year, she was writing to five different emails saying to them, My son's badly
getting attacked by this Rebecca and the other lot. (24:44 - 25:11) Please, can you protect him? None of them would
reply to my mother's emails, yeah? Now, eventually, they thought I'd done
something wrong to one of the neighbours, so they've messaged my mum back on
the same five emails. Now, I've got a diary that proves this, because I
subject access requested all of their computers, so I've got all of their
personal release notes, and I've put them in a diary for me. Now, you can see
my mum sending the email for a year, then blank, and you can see them trying
to call me to cancel off the same email, and my mum. (25:12 - 25:37) Then we can see that we proved that I was right, but
now they're trapped, yeah? Because they've not answered all these emails. So,
they went to these people like Rebecca and that, and they kept asking them,
have I done anything bad about me? I've got all those release notes. Now, the
bloke called Lemmy from Enfield Council went back to the council and created
a council history for me, a malicious council history, and now that is going
through legal process right now, yeah? And I can prove what Lemmy's done to
me. (25:37 - 26:20) Now, they brought me to court for two passing
possession orders, two injunction orders, and I was trapped in a legal
process for five years, where I never got to trial once, because only if they
got me and my legal team to trial, we would prove the forgeries, yeah? So now
they kept me stuck in a legal process forever. It's been so unfair, yeah? And
now, at the end of it all, the judge knew that they was in a lot of trouble
helping them in so many parts, and the judge said that I must be moved out of
that flat and wrote a court order demanding for me to have a two-bedroom,
life-for-life house. Onstead, Enfield Council never listened to the court
order, which I've got still now in all the documentation, and they left me in
the flat and left these attacking me. (26:20 - 26:36) Now, I sit in my house, I've got so many videos of
them doing it to me, and I won't retaliate or do anything wrong. The other
day, we're all getting new front doors installed. Only council tenants are allowed
to have these new front doors, yeah? As you know, most blocks were allowed
private. (26:36 - 27:15) She is supposed to be a private tenant. Somehow,
she's got the new council front door, because she's subletting that flat
illegally of somebody else, and the council know that this is going on, and
let her stay in that subletted flat and let her
attack me, yeah? And it's so unfair. I'm a secure tenant, and I'm supposed to
be in my property, and I look after my property in my home, and she's using a
subletted flat that's a council flat belonging to
somebody else, and she's attacking me in it, and the council are allowing for
that to continue, and they never listened to the court order that was
granted, and they won't accept the paperwork that I've subject access to and
put into a diary form, and that proves the truth, like what I just explained
to you. (27:15 - 27:25) And now, because on the 1st of January, I was
receiving a lot of banging, so I decided to go upstairs and stand up for
myself. I'm polite. I had no shoes on. (27:26 - 27:41) I just had my nightie on, because I was relaxing in
my own home, and I had no other intentions. I've gone upstairs, and I've
noticed that she doesn't have her door frame in, but that didn't bother me.
I've never been to her front door before, because she's got a child, I
wouldn't ever go up there and risk myself. (27:41 - 28:20) But the bloke opposite her, this bloke called
Richard, and Richard, he lives directly above me, and I believed he was
banging at me, so I've gone upstairs, and I've knocked on his door, and there
was no answer. Now, as I've turned around, she's got no door frame or front
door, and the builder's doing work there as well, and then she's come out,
and she started talking to me. Now, we had started with a normal
conversation, but at some stage, it's turned a bit higher rate, where now I'm
saying to her, you're out of order, what you're doing to me, and I admit I'm
really upset and hurt because of what she's put me through over the last few
years, yeah? So I'm like expressing, because no one else will help me or
safeguard me, and my mum's done her best, we've got the evidence, but no one
will listen. (28:21 - 28:40) And she's allowed to continue to do this. And of
course, I've said to her in that recording, as much as I'm like, ah, she's
going, get away, get away, I didn't realise she was
recording me. So she started speaking to you, and then how did you end up in
hiding? I've said to her, I've said to her, she goes to me, why are you at
the door? I go, because I was knocking at Richard's door, and she goes, so
she's come and started on me. (28:40 - 28:50) And now she's saying to
me, I said to her, well, you do the same to me. Like, let's talk about that
then, yeah? Which is like getting to the bottom of it, legal. And she said,
oh, I can't be doing that to you. (28:50 - 29:06) How can I bang from my front door at you? Now, she's
acting silly, like she can't go into her kitchen and bang on my adjoining
kitchen, which she can do, which I've got pictures of it all here now on my
website, and I can send them to you, and you'll be like, yeah, that's what
she's doing. And I'll send you the videos. And now she's acting silly. (29:07 - 29:14) So now, because she's acting silly, it's made things
get a bit hyper. I'm going to her, you know exactly what I'm on about. The
kitchen, not the front door. (29:14 - 29:23) Why are you acting so
silly? I'm talking about you attacking me in the kitchen. You can go to my
website, Horrific Corruption. Now, she must have pulled the phone out, and
she starts recording. (29:23 - 29:27) She goes, get away, get away. Now, I listen to her
in that recording. I do back off. (29:27 - 29:31) But I'm just going, you can go to Horrific
Corruption. I'm not having this. I'm going to get you nicked. (29:31 - 29:37) Now, she knows in her head she's in trouble. She's
gone to my website over the last couple of months. I’ve been watching that video
and listening to it. (29:37 - 29:46) And now she's going to set me up when I've gone out
to go and get a Chinese. I'm sorry, I know it sounds like a lot. But that's
what really happens. (29:46 - 29:57) So, when do you think you're going to get Horrific
Corruption? Yeah, I've gone back downstairs that day. Now, nothing's happened
since January till now. Now, she's submitted that video, but they've cut the
video. (29:58 - 29:59) So now you can hear me. This file is longer
than 30 minutes. Go Unlimited at TurboScribe.ai to transcribe files up to 10 hours long. |
|
|
37. Sent |
|
|
Re: Accepted: Meeting with Simon Cordell From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To:windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Thursday 2 October 2025 at 10:52 BST Formal Statement: Procedural Breakdown and
Legal Clarification To: My Solicitor and the Crown Prosecution Service From: Simon Paul
Cordell Date: [Insert Date] Subject: Clarification of Arrest, Interview Procedure, and Statutory
Misapplication
Background and
Arrest Context On 2 August 2025, I was arrested at my home address for the offence of
harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. This
is confirmed in the Section 9 statements provided by PC
Wilson-Wallis and others. The arresting officer read the caution for
harassment only. I was not cautioned or arrested for any other offence. During the interview, my solicitor submitted a prepared statement
denying all allegations. I then exercised my right to silence and answered
all questions with "No comment." The interview focused
solely on the Harassment Allegation. It is important to note that the offence of Section 4A Public Order
Act 1986 and Threats to cause Criminal Damage 1971 were
both not introduced by the arresting officers, nor were they referenced in
the caution or arrest documentation. The first recorded mention of
Section 4A occurred within the prepared statement submitted by my
solicitor during the interview conducted under caution for harassment. This reference was made pre-emptively and defensively, in response to
questions posed by officers that appeared to be only about harassment and
therefore extend beyond the scope of the original harassment allegation. At
no point prior to or during the arrest was I formally cautioned for
Section 4A, neither Threats to cause Criminal Damage
1971 nor was I informed that these offences formed part of the
investigation. The interview remained framed around the harassment charge
alone, as confirmed by the Section 9 statement authored by PC Wilson-Wallis
and others. The fact that my solicitor introduced Section 4A, rather than the
police, clearly underscores the absence of procedural clarity. It suggests
that the police did not lawfully or transparently transition the
investigation to encompass any other separate statutory offences. This
omission deprived me of the opportunity to respond to the Section 4A
and Threats to cause Criminal Damage 1971 allegations under
proper caution and undermines the integrity of any subsequent change based on
that statute.
Statutory Distinctions: Harassment vs. Section
4A vs. Criminal Damage Each of the offences listed below is governed by a distinct statute
and carries its own procedural requirements. Under PACE Code C, any
person suspected of a criminal offence must be cautioned before questioning,
and any new offence introduced must be supported by a lawful arrest or
caution “unless it was clearly bundled at the time of initial arrest!”
Procedural Concerns and Legal Breaches 1.
Improper
Charge Reframing: The CPS dropped the harassment charge but reused a
single line from the victim's statement to justify a Threats to cause
Criminal Damage 1971 and not even a Section 4A charge. This reframing occurred without fresh arrest or interview. 2.
Failure
to Caution: I was never
cautioned for Section 4A or threats to cause criminal damage. These
allegations were not formally put to me. After the harassment charge was
dropped, I was refused access to my solicitor and denied the legal right to
speak with my appropriate adult, again despite having been granted those
safeguards during the original interview. 3.
Disability
Safeguards Ignored:
My solicitor noted that I have learning difficulties and required an
appropriate adult. This safeguard was respected during the harassment
interview but later withdrawn when the charge was dropped. I was denied
further contact with my solicitor and appropriate adult, in breach of PACE
Code C and the Equality Act 2010. 4.
Use
of Discredited Evidence:
The January video submitted by the alleged victim did not support her claims.
The CPS dropped the original charge yet reused her statement to justify new
allegations that are procedurally flawed! 5.
Statement
Date Irregularities
and Fabrication Concerns: One officer's statement is dated 01/08/2025, the date of before the arrest. However, another statement appears to also
be dated wrong as the 2022, which is chronologically inconsistent and
raises serious concerns about its authenticity. If this statement was
authored before or after the alleged victim's account was taken, or if it was
constructed to retroactively justify the charge, this constitutes as
fabrication intel. I formally request disclosure of which officer took the
alleged victim's statement. If it was one of the attending fabricated
officers involved in the arrest, I believe they must attend court to be
questioned directly. Legal Summary •
Each
offence requires its own caution and interview unless clearly bundled at
arrest and this is not the case! •
I
was only arrested and interviewed for harassment, and this was dropped by the
police and CPS. •
Section
4A and Threats To Cause Criminal Damage allegations both
introduced without proper procedure. •
This
amounts to Abuse Of Process, Denial Of Fair Trial Rights,
and Disability Discrimination. Request for Action I request: •
Full
disclosure of the Police Bodycams as well as the original Police
Pocket Notebooks and Interview Cd And Transcripts as
these pieces of evidence will also prove that I was Never Charged
In Accordance To The United Kingdom’s Laws for any Section 4A
and / or Threats To Cause Criminal Damage Charges. •
Clearer
confirmation of whether I was ever cautioned or interviewed for these
offences. •
Identification
of the officer who took the alleged victim's statement. •
A
review of procedural fairness and compliance with PACE and the Equality Act. This statement is submitted to clarify the legal and procedural
irregularities in my case and to assert my rights under UK law. Signed, Simon Paul
Cordell Meeting
Record and Disclosure Request On 1 October 2025 at 2:30 PM, I attended a meeting with my solicitor,
Nichole, to discuss the current status of my case. During this meeting, I was
informed for the first time that my witness statement must be taken formally
as a Section 9 statement. This requirement was not previously
communicated to me, despite my consistent efforts to provide documentation
and evidence. I have been sending detailed records and supporting files to my
solicitor via email. These include: •
My
Mg11 witness statement previously submitted. •
A
handwritten witness statement previously submitted by witness Shead. •
Despite sending
these materials, I received no acknowledgment or request for the files
themselves rather than downloadable weblinks until yesterday's meeting. I
will "Very Soon," be exhibiting a copy of the following documents as pdf and docx
files, to yourselves, ready for proceedings, in a following
email, later today: •
Transcribed
minutes from the meeting held on 1 October. •
Contact
details for Sheead, including his telephone number
as requested. • Video footage of me being victimised in my home by
Rebbeca O'Hare and other neighbours. • A detailed diary of events leading up to the alleged
victimisation and the creation of false records by government officials and
others. •
Copy
of my Frauded PNC Conviction record and how to prove it! I was also informed
that the police body-worn video footage had been accessed and played
during the meeting. However, I have not yet received disclosure of this
footage. I formally request
that this footage be disclosed to me immediately, as it is critical to my
defence and I now know it is available and functional. This section is provided to document the meeting, assert my right to
timely disclosure, and ensure that all relevant materials are properly
exhibited and reviewed ahead of trial, which is now 11 days away. Signed, Simon Paul
Cordell On Tuesday 30
September 2025 at 10:19:47 BST, re_wired@Ymail.com <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: re_wired@Ymail.com has accepted When Wednesday,
01 October 2025 01:30 pm to 03:00 pm (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time - Dublin / Edinburgh
/ Lisbon / London Where Microsoft
Teams Meeting |
|
|
38.
Sent- |
|
|
|
On 03/10/2025: 10-Days-till-Cour! + 38. Sent-!
|
|
38. Sent- |
|
|
Re: Accepted: Meeting with Simon Cordell From: Rewired (re_wired@ymail.com) To: windelen@tuckerssolicitors.com Date: Friday 3 October 2025 at 08:44 BST Subject: Case Update and Urgent Request Regarding
Saheed’s Statement Dear
Nicole, I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to
update you on my current situation and the progress I've made in preparing
for trial. Due to the GPS bail conditions, I've been unable to
access my home, which has significantly disrupted my ability to organize case
materials. Additionally, my mother, who normally supports me—is now
terminally ill and bedridden, which has placed further strain on my
circumstances. Despite these challenges, I've been working
diligently to organize and finalize several key files that I believe are of
utmost importance to the case. This is why I previously requested that the
trial be postponed if the matter was not dismissed beforehand. Nevertheless,
I understand I am bound to follow the court's directions, even if doing so
risks a miscarriage of justice that I may need to appeal. For now, I've included Saheed's statements, which
were drafted at my home. I respectfully ask that these be placed before the
judges, even if a new statement is taken by your team—provided it does not
contradict the version already submitted. Regarding the other files I am preparing, I hope to
have these sent over today; however, due to the amount of work involved, it
is possible they may still be sent tomorrow. Saheed's contact details are as follows: Address: Burncroft Avenue, EN3 7JQ Phone: 07 If there are any issues reaching him after lunch,
please notify me via email and mobile. I would also appreciate an update on
the progress of the Section 9 statement being prepared for trial. Thank you for your continued support. Kind regards, Simon Cordell On Thursday 2 October 2025 at 10:52:03 BST, Rewired
<re_wired@ymail.com> wrote: Formal Statement: Procedural Breakdown and Legal
Clarification To: My Solicitor and the Crown Prosecution Service
From: Simon Paul Cordell Date: [Insert Date] Subject: Clarification of Arrest, Interview
Procedure, and Statutory Misapplication Background and Arrest Context On 2 August 2025, I was arrested at my home address
for the offence of harassment under the Protection from Harassment
Act 1997. This is confirmed in the Section 9 statements provided
by PC Wilson-Wallis and others. The arresting officer read the
caution for harassment only. I was not cautioned or arrested for any other
offence. During the interview, my solicitor submitted a
prepared statement denying all allegations. I then exercised my right to
silence and answered all questions with "No comment." The
interview focused solely on the Harassment Allegation. It is important to note that the offence of Section
4A Public Order Act 1986 and Threats to cause Criminal Damage 1971 were both not introduced by the arresting officers,
nor were they referenced in the caution or arrest documentation. The
first recorded mention of Section 4A occurred within the prepared
statement submitted by my solicitor during the interview conducted under
caution for harassment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 04/10/2025: 9-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 05/10/2025: 8-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 06/10/2025: 7-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 07/10/2025: 6-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 08/10/2025: 5-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 09/10/2025: 4-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 10/10/2025: 3-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/10/2025: 2-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 12/10/2025: 1-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 13/10/2025: 0-Days-till-Cour!
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 14/10/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 15/10/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 16/10/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admin-Notes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
List needed to be obtained from my home!
1.
My r15
computer keyboard mouse and two screens
2.
My
headphones.
3.
Dictator:
4.
Bed throws over for mattress
put it in a black bag
5.
Coffee
jar!
6.
Work trainer’s Nike
7.
SDQ drill in red box
8.
Soldier iron 4 Iron to be
fixed.
List needed to be obtained from my
solicitor for Arrest [1] 04/08/2025
1. Police
body cam’s footage’s
2. Police
notebooks of all police officers in attendance.
3. Request
for all police officers and victims as well as witness to attend for trial.
4. The
audio tape of the interview for the first arrested dated 04/08/2025. Also, the
Duty solicitors note of interview. As this will prove that the charge and
interview was for harassment and I was legally advised not to answer other
questions after my paired statements the charge of threats to commit criminal
damage were wrongfully processed without legal process after my solicitor had
left and was refused to me there client afterwards.
Requests for Arrest
[1] 04/08/2025
1.
Dismiss
the video footage that was supported evidence for the initial charge of
Harassment 1997 that was drooped by the police and as it has no bearing in this
case AND have the audio transcribed from the video footage!
2.
Request
that the proceedings be dismissed due to insufficient evidence to meet the
merits of the charge: threats to cause criminal damage due to it being my word
against hers if the police body cams footage is not disclosed, as it proves the
burden of our case due to witness offering evidence that the arresting officers
failed to collect. But those statements are said allowed in the footage.
Files for Arrest
[1] 04/08/2025 = 13 of 13.
01.
01.
Case Summary.pdf
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CROWN
PROSECUTION SERVICE Rex v Simon
CORDELL Case
Summary POLICE
REPORT Case
reference:01/YE/12679/25 Defendant(s)
2. Defendant Interview
3. Non-Key Evidence
Evidence Summary statement and interview 4. Visually Recorded
Evidence
Media Type Body
Worn Video
5. Injuries
6. Forensic
Evidence
7. DIP testing
8. Application for
Order(s) on Conviction
9. Application for Compensation –
state if an estimate. Attach quotes/receipts if available. An address for
compensation must be provided on MG6. (If more than one
victim/defendant, list one after the other and give details in the
description box).
10. Other (MG18)
TICs? No 10. Officer’s
certification: I certify that to the best of my knowledge and
belief, I have not withheld any material that might reasonably be expected to
undermine the prosecution or might reasonably assist the defence in early
preparation of their case, including the making of a bail application. I
further certify that relevant material has been recorded and retained in
accordance with the CPIA 1996, Code of Practice, as amended. Name & rank/job title: PC 01 P267140 Rathan Date:04/08/2025 12.
Supervisor’s certification:
I can confirm that this is an accurate summary of the available evidence and
complies with the National File Standard and DPP’s guidance. Name
& rank/job title: PC 01 P255681 White Date:
04/08/2025 YOU MUST ALWAYS COMPLETE CONDITIONAL
CAUTIONING SECTION BELOW.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
02.
02.
CORDELL_Simon_01YE1267925_Section_9_pdf
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
01YE1267925
Section 9
05/08/2025
V1 Rex v Simon CORDELL CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE
Rex v Simon CORDELL Section 9 Notice
TUCKERS SOLICITORS LLP Solicitors 39
Warren Street London LONDON 5th August 2025 01YE1267925/RAJ NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: PROOF BY WRITTEN STATEMENT (Criminal Procedure Rules, r. 27.4(s);
Criminal Justice Act, 1967, s9) Defendant Simon CORDELL Court and Hearing Date: Highbury Corner
Magistrates Court 13th October, 2025 with this notice are copy statement(s)
made by the witness(es) listed below. The prosecutor wants to introduce this
evidence in writing, instead of the witness(es) giving the evidence in
person. How to reply to this
notice: If you do NOT want the prosecutor to
introduce the evidence of these witnesses in writing, you must: 1.
List the witness(es)
you want to give evidence in person. 2.
Send me the list not
more than 7 days after this notice is served on you (as required by section
9(2)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 1967). 3.
Be prepared to
explain to the court what issue(s) in the case make(s) it necessary for the
witness(es) to give evidence in person (as required by Criminal Procedure
Rules 3.2, 3.5 and 3.10). (Signed)
.............................................. (On
behalf of the Prosecutor) Notes: 1.
If you are late
letting the prosecutor know which witnesses you want to give evidence in
person, then the prosecutor can introduce the evidence in writing, unless the
court otherwise directs. 2.
If, at your request,
a witness attends court to give evidence in person when that is not necessary
to deal with the issues in the case, the court may make a costs order against
you. 3.
Despite service of
this notice: London
North-East Magistrates Court Unit 102
Petty France London SW1H 9EA
DX:
161330 Westminster 11 Tel:
0203 357 7000 London.magistrates@cps.gov.uk
(a) the prosecutor may
arrange for any of the listed witness(es) to give evidence in person: or (b)
the prosecutor may decide not to rely on one or more of the listed
witness(es) after all. Ref: 01YE1267925/RAJ
NFR/S9 (11.09) CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE Rex v Simon CORDELL S9 Witness Statements STATEMENT/EVIDENCE LIST URN: 01YE1267925 Rex v Simon CORDELL No Statement(s),
deposition(s) and document(s) (other than exhibits) Statement Date Page 1 PC Wilson-Wallis 1-2 0* individual witnesses have been identified
from the list above. *Note that one or more of the statements
listed is not associated with a witness and so has not been included in this
count
1
Continuation of Statement of: PC WILLIAMS had some and gave them to me to
apply to the suspect. After the application of the first set of leg
restraints I waited to see if he would calm down with the first set on and
then after seeing that he wasn’t calming down and still squirming 1543NA said
to apply the second set of leg restrains on him. I agreed with the decision
and decided to apply the second set of restraints to him. After the second set of restrains was
applied I then kept my leg on his as he was still squirming. As such PC 2546NA
recommending calling for additional support as well as a set of supervisors
to come down and help assess the situation. PC 1543NA began to do this so I
grabbed a hold of his arms to keep him on his side as he tried rolling over
back to his front again. Once PC 1543NA was done radioing for additional
units I went back to keeping his legs in place. After another minute of holding on to him
Samual began to stop resisting as such, we got off him and at this point
additional units arrived who began speaking to Samual which made him more
calm. After this I got off him and called for
boarding up for his front door whilst other officers delt with Samual, after
a while he came out of the property and we began to move him to the van to
which Samual sat on the ground in protest stating he wants a ambulance, officers began to explain to him that we
were going to take him to hospital in a van however Samual refused, at this
point members of the public came and started speaking to officers and Samual.
After a while longer a ambulance came and took
Samual inside of it and out of my care.
Signature Witnessed
by Signature:…………………………………………………………........................................
CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE
Rex v
Simon CORDELL S9 Exhibits LIST OF EXHIBITS
URN: 01YE1267925 Rex v Simon CORDELL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
03.
03.
Defendant Notice of Grant of Bail.pdf
|
|
||
|
Code 2572 Sitting at Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court Case reference 01YE1267925 Defendant Simon CORDELL Simon
CORDELL Date of birth 26 January 1981 280 DURANTE ROAD ENFIELD EN3 7AZ Notice of Grant of Bail
Date of notice 27 August 2025 the court has granted you bail. You
must attend court where and when required to do so.
Details
of your next hearing
Code 2572 Sitting at Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court Conditions: You must live and
sleep each night at 280 Durante Road, Enfield, Middlesex, London, EN3 7AZ. You must not enter
Burncroft Avenue. Your exclusion
condition will be electronically monitored with a GPS tag. . You must not remove or
interfere with the equipment in any way, and you must keep the battery
charged, as instructed. You must not contact
directly or indirectly Rebecca O'Hare. . Reasons: To prevent offending,
to ensure appearance Warning
If you do not keep any
of these conditions you can be arrested and brought back to court. You must attend court
when and where required to do so. Unless your attendance
has been excused at the next hearing and recorded above, you will commit an
offence if you do not attend court on the date and at the time and place as
instructed, as shown above or on any other
date and time as directed by the
court. If you do not attend when told a warrant may be issued for your
arrest. Note
You should attend Court 30 minutes before the
time shown above and have seen your Solicitor (if you have one), in good time
before the date of hearing.
Case reference: 01YE1267925
On 02/08/2025 at Enfield in the Borough of
Enfield, without lawful excuse, threatened Rebecca O'Hare that he would blow up the vehicle belonging
to her intending that she would fear that the threat would be carried out Contrary to
sections 2(a) and 4 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971.
Simon CORDELL Page
2 of 2 |
04.
04.
Let to Client Magistrates Court Trial Advice
|
|
||||||||
Private &
Confidential Simon Cordell 280 Durant Road EN3 7AZ Dear Simon RE: Your
Case Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court 13/10/2025 at 10:00 I write with regard to your forthcoming trial having
now had the opportunity to review the evidence in connection with the
following offence:- Threats of
Criminal Damage to another's Property, s.2, Criminal Damage Act 1971. A
person who without lawful excuse makes to another a threat, intending that
that other would fear it would be carried out, to destroy or damage any
property belonging to that other or a third person. As
you are aware, Andrew Benington is the solicitor with conduct in your case,
Nicole Windele is now the paralegal who will be assisting with your case. The
Prosecution Evidence It is alleged that on 2 August 2025, whilst in the communal area of
your property, you threatened to blow up your neighbour,
Rebecca O’Hare’s car by saying words to the effect of “I will blow up your
car, I will blow it to the other side of the street. If you come and ask me,
I will tell you I didn't do it.” Police were then called to the property.
Upon arrest, it is alleged that you refused to open the door to officers and
began shouting verbal abuse. Your door was therefore forced open by Police
using S.17 PACE to effect an arrest. Your Defence You deny the allegations made against you. You
instruct that you did not use any threatening words towards your neighbour, did not threaten to blow up her car and did
not cause her any harassment, alarm or distress. Burden of Proof In the vast majority of
criminal cases (with some rare exceptions) the prosecution has to prove to
the court that you are guilty – you do not have to prove you are innocent.
This is known as the Burden of Proof and it means it is the job of the
prosecution to satisfy the court beyond reasonable doubt that you are guilty.
When the Magistrates hear the evidence, they must be satisfied that they are
sure you committed the offence before they make a finding of guilt, based on
the evidence the prosecution have presented. If they cannot be sure they must
find you “Not Guilty”. The court can take other
factors into account when weighing up the evidence, such as your defence and
whether they think it is credible, any previous convictions that may have
been allowed into evidence and whether or not you answered questions in a
police interview, but they cannot convict you on those factors alone – they
must be satisfied that the prosecution have put credible evidence before the
court. The Trial At the plea hearing you
entered the following plea: Threats of
Criminal Damage to another's Property - Not Guilty On the day of the trial all
contentious witnesses will be warned to attend court as will probably be the
officer in the case. Your trial is
likely to be listed in court with other matters listed in it and this generally
results in a delay in the proceedings commencing. It is possible that it will be decided that
another trial will have priority over your matter and the court would hear
that case first. If this happens the
court will try to move your trial into another court room. From time to time it is the case that the
court runs out of time to hear all matters and cases are adjourned at the
courts volition to anther date. If the witnesses fail to
attend court or there is some other evidential reason why the prosecution are
not ready to proceed they may apply to adjourn your trial. I would oppose any such application and the
magistrates would need to consider all factors when making the decision
whether to adjourn or not. They would
primarily consider whether it was in the interests of justice to do so. It the magistrates did adjourn your case
another trial date would be fixed. If
they did not adjourn your case it may be that the prosecution have to offer
no evidence and the case against you would be dismissed. If the prosecution are aware
that the witnesses may not attend court they are likely to have applied for
witness summonses to be served. If the
summonses have been served the prosecution may apply for the witnesses to be
arrested and brought to court to give evidence. If you fail to attend court
for your trial the matter is likely to proceed in your absence. There is a presumption that this should be
the case and if I have no information to provide the court about your absence
then it is likely that your case would proceed. Given you would not be present to provide
instructions I would have to withdraw from the proceedings and you would be
likely to be convicted. Also it is
likely that the prosecution would apply to the magistrates for them to issue
a warrant for your arrest. In the
absence of any instructions to explain your absence it is likely that a
warrant would be issued. It is an
offence to fail to attend court without reasonable excuse either on the day
you are due to or as soon as practicable thereafter. The offence of failing to attend court is
an extremely serious offence as it is deemed to interfere with the natural
course of court and can attract a custodial sentence. When the trial does get
underway the prosecution case is heard first.
They will begin with an opening statement outlining what is alleged
against you and what they are seeking to prove. The prosecution will then call any witness
that provide contentious evidence and will ask them to give that evidence
orally to the court. I will then be
able to cross examine the witnesses and put your account to them. The prosecution would present
to the court any exhibits they have and may read the officers
statements. If the prosecution witnesses
are reluctant witnesses either because they have been arrested on a witness
warrant or because they give an inconsistent account to their statement they
may be declared hostile. If the witness
is declared a hostile witness the original statement that they provided could
be introduced as evidence of the truth.
This is especially worrying as I cannot cross examine a witness on the
first account because they will have denied it at this point. I would then ask yourself to
give evidence in order to put forward your version of events and explain what
you say about the allegations. You
will also be subject to questioning from the Prosecution. You are not required to give
evidence, it is a matter of choice. If
you do not give evidence I must warn you that the prosecution would be likely
to ask the magistrates to draw an adverse inference from your failure to do
so. This could mean that the
magistrates could question why you had not given evidence and draw a negative
conclusion. If we are able to identify any
witnesses who can be called to give evidence in your defence it is at this
stage that we would do so. They would
give their evidence orally to the court and the prosecution would then be
able to cross examine them. Once all of the evidence has
been heard the prosecution may address the magistrates again by way of a
closing statement. Your solicitor, Andrew will
then address the magistrates with a closing statement and sum up the case for
the court. Andrew would identify any
important issues and deal with any matters of law. The Magistrates will then
retire to consider their decision. Digital Evidence We have received a copy of and reviewed the
following video evidence: 1. BWV
of your arrest 2. Continuation
of your Interview at the Police Station 3. Video
of you at the complainant's door Bodyworn footage/999 I note that the prosecution have disclosed that they have bodyworn footage/999 evidence available in your case. The prosecution have informed us
that they intend to rely on this and serve it in good time for the trial. On many occasions this evidence is not
served and there are usually various reasons for this, though most commonly
that the police have not provided it to the prosecution in time for the
trial. The prosecution could still
proceed to trial without this evidence if they feel able to prove their
case. In the event that they decide to
do this then the evidence should appear on what is described as the unused
schedule. This is a schedule of any
evidence available that the prosecution do not rely on. It is possible that the defence can obtain
copies of items on the unused schedule.
The reality of this is that if the prosecution fail to serve the
evidence and fail to have it on the trial date, any effort on our part to
obtain it may at best end up with the trial being adjourned but in reality the court are
likely to insist the matter proceed without either side being able to rely on
it. If the witness fails to attend court and the
prosecution have got an account of the complaint on either bodyworn video from the police or from a recording of a
call to the police or both then they may attempt to proceed to trial using
that evidence alone. If the
prosecution do this they do not have to give notice of their intention but
can apply on the day of the trial to use the electronic evidence instead of a
live witness. In order for the
prosecution to be able to proceed in this manner they must satisfy various
legal tests. Firstly they must show good reason why the witness has not
attended. They must also show that the
evidence is unlikely to be fabricated and that using it won’t have an adverse
effect on the proceedings. I can
oppose the application to introduce the evidence in this way and will do so
if the prosecution inform me on the trial date that they intend to proceed in
this manner. Adverse Inference I note that you provided a prepared statement
denying the allegations at the start of the interview. You then answered no comment throughout the rest of interview. It was held in R v Knight that
handing in a statement does not, in itself, prevent inferences from being
drawn. If the defendant relies on facts at trial that were not
mentioned in the statement, inferences can still be drawn from failure to
mention those facts. This means that
they may be less likely to believe any defence that you present during the
trial and conclude that you have had the opportunity to consider the evidence
and fabricate your denial. Bad Character Because you have a criminal record of
cautions/convictions, the prosecution are entitled to make an application to
the court to refer to them in your trial if they can show that they are in
some way relevant to the trial itself. In this case the prosecution have made
no such application so they will not be entitled to refer to your criminal
record unless you 'attack the character' of a prosecution witness
during the trial or if you were to make a 'false character assertion'. We are not suggesting you would do so, but we are
obliged to warn all clients about this issue. If you were to say anything in your evidence that
would be classed as an attack on the character of a prosecution witness (such
as saying they are violent or dishonest for example) then the prosecution
would be entitled to argue that they can now attack your character by showing
the court your criminal record. Your advocate will discuss this with you in
more detail at trial if you choose to give evidence. Similarly, if you were to make a 'false character
assertion' (such as saying you are an honest person if you have convictions
for theft or saying you are not a violent person if you have convictions for
assault) then the prosecution could again try to argue at trial that they can
refer to your criminal record to discredit this claim. Analysis of evidence In my view, the evidence against you is fairly
strong. Conviction after trial If the magistrates find you
guilty, you will stand convicted. The magistrates would then need to consider
sentence and would look at the magistrates court sentencing guidelines for
the matters. The Coroners and Justice
Act 2009 implemented a sentencing regime that the magistrates must follow the
relevant guidelines unless it would be contrary to the interests of justice
to do so. The guidelines set out
factors that the court should take into account that may affect the sentence
given. They set out different levels
of sentence based on the harm caused to the victim and how blameworthy the
offender is. Category 1, Culpability
A – starting point Starting point 1 year 6 months’ custody Category range Serious distress caused
to the victim – victim is heavily pregnant with a young child, alleged to
have intimated victim in front of children on occasion and also threatened to
rip unborn baby from her belly on another – she states she is now scared to
leave her home in case she sees him and has had to ask people for help with
bringing things to her house – was very distressed when officers arrived and
spoke to her Offence committed to
intimidate Considerable damage
threatened Financial Orders If you are convicted after trial the court can
impose a number of financial orders. They could impose a contribution towards prosecution
costs this will be in the region of £620 but can be as high as £800 depending
on the length of your trial. The court could impose a compensation order for an
amount that they see fit to order to compensate the victim for any loss,
injury or distress or psychological harm they may have been caused as a
result of the offence. If there is an identifiable victim, the court are
likely to impose a victim surcharge.
This is an amount of money that is not paid directly to the victim but
is pooled and distributed through the victim and witness general fund. The amount ordered to be paid depends upon
the sentence imposed but is in the range of £15 to £100. Credit Although we have advised you
with regard to the evidence and the fact that you deny the offences and
procedure I must remind you of credit.
If you admit an offence the sooner you do so the more credit you would
get. Credit is a reduction of the
sentence imposed and equates to 1/3 credit at the first hearing reducing to
1/10 on the day of trial prior to witnesses being called to give evidence. Should you have any questions
please do not hesitate to contact myself or Andrew. Yours sincerely Andrew Benington |
05.
05.
PC Chan.pdf
|
|
||||||||||||
On
Saturday 2nd August 2025 I was on duty in uniform parading out of
Lincoln Road patrol base at 1300 hours. I was with PC Obsiye
assigned to call sign NA22L. I was assigned to CAD 6844/02AUG25 where a neighbour had threatened to blow up her
car. On
arrival PC Obsiye spoke with Rebecca O’Hare, I was
trying to distract the daughter from listening to Rebecca explaining the
allegation to PC Obsiye. I was informed that the
male at 109 Burncroft Avenue would be liable for arrest for harassment and that his name was
Simon, she described him as wearing a blue chequered pyjamas. We
went downstairs to knock on the door and could hear a male who I now know as
Simon Cordell through the door, I could hear immediately that he was irate
and was shouting through the door, I could hear him swearing at us and we
told him we were police. He would not listen to our instruction to open the
door and was just shouting through the door. I asked for the van to come on
the hurry up. As we were waiting for the van, I could hear him shout
something along the lines of I will fucking rip you, I made PC Obsiye that I believed that he was making threats through
the front door. I
could hear him walk away from the front door and kept coming back as I could
hear the level of his voice, go up and down. I formed the opinion that the
male was preparing once police got into the property. My concerns were that
he would self-arm with some sort of weapon.
As
soon as the van got to the scene, I asked for the enforcer. PC Obsiye arrested Simon through the door for Harassment. I
had just been to the flat upstairs and was aware that the hallway would be
narrow once in the flat, my considerations were Simon had already been making
threats to blow up his neighbour’s car, swearing
and making threats towards police. He had been pacing away from the front
door and had time to self-arm himself, he was already in an irate state and
anything we was saying was not being listened to. I told him one more time to
open the door. His response was I’m not fucking opening the door. I
considered telling him to step back from the door but was concerned that he
would barricade the door with objects. I hit the door with the enforcer, the
door came off the lock. I could feel that he Witness Signature: … Signature Witnessed by
Signature:…………………………………………………………........................................
9
was
pshing against the door. I hit the door 2 more
times. And kicked it, he was stood behind the door pushing against us. I saw
his blue pyjamas. There were no lights on in the
property. As
I got through the door I saw him backing up, I saw something white and
something black in his hands and he was walking backwards. I did not know
what was in his hands. Exercising S117 PACE I drew my taser and pointed it at
his chest. I armed it. Using
tactical communications and in an authoritative tone I told him to show me
your fucking hands, I was using language that he may understand and to
express the severity of the situation. He backed up onto a sofa or bed and
laid on his back. I told him to stop fucking moving. He still had something
clenched in his hands. I told him that he was under arrest and to stop
fucking moving. I was trying to talk him into a position of control, but he
was not listening. Once
he came to a stop, I put my Taser away and grabbed his left arm. I put a
handcuff on his left arm. He kept shouting that he had surgery and just came
out of hospital, he pulled his pyjama bottom down
and I could see a bandage below his abdomen, above his groin. I
told him to stand up so I could put the handcuff behind his back. I stood him
up and was behind him, he was still struggling and being resistant. I tried
to reach over to grab his right arm but caught PC Obsiye
in the head with my left arm. Once he was in a rear stack he then went to his
knees and pulled himself onto the floor. He would refuse to sit up. I thought
that he was more than capable of getting up and walking around because he had
been pacing around the flat prior to police entering, he was going to his
knees and laying on the ground on purpose obstructing officers in effecting
an arrest. I
tried to calm him down by speaking to him, but he would not listen to me. He
laid on the floor and I held onto his shoulder to keep him on his side. I
asked someone to request for an ambulance and a supervisor to the scene. I
was already aware that PC Obsiye requested for
another unit and once NA22N arrived on scene it was requested that they took
over from me as the male was not listening to me or PC Obsiye.
I withdrew from the flat and asked someone collect my radio which was on the
floor somewhere. I
then went to speak to Rebecca and made them aware of the arrest. I
exhibit my BWV as CKC/01 Witness Signature: Signature Witnessed by
Signature:…………………………………………………………........................................
10 |
06.
06.
PC_obsiye.pdf
|
|
|
On
Friday 01st August 2025 between the hours of 0700 and 1600 I was
on duty in full uniform carrying full PPE kit and BWV. I was working
alongside PC Chan 1405NA as NA22L in a marked police vehicle. We
received an Immediate response call on our PR, were a Miss O’Hare called
police stating that her downstairs neighbour
threatened to blow up her car and that she had done nothing to him. We
attended and entered Miss O’Hare flat, she appeared upset. We asked to enter,
and we spoke with her in the living room. She stated that she has been having
issues with her neighbour and its
been ongoing for a while. She stated that today, she went out with her
children to do the food shopping and on her return, she parked her car and
noticed that the suspect was standing outside the block. She quickly grabbed
her children and ran into the address. She remembered she left her nappy bag
so went to go get it. That’s when the suspect caught her near the door and
began saying something she did not know what he was
saying at first so made a comment to herself that’s when the suspect said,
"IM GOING TO BLOW UP YOUR CAR - ILL BLOW IT UP TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
STREET" "NO ONE WILL KNOW IT WAS ME". She ignored him and ran
off as she was scared. She also stated there was another incident earlier in
the year, when she did not have a front door and was getting it replaced, she
stated that he had come upstairs and was right by the door frame and began
shouting at her saying he would hit her five (5) year old child and she
stated she was six (6) month pregnant at the time and that he “would rip her
baby out of her stomach”. She stated she is so scared of him and that she
does not really go out because of his behaviour, she said she left her
shopping in her car as she was scared. While speaking to her she was visibly
upset and began to cry. I asked her to describe the suspect to me she stated
he was a mixed-race man in his forties (40’s) or fifties (50’s), slightly
long hair, around 5ft10 wearing blue chequered pyjama’s. I
explained to PC Chan 1405NA that the suspect who lived downstairs 109 would
be arrested for harassment. We went downstairs, we knocked on the door and
the suspect called out from behind the door. I explained we are police
officers and for him to open the door so we could speak to him. He refused to
do so. A van was requested, as I knew he would be arrested and needed
transport. I walked further away from the door and left PC Chan 1405NA to
stand outside. PC Chan 1405NA tried to speak with the suspect through the
door, I could not hear what was being said however PC Chan 1405NA came over
to me
Signature
Witnessed by
Signature:…………………………………………………………........................................ Page 1 of 2 4
Continuation of Statement of: and
stated that he was threatening us, I stated that we would wait for the van as
it has the enforcer and I will arrest him by the door and if he still refuses
to open the door we will use S.17 PACE to gain lawful entry to effect the
arrest of the suspect. I did not want to arrest him before hand as I was
extremely concerned about him arming himself and waiting for us behind the
door. NA30L
PC Williams and PC Wilson-Willis attended and bought the enforcer with them.
I arrested the suspect from the other side of the door, giving him the
caution in full and telling him the time was 21:16hrs. PC Chan 1405NA asked
the suspect multiple times to open the door, he refused so he used the
enforcer to open the door however the door bounced back and it appeared that
the suspect was behind the door. This was extremely concerning as he could
have been armed giving us a massive disadvantage. The suspect however backed
up, we entered the property, and the corridor was in darkness. I could see
something in the suspect hand I wasn’t sure what it was. PC Chan 1405NA had
red dot challenged the suspect the suspect kept backing up into the living
room and I grabbed his left arm while PC Chan 1405NA grabbed his right arm. I
noticed what was in his hand was a piece of paper. We continued to give the
suspect commands to give us his arm so we could secure him in handcuffs to
prevent any harm coming to ourselves or him. He was actively resisting
officers using his body to push and pull against officers, resulting in
officers struggling with him to get him into cuffs. To the point that PC Chan
1405NA tried to grab a hold of the suspect he was physically resisting that
PC Chan 1405NA managed to hit me in the head. After a minute we managed to
get the suspect in rear stack. The suspect kept shouting about his medical
condition and threw himself onto the floor. We tried to reason with the
suspect, but he was still actively resisting officers, the suspect was placed
in rear stack for his and our safety. The suspect kept shouting he wanted an
ambulance so one was requested. Further
officers arrived and they took over with the suspect due to his dislike
towards me and PC Chan. The officers came up to me and stated he had calm
down so I entered the address and gave the grounds to the suspect, I
explained that he was arrested for harassment as today he went up to the
victim and threatened to blow up her car and that no one would know it was
him, also previously you had turned up to her house and threatened to slap
her. You have been causing her distress. The suspect continued to shout over
me, he said “Check my cameras, I have not left my house today”. I gave him
the necessity as a prompt and effective investigation and prevent further
harm. The
suspect was taken to North Middlesex hospital as he was adamant he wanted to
go, and to check on his stitches. My
BWV was on at the time and is exhibited as HAO/01 Witness Signature: …………………… Signature
Witnessed by
Signature:…………………………………………………………........................................ Page 2 of 2
5 |
07.
07.
PC_Williams.pdf
|
|
||||||||
On
02nd of AUGUST 2025 I was in full uniform in a marked police van
attached to call sign NA30L. My operator was PC George Wilson-Wallis
1456NA. At
approx. 2100hrs NA 22L PC CHAN 2464NA and PC OBSIYE 1543NA called for a van
not on the hurry up but when I explained I was 20 minutes away they asked for
us on the hurry up. CAD 6844/02AUG25 is the cad they were at whilst on route
they asked if we had an enforcer on board which we did. Once we arrived at
BURNCROFT AVENUE, I saw PC OBSIYE by the door to a block of flats PC
Wilson-Wallis and I grabbed the enforcer and entered the block of flats. The
enforcer was handed to PC CHAN and PC OBSYIE explained to the resident of 109
BURNCROFT AVNEUE they were under arrest and cautioned them through the door
as he refused to open it and was shouting insults and telling us to “FUCK
OFF”. PC CHAN has then forced entry with the enforcer but the resident and
proceeded to kick the door back in our faces 3 times. PC CHAN has entered the
address first followed by PC OBSIYE then PC WILSON-WALIS and I was last in. I
saw PC CHAN draw his taser and point it towards the back of the flat where I
assume the suspect I now know to be SIMON CORDELL was standing. We have then
all followed to the living room at the back of the flat where Simon has
refused to comply
with officers instructions and has tried to stop PC CHAN from handcuffing
him. Simon has just been shouting “LOOK WHATS IN MY HAND LOOK WHATS IN MY
HAND” I have then assisted PC CHAN with getting Simon into handcuffs. The
whole time Simon has been resisting and trying to stop handcuffs being placed
on. Simon has then continued to resist and has been taken to the ground. This
has not stopped Simon from resisting and shouting abuse at officers
especially PC CHAN and PC OBSYIE. Simon has stated he has just had a operation and officers have hurt him that he had
stiches in his stomach and he needed and ambulance. Simon has been kicking
out his legs, so we have placed him in leg restraints. Once she was able PC
OBSIYE has asked for more units and for an ambulance. NA22N and NA1L have then showed up on the
scene. As
Simon did not like us and was being more aggressive towards us and NA22L we
have left Simon with NA22N and gone outside. Simon has eventually been taken
in an ambulance to NMH. I
have not watched my BWV prior to writing this statement and it is true to the
best of my knowledge. I
exhibit my BWV as RAW/01
Signature Witnessed by: Page 1 of
1 Statement
no: NA-1008857-2022 RESTRICTED (when
complete) 8 |
08.
08.
PC_Wilson_Wallis.pdf
|
|
|
WITNESS STATEMENT Criminal
Procedure Rules, r 27.
2; Criminal Justice Act 1967, s. 9;
Magistrates' Courts
Act 1980, s.5B Statement of: PC George WILSON-WALLIS URN
I Age if under 18: Over (if over 18 insert 'over 18J Occupation: Police Constable This statement (consisting of 2 page(s) each signed by me) is true to the best
of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully
stated in
it anything which I know to be false, or do not believe to be true. Witness Signature: ~ ................................................................................ Date:.. 02/08/2025 This
is the witnessing officer statement regarding the arrest performed by officer
1543NA at HHBurncroft
avenue EN3 7JQ on the 2nd of August 2025 for a man who ! know as Samual for
the offence of harassment. In this statement I
will be referring to myself, PC WILLIAMS 1675NA, 1543NA and 2464NA as well as
a male by the name of Samual. On the 2nd
of August 2025 myself and PC WILLIAMS were on standard mobile patrol under
call sign NA30L, during are standard mobile
patrol NA22L called for a van to facilitate the transport of an individual I would later find out to be called Samual to
custody for the offence of harassment. PC WILLIAMS put up for the call and NA30L was assigned to CAD 6844/02082025
officers were making there was at standard speed however after around 5
minutes of driving they were requested to speed up and get there as soon as possible, after this
instruction NA30L made there way toH Burncroft avenue EN3
7JQ as quickly as was safe to. On the way to the address NA22L requested
NA30L to bring an enforcer to help enter the property case they needed to. Once arriving at the
scene, I brought PC 2464NA the enforcer to
help break the door in whilst this was going on at 21:16 PC 1543NA began
arresting Samual for the offence of harassment through the door as he was
refusing to open it as well as this, she also began reading the caution. PC
2464NA asked Samual one last time to open the door before he would break the
door in. Samual refused to open the door stating ‘‘NO I WON'T OPEN THE FUCKING DOOR" as such PC 2464NA began to break door with the enforcer to
allow officers to get inside to continue the arrest and restrain Samual. Once PC 2464NA got the
door open Samual tried closing the door in his face, this repeated itself
numerous times with PC 2464NA opening the door and Samuel closing it. After a
while PC 2464NA managed to open the door at 21:17 allowing officers to get
into the building, PC 2464NA pulled out his taser telling him to stop moving
and get on the ground whilst PC 1543NA took
her baton out and followed closely behind. PC WILLIAMS and I followed behind PC 1543NA ready to restrain the
suspect and assist in the arrest should it be required. After a while Samual
tripped over his sofa and fell onto the sofa facing upwards PC 2464NA and PC
1543NA grabbed his arms whilst I grabbed his legs to stop him from kicking. The
reason for my grabbing his legs to stop him kicking was due to squirming and his hostile nature I didn’t want
him kicking and hurting either himself or my colleagues. PC 2454NA asked
Samual to stand up which he refused to do so myself, PC 2464NA and PC 1543NA
picked him up and tried to move him against
the wall to get his hands behind his back to apply the hand cuffs. This didn't work so we kept him
standing up right and holding his arms in place whilst PC 1543NA tried to put
the cuffs on him. Once we got the cuffs on him Samual carried on screaming
and resisting and decided to put himself on the ground first going to his
knees and then to his front. Once on the floor a
grabbed a hold of his ankles again to keep him from kicking as I could see
him struggling on the floor. Once again, I did
this to keep myself, my colleagues and him safe. A couple of second later PC
1543NA asked officers if anyone had any leg restraints as he was still
squirming and trying to kick, Witness Signature: ..................................................................................................... Signature
Witnessed by Signature:....................................... ................................................................................................
Continuation of Statement of: PC WILLIAMS had some and gave
them to me to apply to the suspect. After the application of the first set of
leg restraints I waited to see if he would calm down with the first set on
and then after seeing that he wasn’t calming down and still squirming 1543NA
said to apply the second set of leg restrains on him. I agreed with the
decision and decided to apply the second set of restraints to him. After the
second set of restrains was applied I then kept my leg on his as he was still
squirming. As such PC 2546NA recommending calling for additional support as
well as a set of supervisors to come down and help assess the situation. PC
1543NA began to do this so I grabbed a hold of his arms to keep him on his
side as he tried rolling over back to his front again. Once PC 1543NA was
done radioing for additional units I went back to keeping his legs in place. After another minute
of holding on to him Samual began to stop resisting as such, we got off him
and at this point additional units arrived who began speaking to Samual which
made him more calm. After this I got off him and
called for boarding up for his front door whilst other officers delt with
Samual, after a while he came out of the property and we began to move him to
the van to which Samual sat on the ground in protest stating he wants a ambulance, officers began to explain to him that we
were going to take him to hospital in a van however Samual refused, at this
point members of the public came and started speaking to officers and Samual.
After a while longer a ambulance came and took
Samual inside of it and out of my care.
|
09.
09.
Rebecca_O_HARE_2nd_pdf
|
|
|
WITNESS
STATEMENT Criminal Procedure
Rules, r 16. 2; Criminal Justice Act 1967, s. 9; Magistrates’ Courts Act
1980, s.5B URN Statement
of: Rebecca O’Hare Age
if under 18: (if over 18 insert ‘over 18’)
Occupation: Retail assistant This statement
(consisting of 2 page(s) each signed by me) is true to the best of my
knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in
evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully
stated in it anything which I know to be false, or do not believe to be true. Witness Signature: Rebecca O’Hare Date:03/08/2025 I am the above name person and
this is my second statement regarding an incident that took place on the 2nd
of August 2025 concerning my neighbour who has
harassed me. I have submitted a video to the
police upon request, that shows my neighbour
hurling abuse at me whilst being at my front door. I exhibit the following
video as ROH/01. Witness Signature:
Rebecca O’Hare Signature Witnessed by
Signature:
Page 1 of 1
|
10.
10.
Rebecca_O_hare.pdf
|
|
|
WITNESS STATEMENT Criminal Procedure Rules, r 27.
2; Criminal Justice Act 1967, s. 9; Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, s.5B URN Statement of: Rebecca O’hare Age if under 18: Over (if over 18 insert ‘over 18’) Occupation: This statement (consisting of
page(s) each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and
I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to
prosecution if I have wilfully stated in it
anything which I know to be false, or do not believe to be true. Witness
Signature: ……………………..…………........
Date: 02/08/2025 This statement relates to my neighbour at 109 Burncroft
avenue, EN3 7JQ I am the above named individual
and reside at location known to police. The
incident I am about to describe occurred on Burncroft avenue, the address is
a block of flats and there are 6 flats within the block and 2 flats per
floor. In January my neighbour Simon (109) was banging on my door shouting
that I was making noise, I’ll punch you up, I’ll slap you up and your
daughter. He also said he would do the same thing to my children’s dad. I
took a video of this and sent this to the police. In January I was
getting a new door fitted, I’ve taken my daughter to school. I’ve come home;
the door was taken off the hinges by the contractor. Simon has come upstairs
and i was in the living room and I could hear him,
Simon was asking the contractor if the guy that lives opposite from me (113)
was home. I’ve gone to the door, and he has started to accuse me of banging
on the floor and keeping him awake at night. I’ve explained that I don’t live
above him then he has then shouting saying that he would hit me, hit my
eldest daughter and drag my unborn baby out my stomach. I kept telling him to
move from the door, he then went to say he’s got videos of me on a website
about being corrupt. As I’ve called the police on that occasion, he has said
call the fucking police I don’t care. On Saturday 2nd
August 2025 I was driving into the estate where my block of flats is, as I’m
driving in I have seen my neighbour who I only know
as Simon, he resides at 109 Burncroft avenue. Whenever come into the estate
the first place, I look is the bottom of my block, to see if he is outside.
If he is I know that he would try and intimidate me, shout at me or something
is going to happen. As I have driven in and drove
around the bend, I could see him from the side staring at my car. I’ve driven
into the small car park on the left and parked my car. I’ve got out my car to
see if he was still there or not, once I’ve seen he is not there I’ve walked
my two kids upstairs. I’ve had to go back downstairs to grab my children’s
nappy bag I told my eldest daughter if the baby wakes up to call m phone. I’ve locked the door and taken the key with me
as I’m walking down the stairs I hear anothe door,
Simon has got to the bottom of the stairs before me, he was saying stuff but
facing away from Witness Signature: …………………………............................ Signature
Witnessed by Signature:…………………………………………………………....................................................... Page 1 of
Continuation of Statement of: me. So I wasn’t paying
any attention and he has turned around and been like ‘you hear me’, not in
response to him I was like what? And then he has said ‘I will blow up your
car, I will blow it to the other side of the street.’ Then he was like if you
come and ask me, I will tell you I didn’t do it. I’ve closed the communal door to
put space between us, I’ve walked towards my car to get the nappy bag he has
opened the door and was shouting stuff at me as I’m walking towards my car, I
wasn’t paying attention to what he was shouting at me I was trying to get to
my car as quick as possible. I’ve got to my car and got what I needed and
looked if he was still by the door, he wasn’t by the door, so I’ve started
walking back home, once I got into my flat. I called the police. Because of his behaviour I am
worried to leave the house with my children. I have been getting other people
to drop things off for me. I try my best to stay as far away from him as
possible but every time I see him I know that something would happen, there
has been incidents when I am at the shop, he would stare at me but would not
say anything, trying to intimidate me. I feel unsafe in my own home and fear
for me and my children because of his threats, every time I make a complaint
a feel that it is put down to his mental health. I am concerned that only if
he touches me or my children that something would be done. Witness
Signature: …………………………………… Signature
Witnessed by Signature:………………………………………………………… Page 2 of 2
|
11.
11.
ROH_01_mp4
12.
12.
Simon_CORDELL_Charges.pdf
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CROWN
PROSECUTION SERVICE Rex METROPOLITAN POLICE
OFFICIAL – SENSITIVE (WHEN COMPLETED)
Page 1 of 2
Page
2 of 2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.
13.
Simon_CORDELL_Pre_Cons.pdf
|
|
|
CROWN PROSECUTION
SERVICE Rex Pre Cons 03/08/25 22:40 THIS PRINTOUT IS
PRODUCED FOR THE USE OF THE COURT, DEFENCE AND PROBATION DATA PROTECTION LEGISLATION THESE PERSONAL DATA ARE PROVIDED TO YOU
FOR THE AGREED SPECIFIED PURPOSE(S). ******************************************** * * * * *
COURT/DEFENCE/PROBATION PRINT * * * * * ******************************************** PRINT
OF PNC RECORD - PNCID : 97/99378V PRINT
FOR : CAROLINE LUNNY TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES ATTACHED 11 PLEASE NOTE THAT
IN THE ABSENCE OF FINGERPRINTS, IDENTITY |
------------
List needed to be obtained from my
solicitor for Arrest [2] 26/08/2025
1. Police
body cam’s footage’s
2. Police
notebooks of all police officers in attendance.
3. Request
for all police officers and victims as well as witness to attend for trial.
Requests for Arrest [2] 26/08/2025
1.
Request
for the proceedings to be dismissed due to myself not being arrested or
interviewed, asdo nor with an appropriate adult or
legal adviser..
What’s worrying me is how my solicitor is going to
handle the case considering the facts. I.E.
1. legal aid took a relevantly long time to be
achieved and therefore legal proceding could not startand due to the court trial date being set within 2
months and 9 days From 4 August 2025 to 13 October 2025 it has
not given us much time to consult.
2. A meeting to be set up so we can go over case 1 and
case 2.
3.
4
List of things that need to be sent by me
to my solicitor.
2.
2x
Statements I can obtain the 3rd is noted on the police bodycam footage,, I
heard the Bypassed who is a Adult resident state the complete true ongoings to
the police officers when outside of my block. He is the fist
person Rebbeca O’Hare Talks to in her statement in the car park and his name is
mark but I do not no his surname or door number in the houses in Burncroft
avenue unless allowed to go there. The body cams prove the truth.
3.
Request
from the Enfield Council and way of the courts or the power possessed in you to
the true occupier’s name
🧾 Legal Pathways to Access Company
Information
- Production Orders under the
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) You can apply to the court
for a production order under PACE, which compels a company to
disclose specific documents or data relevant to the case. This is often
used when voluntary disclosure isn’t forthcoming.
- Disclosure Obligations under
the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA) If the company is part of the
prosecution or holds material relevant to the case, they may be required
to disclose it under CPIA. You can challenge non-disclosure if the
material is likely to undermine the prosecution or assist the defence.
- Third-Party Disclosure
Applications
Under Rule 15 of the Criminal Procedure Rules, you can apply to the
court for disclosure from third parties (like companies) if the material
is likely to be relevant to the defence. This is a powerful tool when the
company isn’t directly involved in the prosecution.
- Data Protection Act 2018 &
GDPR While
these laws primarily protect personal data, they also allow access under
lawful bases such as legal claims or defence of rights. You may be able to
argue that disclosure is necessary for the administration of justice.
On
10/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
11/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
12/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
13/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
14/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
15/09/2025:
|
|
|
|
|
|
My website:
Horrific
Corruption: Uncovering the Dark Truth's
Holder for N1 Claim Form