Page 235 - 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table All

He had his file with all the information in it which included pictures of the known organiser,
he went up to the known organiser who was white north European, after speaking to him the
very senior police officer asked him to leave the land and served him a notice under S63
CJOPOA and a notice not to set up within 24 hours. The very senior police officer gave the
known organiser 3 hours to pack up everything and leave the land and gave him an
explanation of the offence he was liable to commit if he failed to comply with the direction.
2233
215,
Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf
The organiser then relocated to progress way. Police are well aware organisers relocate if the
police close an event down.
The claimant was nowhere near Essex on this day; he was not involved in the organisation or
supply of equipment which the police are well aware of.
Yet the police want to blame him and they was not going to stop until they got the ASBO on
him and did not care what they covered up in the process of the information they had, I
believe this is also why there is nothing really for the 06th June within the bundle for the
ASBO application.
And why when asked over and over why we were never allowed to see the police officers
packet notebooks, for any of the dates in their application.
20/06/2014 1 Falcon Park Neasden Lane NW10:
The claimant’s is alleged to have been involved in the organisation and or supplied
equipment for an illegal rave, the claimant disputes what the police have said, on this date the
claimant had been contacted and asked if he would hire a sound system for a gentleman’s
birthday party. The claimant agreed to do so; the sound system and van were collected from
the claimant’s home. The claimant’s terms and conditions were agreed, and invoice signed,
and a deposit was given to him.
At around 01:00 hours the claimant received a phone call from the person he had hired the
sound system to; the person stated that the sound system and van was being seized by the
police.
The claimant was very upset and could not at this stage understand why the police was
seizing his equipment and van.
The claimant asked the location and took down the address, he had to get up and get dressed
and leave his home it took him around an hour to reach the location, upon approaching the
address he had been given he saw there was a lot of police around, he parked his car up got
out and went up to the police to speak to them to find out what was going on, he showed the
police the terms and conditions of hirer, and the invoice.
The police at this point allowed the claimant into the building where he continued to speak to
the police, the sound system had not been put away and the police allowed the claimant to
start packing it away into his van, but the police stated they were confiscating it until they had
looked into the matter.
The claimant gave the police all his contact information, and also took down the police
officer information. About a week later the police contacted the claimant and told him he was
allowed to come and pick his van and equipment up from the police station.
The claimant did not knowingly supply equipment for an illegal rave; he believed the hire
was for a birthday party and it was all above board.
The claimant did not cause any antisocial behaviour on the 20th June 2014.
19/07/2014 Carpet right A10 Enfield:
As stated previously by the claimant he was not involved in the organisation or supplied
equipment on this date. And the claimant totally disagrees in regard to what the police have
said in their application. The claimant on this day was driving down A10 he was heading