Page 295 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 2nd Half

163,164,165,166,167,168
169,170,171,172,173
--
160,
From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>
Sent time: 26/04/2017 06:58:10 PM
In the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division
Royal Courts of Justice Strand,
London,
WC2A 2ll
Date: 17/04/2017
Between:
THE QUEEN
ON THE APPLICATION OF
SIMON CORDELL CLAIMANT
- AND -
THE COMMISSIONER OF THE POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS
DEFENDANT
THE COMMISSIONER OF THE POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS
INTERESTED
PARTY
SKELETON ARGUMENT INTRODUCTION:
1. This application is to have the following decisions/orders reviewed and reversed in order to
prevail in the right to and in justice.
2. A decision/order to make an application for an Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order against
the Appellant as named above was agreed in a conference at the Enfield civic centre on the
00/00/2014 alongside their employed staff and members of the Metropolis police.
3. On the 5th November 2014, the Appellant defends in his defence that a guilty verdict was
wrongfully decided at Highbury Magistrates Court, this was in order for the Commissioner of
the Metropolis Police.
4. The Appellant asks for the case to be reopened and reviewed in its decision that is made by
order of the Magistrates Court, so for the verdict to be overturned in his favour to be declared
as void making the decision an error in law.
5. The Appellant's human rights have now been breached. And.
6. The Appellant's right to due process has also been breached. This led to the Appellant's
right to a fair trial also being breached.
7. The ongoing of the Asbo case are a clear miscarriage of justice that has been allowed to
happen, even once reported.
8. The Appellant's rights in the data protection act 1998 have also been breached in relation
towards the ongoings of the Anti-Social Behaviour order.
9. The Appellant requests the decision/order that was placed upon his statue of liberties to
make the interim order a full Antisocial Behaviour order on 4th August 2015 by Highbury
Corner Magistrates Court, in order for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to be
revoked.
10. The Appellant asks for the case to be reopened and reviewed in its decision that is made
by order of the Magistrates Court, so for the verdict to be overturned in his favour to be
declared as void making the decision an error in law.
11. The Appellant's human rights have now been breached. And.
12. The Appellant's right to due process has also been breached. This led to the Appellant's
right to a fair trial also being breached.