clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
It is if the PM can step in for the Southport riots what’s he waiting for.
It’s why people think we’re not all equal under the law.
Post Office - Horizon scandal
- Thread starter Jensen
- Start date
It’s why people think we’re not all equal under the law.
Voyager EMH
Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
I felt that while watching the TV drama.
Trouble is, a failure of the judicial system on this scale could never have been imagined or anticipated.
There is simply no procedure for those in the judicial system responsible for the failure to be properly and effectively brought to book. Or so it seems to me.
One-off errors can be dealt with and maybe a bit more than that.
But not this.
So much wrongdoing over such a long number of years.
I expect this story and its repercussions and consequences to last for the rest of my lifetime.
With 21 solicitors and legal firms being investigated by the SRA I would hope there’ll be some official fall out from this.
The Inquiry engaged a number of expert witnesses to comment on the evidence submitted to the Inquiry. The following is a brief clip of Duncan Atkinson KC’s ‘take’ on where some of the evidence the PO Disclosed in cases actually came from.
In this instance, Jarnail Singh crafted a story, shared with senior managers, which was then refined by the Head of PR & Comms. Subsequently, it appears in a number of witnesses statements submitted by PO investigators. As Duncan Atkinson KC says, witness statements are drafted by people who have the skills to do so but are refined paraphrasing of the witness’s own words. That is clearly not the case in these fabrications.
In this instance, Jarnail Singh crafted a story, shared with senior managers, which was then refined by the Head of PR & Comms. Subsequently, it appears in a number of witnesses statements submitted by PO investigators. As Duncan Atkinson KC says, witness statements are drafted by people who have the skills to do so but are refined paraphrasing of the witness’s own words. That is clearly not the case in these fabrications.
Closing statements as per below.
The Inquiry will publish all written closing statements from Core Participants on Monday 16 December.
After closing statements, the Inquiry will continue gathering and analysing evidence, drafting the final report and will begin a process known as Maxwellisation. This is where, under Rule 13 of the Inquiry Rules 2006, the Inquiry needs to give anyone who it is proposed significantly or explicitly to criticise in the report a reasonable opportunity to respond.
The application deadline for public gallery attendance for Closing Statements has closed. The Inquiry is contacting people who applied before the deadline and have been allocated a place. The Inquiry will not be able to admit anyone who did not register in time and has not had a place confirmed.
You can still follow the hearings live (with a three-minute delay) on our YouTube page. Hearings will commence at 10:00am.
The Inquiry will publish all written closing statements from Core Participants on Monday 16 December.
After closing statements, the Inquiry will continue gathering and analysing evidence, drafting the final report and will begin a process known as Maxwellisation. This is where, under Rule 13 of the Inquiry Rules 2006, the Inquiry needs to give anyone who it is proposed significantly or explicitly to criticise in the report a reasonable opportunity to respond.
The application deadline for public gallery attendance for Closing Statements has closed. The Inquiry is contacting people who applied before the deadline and have been allocated a place. The Inquiry will not be able to admit anyone who did not register in time and has not had a place confirmed.
You can still follow the hearings live (with a three-minute delay) on our YouTube page. Hearings will commence at 10:00am.
Monday 16 December 2024
| Sub-postmasters represented by Hodge, Jones & Allen | 1hr |
| Sub-postmasters represented by Howe + Co | 1hr |
| Sub-postmasters represented by Hudgell Solicitors | 1hr |
| Core Participant Represented by Livingstone Brown | 30mins |
| National Federation of Subpostmasters | 1hr |
| UK Government Investments | 1hr |
Tuesday 17 December 2024
| Post Office Limited | 1hr |
| Paula Vennells | 1hr |
| Fujitsu Services Limited | 1hr |
| Gareth Jenkins | 1hr |
| Department for Business and Trade | 1hr |
Met Police Commander Stephen Clayman listed the possible crimes & charges being considered in the current investigation. They include corporate manslaughter and fraudulent demands for money along with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and perjury.
Those witnesses to the Inquiry that exercised their right not to answer certain questions for fear of self incrimination are of special interest to the police.
Sadly, he reiterated that there is little expectation of any prosecutions before 2027.
Those witnesses to the Inquiry that exercised their right not to answer certain questions for fear of self incrimination are of special interest to the police.
Sadly, he reiterated that there is little expectation of any prosecutions before 2027.
A bit more detail in Wednesday’s article in the Independent.
www.independent.co.uk
Dozens of Post Office and Fujitsu staff probed for crimes linked to Horizon scandal
An 100-strong national taskforce is probing staff at Fujitsu, the Post Office and legal professionals over crimes but no charging decisions will be made until after the public inquiry report
www.independent.co.uk
The Capture system.
Prior to the introduction of the (networked) Horizon system in 1999, the branches had standalone terminals, the system called Capture. As the contract with SubPostmasters back then was the same as that under the Horizon system, the recovery of shortfalls and subsequent prosecutions predates Horizon.
Short version; appeals against Capture convictions predate the Horizon scandal. None have been successful. As the Horizon scandal has gained prominence a report was commissioned, the Kroll Report, into the Capture convictions. That report has reviewed the practices of the PO in bringing those convictions, one of its conclusions being “it’s reasonable to assume that some of those convictions are unsafe.”
As a result, all of the Capture convictions have been referred to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), and to date five of those convictions have been referred to the Court of Appeal. It’s very early in the Capture scandal and it is expected that, ultimately, a significant number of convictions will be referred to the Court of Appeal.
The thorn in the side of the Post Office Minister, driving this forward, is the House of Lords, specifically Lord Burnett & Lord ‘Arbuthnot who as MP’s have fought for the SubPostmasters in the Horizon scandal.
Prior to the introduction of the (networked) Horizon system in 1999, the branches had standalone terminals, the system called Capture. As the contract with SubPostmasters back then was the same as that under the Horizon system, the recovery of shortfalls and subsequent prosecutions predates Horizon.
Short version; appeals against Capture convictions predate the Horizon scandal. None have been successful. As the Horizon scandal has gained prominence a report was commissioned, the Kroll Report, into the Capture convictions. That report has reviewed the practices of the PO in bringing those convictions, one of its conclusions being “it’s reasonable to assume that some of those convictions are unsafe.”
As a result, all of the Capture convictions have been referred to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), and to date five of those convictions have been referred to the Court of Appeal. It’s very early in the Capture scandal and it is expected that, ultimately, a significant number of convictions will be referred to the Court of Appeal.
The thorn in the side of the Post Office Minister, driving this forward, is the House of Lords, specifically Lord Burnett & Lord ‘Arbuthnot who as MP’s have fought for the SubPostmasters in the Horizon scandal.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Very interesting.
There was an interesting comment made by a SubPostmaster who was prosecuted way back in the early noughties. It’s along the lines of although the Horizon system is faulty it’s people that decided to prosecute based on the flawed evidence gathered by PO investigators. It’s people that ignored evidence to the contrary. It’s people that created the narrative that Horizon was fine. It’s people that withheld, did not disclose, evidence that would have supported the defence teams.
Going off at a tangent, and perhaps a bit simplistically, the SubPostmasters are still being ‘prosecuted’ via the compensation schemes. It’s the solicitors that are judging the claims put forward for compensation. Evidence put forward to support those claims is being discounted, judged by solicitors. How can a SubPostmaster who has paid £32,000 to cover a shortfall be offered £21,000 as full and fair compensation? How can a SubPostmistress have to provide 5 medicals to support her claim?
Voyager EMH
Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
This is the one that interests me.
Not so much the "demands" for money, but the actual obtaining of that money. Payment to correct shortfalls that did not exist in reality.
But who gets to face this charge? Which individuals exactly?
This did happen - and how can no one at all be responsible and guilty?
Yes, there have been plenty of lies and perverting the course of justice - and these are more likely to be pinned on individuals.
But subpostmasters were found individually guilty of taking money.
I want to see those responsible for taking money illegally to face same charge and the threat of prison for doing so.
To me, this will be another failure of the justice system, if this does not happen.
The “who” with regards to fraud; surely it’s who made the decision to enforce the demand. The “I was only following orders” shouldn’t cut it. In that respect, that also includes Vennells. A piece of advice from an independent QC back in 2013 to the PO board, based on a recognition that the evidence might be flawed, that prosecutions might be unsafe and should be paused was discussed by the board. It was decided to continue those prosecutions because if they’d paused them it would have brought into question the validity of previous prosecutions.
Following the hearings relatively closely, though not with an experienced eye, it’s been relatively easy to join the dots on so many examples of conspiracy and perjury. Jason Beers KC and the team have been superb in linking various email chains to individuals. Then there’s the issue of non-Disclosure, and the specific charges associated with that irrespective if it can be tied to conspiracy.
Bearing in mind there has been 4 suicides linked to the flawed prosecutions I sincerely hope corporate manslaughter charges are brought. The actions of Angela Van Den Bogerd with regards to one of those suicides must be giving her sleepless nights. Though desperately sad to hear, Jason Beers KC didn’t pull any punches when questioning her about the attempts to buy the relatives silence about how and why people had died.
Noel Thomas, SubPostmaster convicted in 2006, had his conviction quashed in April 2021. It took 3 years 7 months to settle his compensation claim - it was settled this week. He’s now 77 years old.
Fairly certain the PO director in charge of the redress schemes gave evidence at the Inquiry that claims were being settled in 96 weeks.
Fairly certain the PO director in charge of the redress schemes gave evidence at the Inquiry that claims were being settled in 96 weeks.
Today sees the start of the Closing Statements. I’ll précis today’s statements in a later post - note, there’s also Closing Statements tomorrow. See post 885.
However, there’s a separate issue that’s come to light today.
The Met Police are having Disclosure problems with the Post Office. The Post Office continues to withhold requested documents.
However, there’s a separate issue that’s come to light today.
The Met Police are having Disclosure problems with the Post Office. The Post Office continues to withhold requested documents.
Voyager EMH
Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Paula Vennells closing statement
a PDF 138 page document is available to download here
www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk
SUBS0000071 - Closing Statement on Behalf of Paula Vennells
a PDF 138 page document is available to download here
SUBS0000071 - Closing Statement on Behalf of Paula Vennells | Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
See
Paula Vennells closing statement
SUBS0000071 - Closing Statement on Behalf of Paula Vennells
a PDF 138 page document is available to download here
SUBS0000071 - Closing Statement on Behalf of Paula Vennells | Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
See
The statement is full of I wasn’t told/it was someone else’s remit. It also has a number of omissions.
She draws a distinction between her role as Network Director, in charge of the network of branches, and the IT director, who was aware of a number of bugs, saying the IT director never told her of the bugs. Maybe he didn’t tell her, but I’d be very surprised if she didn’t ask why 67 branches were showing shortfalls. Network revenue/profitability was her remit.
There is also a discrepancy in her testimony about when she was told of the Receipts & Mismatch bug. She gives one date in the witness statement, yet in a phone call, long before the date in Vennells statement, between Second Sight, the Company Sec and Angela Van Den Bogerd the Company Sec said that she had shared the information with Vennells. The Company Sec also reiterated this in her testimony in July. Channel 4 also broadcast a recording of that call along with a subsequent call between Second Sight and Vennells.
TBH, having heard so much of the Inquiry I have a jaundiced view of anything coming out of her mouth.
Below is Closing Statements from the Core Participants legal teams. They are repetitive apart from the examples used by the legal teams are, obviously, different SubPostmasters. First up is Ed Henry KC followed by Sam Stein KC. Ed Henry’s session takes around one hour, and is probably one of the most powerful things I’ve heard. And it’s brutal. If you only listen to the first 20 minutes…
Today saw the final day of Closing Statements - please see post 885 for whose statements were submitted. Needless to say the solicitors/KC’s submitting those statements on behalf of their clients were extremely good at articulating the points those witnesses wanted to put before the Inquiry. However, whilst what they said was both credible and detailed there appeared to be the odd omission or slant that skewed the overall truth. Also, some of the statements saw blame being apportioned to others.
A few brief points;
Apart from ‘reporting’ on the report when it’s issued that’s me done. No more 5-6 hour days, thank god! Many thanks to those of you who have had the stamina to follow my ramblings. It’s been both fascinating and shocking to be able to join the dots between different bits of evidence.
A few brief points;
- Vennells threw everyone else under the bus, often saying they/he/she didn’t tell me. Maybe they didn’t. However, there was no mention of the media piece and course of action she “took a steer” from her Director of Communications. And there was no mention of Second Sight’s conference call about the bugs involved in several cases nor the details of their interim report that they’d been asked to rewrite, and which ultimately led to them being sacked. And Susan Crichton, General Counsel to the PO was also sacked for allowing Second Sight’s too much latitude in producing its report. Vennells was front and centre to that sacking and would have known exactly why Alice Perkins and the board wanted Second Sight sacked…
- Fujitsu acknowledged their failings but absolutely threw the PO under the bus. In July this year the PO wrote to Lancashire Constabulary about a prosecution they wanted progressing, and sent Horizon data as evidence. Lancs Constabulary sent that data to Fujitsu for an expert opinion. Fujitsu replied that the evidence wasn’t sound, and also wrote to the PO roasting them for not changing their behaviour with regard to prosecuting SubPostmasters.
- Gareth Jenkins as an expert witness. Fujitsu didn’t educate him in the responsibilities of an expert witness. Nor did the PO, as the prosecutor, educate Jenkins as to his responsibilities. For every expert witness statement he produced he will have signed a declaration as to its authenticity and independence, yet his Closing Statement attested to the fact that up to 30 people had an input to his statements. Parts of those statements were actually written by the PO’s legal dept. Finally, as mentioned several times previously, he emailed Jarnail Singh on the Friday prior to Seema Misra’s trial on the Tuesday that there were 2 bugs in Misra’s terminal. Singh could have stopped that trial before it even started but, equally, Jenkins could have spoken up from the witness box. He was portrayed today as anything but an expert witness in the legal sense, and that he’s a victim too. I refer you to the signed declarations and his silence from the witness box.
- Dept of BEIS. Wow! The opening of its Closing Statement is as powerful as that of Ed Henry KC yesterday, and is absolutely worth 5 minutes of your time.
Apart from ‘reporting’ on the report when it’s issued that’s me done. No more 5-6 hour days, thank god! Many thanks to those of you who have had the stamina to follow my ramblings. It’s been both fascinating and shocking to be able to join the dots between different bits of evidence.
Today, the govt announced that SubPostmasters convicted using data from the Capture system will have their convictions quashed and are eligible for compensation.
D-S
Well-known member
Thank you for this. A really powerful speech from Ed Henry KC. Really lays out the case for I hope many, many prosecutions. I thoroughly recommend every one to listen to it, quite emotional too.
I saw that Jason de Beer won Barrister of the Year and gave all the credit to his team - I am so impressed by him. He no doubt earns a fortune but deserves every penny unlike so many in public life.
