Post Office - Horizon scandal

[Hobbit]

Legit question, aren't all the witnesses under oath during this enquiry ?

Yes. As it’s a Statutory Inquiry they can, a) be subpoenaed to attend, b) compelled to provide a written statement, c) legally bound to answer questions. However, they are advised not to self-incriminate by offering extra information when answering a question.

 

[Hobbit]

They would not have to build a case for every victim.
They prosecute a person. Then choose the two victims where the best case can be built to prove dishonesty and intent to permanently deprive.

Money was wrongfully taken from the SubPostmasters. Ian Hislop called it theft last night.
This must be a crime when it was known by senior management that the false accounts were Post Office false accounts and not SubPostmasters false accounts.
That is where the dishonesty lies.

The thing missing from this inquiry is the failure of Lawyers, Magistrates and Judges to see the truth. And they failed time and time again.
Ministry of Justice needs to conduct its own inquiry, I believe.

I would expect every wrongful conviction will be reviewed. In most cases, a major issue was failure to Disclose evidence by the PO. The case can only be judged on the evidence presented. However, in one case it was down to the judge accepting the PO’s answer of “the bug didn’t affect the balance.” Also, a number of defence teams didn’t chase evidence hard enough, accepting that the PO had Disclosed everything.

I do think Disclosure will become a major issue for judges and the PO. In some cases the PO sought legal privilege to withhold evidence. And in general terms the PO wrongly applied legal privilege designation to a number of pieces of evidence.

Just to expand on the idea of a review, a number of convictions came about because the defendants couldn’t afford a thorough defence. It’s got to be wrong that one side wins because they have more money.

And then there’s the issue of private prosecutions and the PO using their own investigators. Different rules in Scotland and Northern Ireland but it was still the PO’s investigators providing the evidence…

 

[Billysboots]

What about the cases that happened after that period of time where it became apparent that the money being recouped was based on errors in the Horizon system? Isn't there a cut off date where it was known that it wasn't the postmasters at fault and yet the prosecutions continued? Surely after that date (to quote one of your previous posts) they are guilty of,

"(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b)intends, by making the representation"

"(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss."

Once they became aware of the issues with the IT system and the ability to access it and make changes remotely, any prosecutions after that were false representations that caused a loss to another or exposed another to the risk of a loss?

I agree on the face of it that this may be a possibility, which is why I have agreed that there may be some individuals within the PO guilty of fraud.

But as I have also suggested, every element of the offence needs to be proven against an individual defendant for an offence to be made out. Each sub-postmaster’s case would, I suspect, have been dealt with by multiple individuals, each with different responsibilities. So whilst they may have been guilty of one element of the offence, they may not have ticked the other boxes, so the full offence may not be proven.

There has long been an argument that complex fraud cases should be tried by specialist juries, and not by twelve individuals plucked from the street. Anything other than simple fraud can be an absolute nightmare to unravel.

As I said in a subsequent post, if those with more knowledge than us deem that there are persons within the PO who have committed fraud then crack on and prosecute. The fact that it may not look and feel right to me doesn’t mean it isn’t!

 

[clubchamp98]

I’m with Hobbit in as much as there are others who are probably more culpable than Vennells. Whilst, ultimately, as the CEO the buck in many respects stops with her, there will be individuals at the coal face with an in depth, hands on knowledge of what was going on. They are perhaps the ones who should be in the crosshairs.

And I absolutely share your view that a full criminal investigation, with appropriate prosecutions, should follow this enquiry. I hope that this doesn’t end up like Hillsborough.

Yes but the way to stop it turning into a Hillsborugh is to get the big boss in court.
This will start a domino affect where they all start squealing on each other.

The buck stops with Vennells,

But the Establishment will do all they can to stop it.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Vennells not exactly carrying the torch for the Christian faith.
Seemingly she was being fast tract as the next Bishop of London.

 

[Hobbit]

Below is a very short vid which, I think very much encapsulates the last 2.5 days. In it she says she used the wrong words and that it wasn’t her real thinking/positioning on the issue.

Given some time to quietly reflect on her testimony….

How many times has she said something similar in the last 2.5 days? The woman has been round the block more times than Lewis Hamilton. She’s been very precise in her language used throughout the 2.5 days. She’s got a CV that more than suggests she’s exceptionally bright. She’s obviously not politically naive, evidenced by her ‘promotion’ into the Cabinet Office after leaving the PO, and her consideration for the position as Bishop of London.

She is absolutely not an idiot, and if I take it a little further I’d say she didn’t surround herself with idiots either. I would not trust the woman with a school crossing..

 

[chico]

Vennells not exactly carrying the torch for the Christian faith.
Seemingly she was being fast tract as the next Bishop of London.

Some of the biggest hypocrites you will ever find are the one who professe to be devout Christians. They spoil it for the ones who are true Christians.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Timetable through to closing statements at the end of the hearing.

Phase 5 and 6 Timetable | Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry

Heari

www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk

Thanks for posting this schedule.
I can now search youtube for any that take my interest.

When the inquiry resumes, I will be looking out for the interviews with both the Second Sight investigators, two Fujitsu execs and the 4 days set aside for Gareth Jenkins who is described as a former Distinguished Engineer at Fujitsu Services Ltd.

 

[Hobbit]

Thanks for posting this schedule.
I can now search youtube for any that take my interest.

When the inquiry resumes, I will be looking out for the interviews with both the Second Sight investigators, two Fujitsu execs and the 4 days set aside for Gareth Jenkins who is described as a former Distinguished Engineer at Fujitsu Services Ltd.

Gareth Jenkins has twice asked for immunity, and been denied both times by Sir Wyn. On the 2 previous occasions he was scheduled to appear, the PO dumped thousands of documents on the Inquiry the day before… coincidence?

Edit; there’s a vid on the Inquiry page on YouTube from early July last year about the PO holding docs till the very last minute. They’ve dragged their heels in the run up to each session then literally dumped them the day/evening before. It’s not gone down well with the chair. In the run up to the start of the current run of sessions they did it again. The Chair’s response was all witnesses will attend as scheduled but will also be called back if the document review brings up points that lead to questions.

Fujitsu architect demands immunity before he will speak to Post Office inquiry

A Fujitsu architect working on the controversial Horizon IT system whose evidence helped convict innocent subpostmasters has demanded immunity to appear at the public inquiry

businessplus.ie

 

[Hobbit]

Jane MacLeod, General Counsel to the PO and the witness who has said she won’t appear at the hearing has been ‘found’ alive and well in Australia. To be fair, she didn’t run off to Oz. She is Australian, and returned there in Oct 2020. She has provided a witness statement, see below, but feels she has nothing further to add.

The Chair has said that he could subpoena her to appear and then apply for extradition if she doesn’t turn up but feels it would unduly delay proceedings. He has also said that there are enough witnesses and documentation to come to make accurate findings in his report.

https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/file/3358/download?token=V3iFk3cI

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Vennells not exactly carrying the torch for the Christian faith.
Seemingly she was being fast tract as the next Bishop of London.

What I have been thinking as someone having such a faith. I think that I would struggle were I to be be sitting in church (or listening anywhere) with PV leading a service or delivering a sermon - indeed much of what has gone on under her watch and that she was complicit in, would have had Christ chasing her out of the ‘temple’.

That said…not a few convicted criminals have become ordained clergy, often following periods of imprisonment - see for instance Jonathan Aitken. They often (usually) in true repentance, humility and with grace have much indeed to say of value to us, and are usually heard with an open, listening and forgiving ear. But perhaps in these cases the important word is ‘convicted’ - whatever that might actually be in reality.

 

[clubchamp98]

What I have been thinking as someone having such a faith. I think that I would struggle were I to be be sitting in church (or listening anywhere) with PV leading a service or delivering a sermon - indeed much of what has gone on under her watch and that she was complicit in, would have had Christ chasing her out of the ‘temple’.

That said…not a few convicted criminals have become ordained clergy, often following periods of imprisonment - see for instance Jonathan Aitken. They often (usually) in true repentance, humility and with grace have much indeed to say of value to us, and are usually heard with an open, listening and forgiving ear. But perhaps in these cases the important word is ‘convicted’ - whatever that might actually be in reality.

Isn’t the first part of redemption actually admitting what you have done?
You can then work on rehabilitation.

 

[Hobbit]

A brief vid with an explosive revelation. Witness statements presented to the courts during prosecutions had details of bugs edited out… I wonder who did the editing? The witness? Fujitsu managers? PO managers? Is that conspiring to pervert the course of justice?

Sounds like Gareth Jenkins has some tough questions to answer

 

[RichA]

Might be behind a paywall for non-subscribers to The Times, but answers a lot of the questions asked here about what the police and CPS are doing about prosecuting the PO and Fujitsu conspirators.
Essentially, they've been investigating since 2020 but have to wait until the inquiry finishes and it will take at least a couple of years. There are millions of documents that have to be reviewed and hundreds of witnesses to interview.

Inquiry into Post Office to use 80 detectives from across UK

Metropolitan Police are leading investigation into possible offences by senior leaders at Post Office and Fujitsu, but must wait until the public inquiry is complete

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[cliveb]

Might be behind a paywall for non-subscribers to The Times, but answers a lot of the questions asked here about what the police and CPS are doing about prosecuting the PO and Fujitsu conspirators.
Essentially, they've been investigating since 2020 but have to wait until the inquiry finishes and it will take at least a couple of years. There are millions of documents that have to be reviewed and hundreds of witnesses to interview.

OK, I don't know the intricacies of the legal system, but is there any rule that says EVERY piece of evidence has to be reviewed?
If the police/CPS find, say, 100 pieces of evidence that are enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, why do they need to trawl through all the rest?
Provided they disclose it all to the defense, isn't it then the defense's job to find something that supports their case?

 

[RichA]

OK, I don't know the intricacies of the legal system, but is there any rule that says EVERY piece of evidence has to be reviewed?
If the police/CPS find, say, 100 pieces of evidence that are enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, why do they need to trawl through all the rest?
Provided they disclose it all to the defense, isn't it then the defense's job to find something that supports their case?

If they have possession of or access to material then they have to review and disclose it. It's the PO's failure to follow this rule that has led to the massive miscarriages of justice. It's the court's job to decide whether there is reasonable doubt - not the prosecuting party.

 

[Hobbit]

OK, I don't know the intricacies of the legal system, but is there any rule that says EVERY piece of evidence has to be reviewed?
If the police/CPS find, say, 100 pieces of evidence that are enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, why do they need to trawl through all the rest?
Provided they disclose it all to the defense, isn't it then the defense's job to find something that supports their case?

If they have possession of or access to material then they have to review and disclose it. It's the PO's failure to follow this rule that has led to the massive miscarriages of justice. It's the court's job to decide whether there is reasonable doubt - not the prosecuting party.

They have to Disclose all but they don’t have to use all. Sometimes, though rarely, they will prosecute using x with a specific charge. If that fails they’ll use y on a different charge. It’s relatively rare but not unheard of.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I thought I heard on the radio today the Met (and possibly other forces) are now going to be looking into cases of perjury and something else I can't remember .
It's time to start handing out punishments.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I thought I heard on the radio today the Met (and possibly other forces) are now going to be looking into cases of perjury and something else I can't remember .
It's time to start handing out punishments.

Probably late next year or 2026 when charges might be brought.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Isn’t the first part of redemption actually admitting what you have done?
You can then work on rehabilitation.

It is.