POL00055421
POL00055421
Page 1 of 2
Marilyn Benjamin
From: warwicktatford:
Sent: 08 October 2010 15:49
To: Jarnail A Singh
Subject: Fw: misra
Attachments: C.htm
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
crere Original Message--
From: warwicktatford-
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 1
To: <jarnail.a.singl
Reply-To: warwicktatfor
Subject: Fw: misra
Dear Jarnail,
Please see the below emails. Keith Hadrill's document sets out a
history of the case that in parts I struggle to recognise. You
may want to think what parts you accept and what you dispute.
As far as I am concerned what really matters is that we completed
secondary disclosure when we served the logs, as I understand it
on or about 8 march. The ball was then in the defence's court.
Ww
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
ee Original Message
From: warwicktatford..
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 08:10:37
To: Keith Hadrillf
Reply-To: warwicktatford
Subject: Re: misra
I have had a chance to read this now Keith. I am afraid that it
is inaccurate in many respects. Most particularly Critchlow did
not order that there should be no more disclosure. He simply
treated the new request with derision.
My point is simply this. We repeatedly asked for focussed
disclosure requests, sadly without success. In particular I
repeatedly asked for suggestions as to a suitable time span for
the logs. None was forthcoming. We were forced to choose a time
span. It is not our fault if your expert would have preferred a
different period. After all he had known about Falkirk since Jan.
At the last hearing I made it clear that if you wanted more
disclosure you would have to apply to the court. A dusty response
from the judge in no way prevented you from making a more
considered application. Also of course we would have considered
fairly any appropriately argued request.
08/10/2010
POL00055421
POL00055421
Page 2 of 2
At the moment I am keeping an entirely open mind whether to object
or not to parts of your report. I await the discussion between the
experts. I anticipate they will have much to discuss after Jenkins
serves his new statement.
I am sorry if this sounds depressing. I just thought you should
have notice of my provisional views.
WwW
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
aiid Original Message
From: "Keith Hadrill"
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 201
To:
Subject: misra
Dear Warwick,
I have left a message of your mobile re the attached submission
note.
It is relevant to your intention to apply to exclude some of McL
conclusions etc.
I have drafted it so as to set out the history and dislcosure
problems etc.
Hopefully, it will save a lot of time, initially, with the Judge.
Give me a call
Keith
(See attached file: C.him)
08/10/2010