The sub-postmasters scandal

[cjcregg]

11 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

It has similarities to the Covid inquiry. They would rather appear to be idiots by claiming not to remember than to admit the truth.

I believe Vennells and other execs are appearing at the Horizon inquiry this year.

It's a very well run inquiry and Wyn Wlliams might look a bit passed it but he's as sharp as a knife. He had some health issues half way through it so now appears at the inquiry via video from home but I've got a lot of faith in him. Jason Beer, lead counsel, is utterly forensic and doesn't pull a punch. It started out  just as a judge led independent inquiry but then gained the status of a full public inquiry with all the powers that go with it.

Apparently the inquiry has recently obtained 80 covert recordings of discussions between PO execs including Venells. When she is eventually called to give evidence, clear your diary, order in popcorn.

Edited January 8 by cjcregg

[honeybee13]

I think the 80 recordings were mentioned in the Tines, CJ. I think I posted it a couple of days ago.

[honeybee13]

Here's the inquiry schedule for this year. There are quite a few names we're familiar with now but I couldn't spot Vennells or Van den Bogerd.

Phase 4 Hearing Schedule

WWW.POSTOFFICEHORIZONINQUIRY.ORG.UK

---

Hearings will normally take place on Tuesdays to Fridays, from 10:00 to 16:30. The below schedule is indicative and may be subject to change...

 

[honeybee13]

The 38Degrees petition passed 1 million signatures overnight.

[cjcregg]

The inquiry has only published the witness schedule for some of the remainder of the current phase (4) which deals with the actual prosecutions. I expect Venells etc will appear in phase 6 which deals with oversight of and response to the scandal, so sometime in late spring/summer.

[tobyjugg2]

I've actually done a number of those HB - most extensive around 35 years ago i spent a year examining and correcting the expenditure of a number of capital projects totaling in the £millions.

Its not even technically complex - just requires being methodical - and actually doing the work. Nothing criminal evidenced in the end - just 'errors and necessity (booking expensive items on wrong projects or 'needing' too as correct project was awaiting authorisation  and intent to move costs later which got forgotten) 

You start from a point of 'theres something wrong here' or 'is there something criminal going on here' when one project is audited, and its quite enlightening how pulling on just a few threads starts quite an avalanche of issues, which you run through correcting each in turn.

A criminal conviction MUST/SHOULD have required detail of where money/items to that sum was missing from - not just a figure hanging in the air.

[honeybee13]

I assume cases were based on figures from Horizon, TJ. They just happened to be fatally flawed.

[tobyjugg2]

Just imagine - I have a line of output here that says you've stolen 30,000 pounds this month (as last months before the upgrade) was fine

see - 120,000 income - 120,000 costs and transferred = £30,000 missing

 

or - what were you doing ordering £30,000 of bricks and concrete delivered to our new site 300 miles away at our expense

- answer - I have no idea what you are talking about - I didnt

- response - book em asset strip em lock em up and throw away the key

Edited January 8 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

I've spent an hour running through some of the info, and how these prosecutions were ever actioned is utterly beyond me. Can only be (it seems to me) that the PO prosecution system is simply NOT fit for purpose.

Simple fact that apparently fujitsu staff were able to access the individual terminals even raises questions about any (if there are any) possibly genuine dodgy money transfers/missing money without definitive detailed evidence justifying the charges - even more so than that the cases should have had that anyway to prosecute or even allege wrongdoing.

Seems unquestionable that all convictions based solely on the Horizon system, should be immediately quashed and compensation paid. If the PO want to bring fresh/resubmit charges - let them do it through the normal legal system.

 

That the PO are seemingly spending vast sums on lawyers obstructing the payment of compensation seems little more than piling insult and injury on top of insult and injury

Edited January 8 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

6 hours ago, cjcregg said:

It's a very well run inquiry and Wyn Wlliams might look a bit passed it but he's as sharp as a knife. He had some health issues half way through it so now appears at the inquiry via video from home but I've got a lot of faith in him. Jason Beer, lead counsel, is utterly forensic and doesn't pull a punch. It started out  just as a judge led independent inquiry but then gained the status of a full public inquiry with all the powers that go with it.

Apparently the inquiry has recently obtained 80 covert recordings of discussions between PO execs including Venells. When she is eventually called to give evidence, clear your diary, order in popcorn.

As were many of the covid enquiry - didnt stop all the 'dont remember' 'lost those whatsapps' dont recognise that claim and I lost the phone for that period let alone the 'I did brilliant it was them others' claims

Innocent until proven guilty? Has to be the default BUT Many of these are clearly guilty - just they effectively claim  rank incompetence as an alternative to rampant criminality.

Sorry yerhonor, I dont remember pushing him and anyway how could I be expected to know pushing him would result in him going off the cliff he was next too, let alone that a 200 foot fall would harm him, nor should I just because I was paid a fortune to run the site.

Edited January 8 by tobyjugg2

[honeybee13]

From Private Eye.

[honeybee13]

Shelagh Fogarty on responsibilty and how Ed Davey was not the only minister involved.

 

[honeybee13]

Alan Bates was interviewed by Krishnan Guru-Murthy, I think it was last night.

 

[honeybee13]

The Times today has 'Who was responsible for the PO scandal'. At least Adam Crozier [now BT] gets a mention, with some other names that I haven't noticed before.

https://archive.is/S1woq

[honeybee13]

The Vennells CBE petition on 38Degrees passed 1.2m signatures this morning.

[cjcregg]

So Paula Vennells has put her CBE in the post.

[honeybee13]

I've just seen.

That's a shame, like Bankfodder I wanted her to be publicly stripped of it.

[honeybee13]

LibDems' Daisy Cooper, in the House.

Paula Vennells is right to hand back her CBE, but the Conservatives still need to explain why they gave it to her in the first place in 2019, along with a plum job at the top of the Cabinet Office.

Oliver Dowden needs to explain why he failed to sack Paula Vennells as a Cabinet Office director when the high court judgment was handed down in 2019, exposing her full involvement in the Horizon scandal.

[tobyjugg2]

and she's quite specifically just apologised ONLY for the small number of postmasters who have so far had their convictions overturned hasn't she? - and thats MORE than bad enough (both the weasely apology and the number afflicted) for severe criminal penalties IMO

When her (and Cress' among others) pensions and bonuses being clawed back?

- or do we have to wait for a new government to even see the PROVEN 'unsafe' at best prosecutions overturned

 

and - seen the figures on compensation awarded so far (even if they haven't got it)

something like £58 million awarded after years of legal wrangling and obstructing - of which around 80% is going to lawyers etc.

Surely all costs should be born by the corporate perpetrator, with the victims receiving the full compensation?

 

 

Edited January 9 by tobyjugg2

[honeybee13]

I hadn't picked up that she wasn't apologising to everyone, TJ.

Fujitsu seem to be getting more attention now, I really hope the spotlight turns on them. Hopefully they can't hide behind the inquiry forever.

[honeybee13]

This is from the Secret Barrister on Twitter/X.

 

[tobyjugg2]

Not sure of the contract details with Fujitsu (of course) let alone any culpability, or the actual incolvement of politicians in the day to day running

user testing and signoff by end user reps/senior management is largely standard .. if it wasn't - thats also their fault.

 

- I think the focus should really be on the PO senior staff.  I agree with  @cjcregg that this seems primarily corporate 'malfeasance which its already long overdue for severe penalties against those in the PO that knew (or should have known) and proper compensation from the company/companies insurers itself

- supplier and political blame should come out the other end of that - not a distraction before or during it. Its the people with oversight of the proper installation, testing and monitoring of the processes who should be in everyones sights.

 

lets not forget that a decade ago:

"This was a period when an external review of the Horizon IT system was carried out by the forensic accountants Second Sight, brought in by the Post Office as pressure mounted from a small group of MPs and the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA) set up by victims to campaign for their innocence.

Second Sight’s interim report found evidence of flaws and bugs in Horizon. On two occasions, “defects” in the system had resulted in a shortfall of about £9,000 at 76 branches."

DESPITE this:

"However, the Post Office maintained that there was “absolutely no evidence of any systemic issues with the computer system”. (Joe) Swinson backed up this position in a statement to the House of Commons."

-- so they brought in Ernst&Young - who gave it a clean bill didn't they ?

- that should be looked at.

[honeybee13]

It's quite possible that clever lawyers for Fujitsu stitched up HMG procurement on the contract, it seems to happen regularly.

A cynic could say it stipulates that anything that goes wrong is down to the SPMs.

[tobyjugg2]

Undoubtedly

but user acceptance testing is A if not THE crucial part of sign-off of projects

- supposed to ensure that the system does what is required and to the customers specifications.

 

[honeybee13]

So you think POL may not have tested Horizon properly?