Post Office inquiry

[niemeyjt]

I thought that only applied to those not involved in the original court case - whose awards disappeared in lawyers' fees.

[rabbit]

I think it is still being negotiated

[rabbit]

Some interesting testimony from the lady responsible for central PO accounts. She recounted the numbers of postmasters who were prosecuted prior to the implementation of Horizon. She appeared to be of the mindset that false accounting was common and championed the withdrawal of the suspense account from the branches. Her rationale was that the suspense account was used by fraudulent activities to park a mismatch. She said she was never made aware of any errors in the Horizon system.

[rabbit]

The latest revelations from the Post Office Inquiry.
The PO’s expert witness was an employee of Fujitsu - hardly impartial. Expert witnesses should owe their allegiance to the court not to the prosecutor.
The expert witnesses received no training or instruction as to what was expected of them. They were all techies.
The witness statement by the key expert stated that accounting errors might, amongst other causes, ensue after a system failure. The Post Office legal team erased this statement from the expert witness statement presented to the trial.

[niemeyjt]

Listening to it last week on R4, my view was why are they persisting with this enquiry? Why is the fraud squad not investigating and putting people on trial?

[rabbit]

niemeyjt, The irony is that this expert witness is being investigated by the Met for perjury on the grounds that he didn’t tell the court that there were bugs in the system, whereas he did but the PO expunged it! It should be the PO who should face the perjury trial. The inquiry now has names, evidence and witnesses of perjury

[rabbit]

I just watched the testimony of a senior post office lawyer. He was involved in a number of prosecutions which were later overturned. He was in utter denial and evasive. E. G an email he sent to a barrister giving his views on the likely guilt of a post mistress. Asked by the KC on the grounds for his belief
PO Oh I didn’t write this I can’t type
KC so did you dictate it
PO er yes I may have done
KC so what justification did you have for these views
PO oh they weren’t my views. We were a team and it was the view of the team.
KC but your email begins « In my view »
PO yes but it was the view of the team etc etc
The KC’s final question after 2 days of grilling and clearly exasperated was » so were you just following orders »
PO yes I was
If you like Schadenfreude it is worth a view day 92/93

[niemeyjt]

For those who feel strongly:

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... c49e633d36

And please circulate

[exile]

Doesn't like foreign post codes so I used my last UK one

[Pathca]

Listening to it last week on R4, my view was why are they persisting with this enquiry? Why is the fraud squad not investigating and putting people on trial?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67899189
The Met are investigating