Cover Up Continues!!

Why did the Attorney General not consider the key evidence of Tide Movements and telecoms submitted by me 4 years ago to disprove suicide at Beachy Head.

The tides prove:

1. That the Ponzas could not have swum to the lighthouse at 730pm, thus the body was NOT at the lighthouse but at Birling gap two hours up the Coast
2. That the body did not com in from the sea as stated in the Opinion.
3. That the RNLI could not have found the body at 845pm as it would have been underwater.
4. That the RNLI could no have log rolled the body into a bodybag and dragged it up the shingle as it was high tide and there is no shingle back at high tide at the lighthouse.
5. My son was maiing phone calls from Rye Tennis Club t 832 and 845, thus he was not dead at 730pm. His mother could not have made these calls as she made a call at 833pm 5 miles form Rye Tennis Club using her phone at Broad Oak.

So I repeat for the umpteenth time, if my son did not drive the car to Beachy Head (Jamie Stork did) and the car was impounded by Sussex Police at 1045, then the only way his body could have reached the beach at 8pm on the 28th was via a Third Party.

You have not addressed the act that Aaln Craze iied in his Representation that I was informed about the Post Mortem which never took place. Thus your claim that the Post Mortem proves suicide, is flawed. Alan Craze said the body moved. Where did it move from, he fails to state this.

To justify the refusal to grant an Appeal the Attorney General, as state in your opinion is required to abide by section 13(1)(b) of the Coroners Act 1998. To ignore this new evidence to disprove suicide is not only abuse of process it allows my son’s killers to remain free.

I await your answers with interest. It was noted in the FoI Reply that your office, unlike myself, has not employed a Tides Expert. Could I suggest that you do prior to your reply to this complaint?