Page 65 - 3. 2014 1st half New 26-05-21 No Table

to email me. I will still assist you with the preparation of the defence until legal
representation is revoked or transferred.
Regards
Josephine

14
The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue:
23 JOSEPHINE Ward_ Regina v Simon Cordell CL ref 5005393 (Patel)
/ Page Numbers: 73,74,75
From: JOSEPHINE WARD [josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com]
Sent: 12 February 2014 11:43
To: Lorraine Cordell; too smooth
Subject: Fwd.: Regina v Simon Cordell CL ref 5005393 (Patel)
Attachments: STATEMENT PATEL PART 2.pdf; INDICTMENT AND PATEL
STATEMENT PT1.pdf
Lorraine / Simon
Please see forwarded email that I sent to Mr Trevor Allaway.
Regards
Josephine
Forwarded message from:
JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: Regina v Simon Cordell CL ref 5005393 (Patel)
To: "Allaway, Trevor" <Trevor.Allaway@cluk.com>
Dear Mr Allaway
Thank you for your email.
This case is listed for mention at Woolwich Crown Court on
18th February 2014
It is my understanding that you have been contacted directly by Mr Simon Cordell and Miss
Lorraine Cordell in relation to ongoing legal proceedings. Thank you for the indication that
an application under section 35 of the Data Protection Act 1998 would be viewed favourably.
We make this application under section 35 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to request details
of all insurance claims submitted by Mr Rakesh Patel in relation to a burglary committed at
Unit 3 Horrisons Industrial Estate. Mr Patel alleged in a section 9 statement to the
Metropolitan Police that a burglary was committed between
01st May 2013
And
08th May 2013
He alleges that goods to the value of £8220 were stolen and damage to the walls estimated to
be between £8,000 £10,000. Our client disputes involvement in the burglary but states that he
did hire out his sound equipment in order for a private party to place arranged by persons
legally squatting at the premises. Mr Cordell was forensically linked to the premises by DNA
on a can of drink. Mr Cordell gave an explanation for this in that he stated that he oversaw
the persons using his equipment. Mr Cordell has stated that when he arrived damage had
already been caused and he has produced Facebook pictures purporting to be of the alleged
premises. It is our understanding that you are in possession of photographs from previous
burglaries at the same premises and the damage cited by Mr Patel in his statement to the
police actually relates to damage already caused during a previous burglary and not
May 2013
as Mr Patel alleges. We rely on paragraph section 35 (2)