Page 338 - 3. 2014 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table
P. 338

To: Lorraine Cordell
               Subject: Re: Regina v. Simon Cordell for mention at Woolwich Crown Court
               08th April 2014
               Lorraine
               The previous conviction discrepancies will be highlighted counsel to counsel between the
               prosecution and the defence. Tactically we have to withhold certain information in particular
               the email from the council. I have referred to the noise abatement officer attending and
               alluded to police also being in attendance. The CPS is the organisation that makes the
               decision on continuing the prosecution and it the police are failing to investigate and we
               provide written representations with evidence in support then the prosecution may review on
               the grounds that there is no realistic prospect of conviction. This is the most sensible
               approach. As advised earlier once my headache clears, I will be drafting detailed
               representations with a view to the CPS reviewing the prosecution in this case.
               Regards
               Josephine
               On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
               Hi Josey
               Sorry to hear you are ill I hope you feel better soon. I notice that nothing is in there for the
               bail application for the PNC and the failing to surrender that should not be on his record.
               Which he does have bail condition set for failing to surrender. And can the issues about his
               PNC be given in court tomorrow without it being in the bail application as I do feel the judge
               should be told about these errors on Simon record as there is also more than one error and
               these did have a deciding factor towards his bail condition in this case. And are we showing
               the court the email from the council which does show the police was aware of the party
               before
               04/05/2013
               and that it was being squatted before Simon had even attended the building?
               I was thinking that all this information would have been needed to show the judge how bad
               this case really is. Will it be Jemi that will attend court tomorrow?
               From: JOSEPHINE WARD [Mail To:josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com]
               810,
               Sent: 07 April 2014 13:33
               To: Lorraine Cordell
               Subject: Fwd.: Regina v. Simon Cordell for mention at Woolwich Crown Court
               8th April 2014
               FYI
               Forwarded
               message from:
               JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>
               Date: Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:53 AM
               Subject: Regina v. Simon Cordell for mention at Woolwich Crown Court
               8th April 2014
               To: croydonkingston&woolwichcrown@cps.gsi.gov.uk
               listing@woolwich.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk,
               "J.B. AkinOlugbade"
               J.akinolugbade@nexuschambers.com
               Dear Sir or Madam
               We refer to the above matter. This case was last mentioned in court on
               18th March 2014
   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343