We received the CPS Charging Bundle late on Tuesday with only three working days before the committal hearing.

It's 160 pages of tangled mess with no reference to the two interviews during which I disposed of all the nonsense allegations. Ie convenient ommission of my defence!

(After these oppressive interviews, I was congratulated by the appropriate adults on each occasion as to the common sense way in which I disposed of each allegation)

Nothing in this bundle to suggest why the CPS are now proceeding to charge my now having rejected the same material four times previously throughout 2024.

The bundle also failed to evidence that the real perpetrator, who is the alleged victim in these proceedings, has been shown in over 700 pieces of video evidence to have committed many crimes against me, including but not limited to, the alleged victim physically assaulting me, with no explanation by the police as to why no formal prosecution has taken place despite many admissions of his guilt.

I can only guess that the corrupt officers got this carefully edited bundle, that conveniently does not provide any information in defence, given to a new lawyer at the CBS who was unaware of what had happened previously.

We have written to the borough commander suggesting that this date be put off to allow dialogue with the CPS so that their bundle can be complete and, if they genuinely then still think there is a case to answer, the hearing can be reinstated, but given that over ninety percent this nonsense bundle is to do with a nonexistent event, which even if it had happened, would in the first instant property damage would be a summary only offence and not an indictable offence and would still be time barred (as there is a time limitation of six months) regardless so the possibility is laughable!

On the more positive side at leleast I'll be able turn of the Magistrate about all of the corrupt practices of the Canon hill SNT officers, one of which happened to go to school with the alleged victim!

At the same time our wonderful ward councillor has written to many of the senior officers of the Metropolitan Police and received positive answers that they will look at these corrupt practises by the Cannon Hill SNT.

Some examples of the corrupt practices referred to above:

1. The original OIC who then perpetrated much of the original abuse of process in support of the perpetrator was a school friend of the perpetrator, a fact offered by Sgt New to our ward councillor with permission for it to be repeated;
2. That officer falsified evidence to impose an ASB warning on me once he had no alternative but to impose it on his friend, but had clearly decided to punish me for making him do so. Similar tactics are used in much of the statements by police officers in the bundle (e.g. taking a video provided by me of the perpetrator damaging our fence to complain that in one corner of the image their bathrooms window can be seen);
3. The bundle includes a statement by Sgt New on p97 that “that the camera showed him putting the hose into the adjacent property's flue from 0019 hrs for 6 minutes up until 0025 hours”, based on a quick view of grainy video footage I was happy to show him on my phone. To do this would have been a physical impossibility for anyone let alone someone registered blind (the hose is not that long, and the 8ft gap from our side is beyond any human reach). Why was it not presented for comment at either interview, and why then would the CPS have repeatedly rejected the case during 2024 and enter 2025?
4. Multiple breaches of PACE where Sergeant New refused to look at the words of the relevant sections when challenged because he knew that what he was doing was not so authorised;
5. False accounts by the OIC that at the time of the arrest I was already awake, when the truth was that I was fast asleep in bed, and the physical means by which I was woken amounted to assault, as well as admissions by the OIC that he was aware of the likely traumatic effect on me of such a surprise but had taken no steps to prevent that happening.
6. Multiple breaches of PACE in relation to improper extensions of bail imposed on me;
7. Putting forward allegations of stalking and harassment against me despite the rejection by the county court of similar allegations in the failed injunction case initiated by the perpetrator’s schoolfriend against me when bail ran out the first time, which supports my belief that real purpose of the current prosecution includes it being just another way of imposing bail for an indefinite period;
8. The prosecution case containing none of the defence material it should shows that the allegations against me are specious;
9. None of the life changing physical and medical injuries suffered by me as a result of the failure to protect me from repeated unwanted abusive behaviors of be perpetrator (aka the test the STALKING), over the last four years by Sergeant New and his team have been included let alone the ample evidence that shows that neither the perpetrator or his ex-wife are in any way adversely affected.
10. The bundle does not reference the multiple complaints over the years submitted to the IOPC. Several of these are outstanding including one which may lead to a charge of sexual assault against me by the OIC.