Page 304 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 2nd Half
P. 304

35. The Appellant had not been coping throughout this case and walked out of the Court, the
                   Appellant's mother said to the District Judge you can clearly see he is not well and is not
                   coping, which the district Judge confirmed she could clearly see that the Appellant was
                   not well. But continued to ask the clerk to get the Appellant back in Court and she also
                   informed that if appellant re-entered the Courtroom and was disruptive, she would hold
                   him in contempt of Court. The Appellants mother would not let the Appellant re-entered
                   the Courtroom, as she knew the Appellant was so unwell and not coming and did not
                   want him to be held in contempt of Court due to his health.
               36. Because of this, the Appellant was not there to have the Antisocial Behaviour Order
                   served on him, and the Antisocial Behaviour Order was served to the Appellant's mother
                   on his behalf.
               37. Upon proving the case District Judge Pigot granted all the applicants’ conditions. The
                   applicants wanted to make this a lifetime Antisocial Behaviour Order, which district
                   Judge Pigot did not allow and granted it for five years within the whole of the UK. With
                   the stipulation that it could be reapplied for when the five years were concluded. She
                   started the five years from the 04/08/2015; she did not count the time the Appellant had
                   been on the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order.
               38. The Appellant's mother and the Appellant's barrister then asked the Judge if the
                   conditions of the Antisocial Behaviour Order could be defined as there were many points
                   of concern. the Judge was asked if the Appellant went to a Tesco or Tesco petrol station
                   between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am would he be in breach of the conditions and
                   subsequently arrested, the response from District Judge Pigot was dumbfounding she
                   said” yes he would be arrested, taken to Court and would then have to prove he was going
                   to get whatever petrol he required”. I am guessing the same could be said for food and
                   any other non-residential buildings, this would include hospitals, police stations,
                   restaurants, cinemas etc. on hearing the Appellant's mother and barrister questioned this
                   and said “so you think this is in accordance with the law,?” she replied to this “the
                   conditions are precise and plain.
               39. District Judge Pigot then left the Courtroom with her clerk to get the memorandum of an
                   entry, so for them to be made up as soon as possible, this was due to the lateness of the
                   day and the department who dealt with this kind of request would be closed, on her return
                   the District Judge asked why the Appellants barrister was not in Court, the Appellants
                   mother said that he had left because he was not told that he needed to stay, she handed the
                   memorandum of an entry to the Appellants mother and a copy was then sent to the
                   applicants barrister, on reviewing this the applicants barrister said there were multiple
                   spelling mistakes and that the dates from 2013 should not be entered and needed to be
                   removed. She said this would be amended and a new copy would be sent in the post, and
                   until this day this has never happened even though the Appellants mother contacted the
                   Court via emails in regards to them issues, the spelling mistakes were corrected but not
                   the dates.
               40. We have since found out that we also should have been handed a map showing all areas
                   which the Antisocial Behaviour Order conditions encompassed, which we have also never
                   been given, but this map would have just shown the whole of the UK, even low the extent
                   of the problems only excised in Enfield and under Asbo guidance should never have been
                   granted on such a geological wide scale without proof of contempt.
               41. The Appellant's mother asked the Court for the transcripts, but was told at the
                   Magistrate's Court does not record hearings, that the only notes that were kept were the
                   clerks Court notes, the clerks Court notes were requested and the fee paid to obtain these.
                   Upon looking at the clerk's notes there is a substantial amount is not included within them
                   for the full two-day hearing for the Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing.
   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309