PO Scandal

[stockton]

Having listened to the program it really does not seem to be getting through to lawyers that computer evidence alone cannot be relied on, and that there is no easy fix for that problem. Sometimes the court case may occur simply because the computer was wrong or misleading.

[cinelli]

There was a moment of supreme irony at the inquiry last Friday. Rod Ismay, trying to explain why he didn’t report his knowledge of remote access of Horizon to senior members of the Post Office, complained that he had been provided with too many documents. Counsel Jason Beer replied:

“Yes, apologies for the number of documents. In the Inquiry, we like to give people full disclosure.”

Cinelli

[Alaric]

Having listened to the program it really does not seem to be getting through to lawyers that computer evidence alone cannot be relied on, and that there is no easy fix for that problem. Sometimes the court case may occur simply because the computer was wrong or misleading.

It needs to get through to MPs as well as the law was changed in around 1999 to presume that the computer software was always working correctly. Before that, a defence could claim that the software or hardware were faulty and the prosecution had to denonstrate reliability. Admittedly this change shortened speed camera and drink driving trials.

[stewamax]

Aficionados of these proceedings will remember that Horizon's 'bugs, errors and defects' were renamed 'anomalies' after Ms Vennells asked her husband for wording less emotive.
Leading Counsel Jason Beer KC drove home the inanity of this when the Inquiry's document display system crashed temporarily when switching from one type of document to another. He suggested a 5-minute break saying that 'we seem to have a bug in the system, or perhaps an anomaly'.

[stewamax]

This three-day feast will celebrate the martyrdom of Saint Paula of Po

[stewamax]

The best bit today was not Vennells' histrionics, but at the very end (2:07:06 onwards) the last question by Chairman Wyn William: "Why" - that totally floored her.

[GoSeigen]

The best bit today was not Vennells' histrionics, but at the very end (2:07:06 onwards) the last question by Chairman Wyn William: "Why" - that totally floored her.

Please link to the content you are referring to.

Thanks

GS

[Mike4]

The best bit today was not Vennells' histrionics, but at the very end (2:07:06 onwards) the last question by Chairman Wyn William: "Why" - that totally floored her.

Not having heard the programme, could you perhaps expand on why the question "Why?" "totally floored her" please?

Thanks!

[staffordian]

I can't help thinking the Lord must be looking down favourably on Paula Vennels.

I can't help thinking that the news reports covering her appearance today will no longer be as prominent or as in depth as most people thought it would be...

[Mike4]

I can't help thinking the Lord must be looking down favourably on Paula Vennels.

I can't help thinking that the news reports covering her appearance today will no longer be as prominent or as in depth as most people thought it would be...

It was her breaking into tears and needing a break to "compose herself" before continuing wot dunnit.

Made her come across as almost human, I thought. Mebbe our Dear Lord was taken in by it too.

[stewamax]

Sorry for not providing a link - I have tended to assume that Inquiry 'regulars' know where to look.
Today's episode is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGAi6lqaORE

To summarise my point: immediately before Ms Vennells appeared before the Parliamentary Select Committee, she had been given a brief of how to respond to questions about the PO or Fujitsu having remote and undetectable access to a sub-postmaster's account. The brief was in three parts - roughly:
- a straightforward answer "remote changing or deleting transactions was impossible"
- if pushed, then some more only slightly embarassing explanation
- if still pushed, then a guarded admission that Fujitsu could ADD a transaction to balance the books (if a Horizon error had screwed them up)

Vennells had at various times denied that there was any attempt at a cover-up.
So Chairman Wyn Williams, who was clearly interested in why there was a need for a brief structured with such temporising and prevarication simply asked - given that there was no attempt at cover-up - Why?
Vennells just stopped dead with her mouth half open and with no response whatever.

Urbane and extremely well-prepared Leading Counsel Jason Beer KC never raised his voice but led her gently into lethal minefields of questions for which she had no cogent answer.

[moorfield]

Sam Stein KC did quite a hatchet job on her this morning, it was car crash stuff. Unimpressed by the "I cannot remember" line of response all week, I wonder if that was more to do with deflecting any civil or criminal claims in future. Anyway, her reputation has been binned, I doubt we'll see or hear from her in public again.

[stewamax]

KCs Sam Stein and Edward Henry both came out with guns blazing. But their lines of questioning were mostly obvious, and Ms Vennells was generally prepared for them.
But the silks that have done the real reputational damage were - inevitably - the quietly lethal Jason Beer (who was not 'on' today* as it was a core-participants day) and the subtle Dr Tim Moloney who using just three emails and comparing their times managed to shred Ms Vennells soi-disant reputation as a caring boss.

* apart from when he needed to remind the gallery (audience) to keep quiet or be ejected

[didds]

Sam Stein KC did quite a hatchet job on her this morning, it was car crash stuff. Unimpressed by the "I cannot remember" line of response all week, I wonder if that was more to do with deflecting any civil or criminal claims in future. Anyway, her reputation has been binned, I doubt we'll see or hear from her in public again.

from her perspective "so what" - she keeps all the dosh, all the bonuses. All she has lost is a bauble.

caveat: https://news.sky.com/story/post-office- ... g-13144248

[stewamax]

From her [Ms Vennels'] perspective "so what" - she keeps all the dosh, all the bonuses. All she has lost is a bauble.

But we have the well-deserved announcement today that 'scourge of the PO' Alan Bates, who turned down an OBE last year because Paula Vennells still had her CBE at that point - has been knighted in the King's Birthday Honours.
Excellent.

[77ss]

Sam Stein KC did quite a hatchet job on her this morning, it was car crash stuff. Unimpressed by the "I cannot remember" line of response all week, I wonder if that was more to do with deflecting any civil or criminal claims in future. Anyway, her reputation has been binned, I doubt we'll see or hear from her in public again.

from her perspective "so what" - she keeps all the dosh, all the bonuses. All she has lost is a bauble.

caveat: https://news.sky.com/story/post-office- ... g-13144248

Has private prosecution been ruled out? I hope not.

It would seem fitting to me - after a­ll, the PO used this method on the subpostmasters!

[stockton]

There is one thing that puzzles me about the whole business.

Horizon was apparently deficient in that it could not produce a simple account of a days business at a single post office,ie opening balances, list of transactions, closing balances.
It does not require any IT knowledge to understand that this is a serious shortcoming but it hardly seems to be mentioned anywhere , when I would have expected it to be a subject of significant attention at the various trials, in the Second Sight inquiry and at the present Inquiry.
Have I misunderstood something ?

[UncleEbenezer]

There is one thing that puzzles me about the whole business.

Horizon was apparently deficient in that it could not produce a simple account of a days business at a single post office,ie opening balances, list of transactions, closing balances.
It does not require any IT knowledge to understand that this is a serious shortcoming but it hardly seems to be mentioned anywhere , when I would have expected it to be a subject of significant attention at the various trials, in the Second Sight inquiry and at the present Inquiry.
Have I misunderstood something ?

Alan Bates, who had previously worked in IT, observed and pointed out some of that. Indeed, I think his pursuance of that and having the expertise to ask the right questions was one reason the Post Office didn't try to prosecute him, but just got rid of him instead.

Second Sight got actively hushed up. The latest Private Eye makes the point that the timing of that was the run-up to Royal Mail privatisation. Though RM and the PO were already separate institutions, a post office scandal back then might've queered the pitch!

They also run a picture of a cosy 2014 Party fundraising dinner sponsored by UK Fujitsu boss 2004-2019 and half-million party donor Simon Blagden. VIPs like Liz Truss and post office minister Kevin Hollinrake, along with Ms Venells and himself. It's not what you know, it's who you sponsor.

[stewamax]

In today's hearings, Graham Ward - "Former Post Office Security Team Casework Manager and Financial Investigator" - indubitably wished he was elsewhere.
From the outset, Lead Counsel Jason Beer steadily homed in on Ward's assertion that he had never ever asked for a crucial statement about Horizon unreliability in Gareth Jenkins' draft witness statement to be deleted - statement that could have cleared a sub-postmaster being prosecuted.

Then the bombshell: Beer displayed the original Word document as a live document that had 'change tracking'. Ward must have then known that he was doomed since his name was displayed as the person who made the deletion. Beer then remorselessly reeled him in slowly, Ward squirming like a fish on a line.

Overt perjury to the Inquiry
+
Subornation of perjury (attempting to get Jenkins's expert witness statement changed)
=
Dartmoor with hard labour

Final score: Beer 10 - Microsoft Word 1 - Ward 0 (own goal)

[UncleEbenezer]

Dartmoor

Typical metropolitan elite. Foist off your villains on someone else!

Why should we want him?

(security team ... financial investigator ... how could he have been unaware of document change control logging)?

But ... erm ... if he made a deletion himself, I guess that's perfectly compatible with him never having asked for it to be deleted!