Mr Bates vs The Post Office

[skwdenyer]

vaud said:

Short Grain said:

Scotland have just removed the Post Offices status as a 'specialist reporting agency to Scotland’s prosecutors' meaning they will no longer be able to investigate and report criminal allegations directly to the Crown, after the Horizon scandal showed it was “not fit” to hold that status, and it would instead have to report allegations of crimes to the police!
Wonder if the PO in England will have it's powers of prosecution removed?

They have already said they won't use those powers in the future.
IIRC it needs an act of parliament to formally remove them. IANAL.

Didn't I recall that they had in fact no longer got those powers, because they attached to the Royal Mail and not to POL - but merely that everyone had *assumed* they still existed, and so allowed them to get on with it?

[C n C]

skwdenyer said:

vaud said:

Short Grain said:

Scotland have just removed the Post Offices status as a 'specialist reporting agency to Scotland’s prosecutors' meaning they will no longer be able to investigate and report criminal allegations directly to the Crown, after the Horizon scandal showed it was “not fit” to hold that status, and it would instead have to report allegations of crimes to the police!
Wonder if the PO in England will have it's powers of prosecution removed?

They have already said they won't use those powers in the future.
IIRC it needs an act of parliament to formally remove them. IANAL.

Didn't I recall that they had in fact no longer got those powers, because they attached to the Royal Mail and not to POL - but merely that everyone had *assumed* they still existed, and so allowed them to get on with it?

This is how I understood it, and Nick Wallis mentioned the same at his talk. The power of prosecution was attached to the Royal Mail, so POL never actually had the power, but just assumed they did.

[LimmerickLad]

C n C said:

skwdenyer said:

vaud said:

Short Grain said:

Scotland have just removed the Post Offices status as a 'specialist reporting agency to Scotland’s prosecutors' meaning they will no longer be able to investigate and report criminal allegations directly to the Crown, after the Horizon scandal showed it was “not fit” to hold that status, and it would instead have to report allegations of crimes to the police!
Wonder if the PO in England will have it's powers of prosecution removed?

They have already said they won't use those powers in the future.
IIRC it needs an act of parliament to formally remove them. IANAL.

Didn't I recall that they had in fact no longer got those powers, because they attached to the Royal Mail and not to POL - but merely that everyone had *assumed* they still existed, and so allowed them to get on with it?

This is how I understood it, and Nick Wallis mentioned the same at his talk. The power of prosecution was attached to the Royal Mail, so POL never actually had the power, but just assumed they did.

Should not someone in the law / court system have known this also?

[Short Grain]

LimmerickLad said:

C n C said:

skwdenyer said:

vaud said:

Short Grain said:

Scotland have just removed the Post Offices status as a 'specialist reporting agency to Scotland’s prosecutors' meaning they will no longer be able to investigate and report criminal allegations directly to the Crown, after the Horizon scandal showed it was “not fit” to hold that status, and it would instead have to report allegations of crimes to the police!
Wonder if the PO in England will have it's powers of prosecution removed?

They have already said they won't use those powers in the future.
IIRC it needs an act of parliament to formally remove them. IANAL.

Didn't I recall that they had in fact no longer got those powers, because they attached to the Royal Mail and not to POL - but merely that everyone had *assumed* they still existed, and so allowed them to get on with it?

This is how I understood it, and Nick Wallis mentioned the same at his talk. The power of prosecution was attached to the Royal Mail, so POL never actually had the power, but just assumed they did.

Should not someone in the law / court system have known this also?

Put the question into Google and just read parts of an article online in something called The Week, published 11/01/24

https://theweek.com/law/how-the-post-office-got-it...


'The Post Office has no special authority to bring private prosecutions but instead pursued cases against its staff using its own investigation branch under the "general right in English law for any individuals and organisations to pursue private prosecutions" so slightly different to using their own power of prosecution'

Damn, I started to look forward to an even more monumental 'new ahole ripping exercise' by Sir Wyn in his report / summing up than the one I'm currently looking forward to!

[LimmerickLad]

Short Grain said:

Put the question into Google and just read parts of an article online in something called The Week, published 11/01/24

https://theweek.com/law/how-the-post-office-got-it...


'The Post Office has no special authority to bring private prosecutions but instead pursued cases against its staff using its own investigation branch under the "general right in English law for any individuals and organisations to pursue private prosecutions" so slightly different to using their own power of prosecution'

Damn, I started to look forward to an even more monumental 'new ahole ripping exercise' by Sir Wyn in his report / summing up than the one I'm currently looking forward to!

But Royal Mail did have special authority to prosecute I believe...so it is my understanding it was assumed POL automatically continued with that authority even after they had been split of as a seperate organisation.

"access to the Police National Computer system for intelligence and prosecution purposes. It had financial investigators appointed by the National Crime Agency for the purposes of undertaking financial investigations for restraint and confiscation proceedings, and Royal Mail Group was included within the list of ‘Relevant Public Authorities’ under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 designated to grant authorisations for the carrying out of directed surveillance to investigate crime. "

https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/the-pos...

Edited by LimmerickLad on Thursday 16th May 23:13

[Mojooo]

Being pedantic, they had access to stuff to INVESTIGATE
Which is different from PROSECUTE (i.e going to court)

[LimmerickLad]

Mojooo said:

Being pedantic, they had access to stuff to INVESTIGATE
Which is different from PROSECUTE (i.e going to court)

Very true but then again they had " access to the PNC system for intelligence and "prosecution" purposes....... financial investigators appointed by the National Crime Agency for the purposes of undertaking financial investigations for restraint and "confiscation proceedings".......... being within the list of ‘Relevant Public Authorities’ under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 designated to grant authorisations for the carrying out of directed surveillance to investigate crime...........Therefore, although possibly splitting hairs, I would say they did have special prosecution authority that should NOT have been available to them as Post Office Ltd and if correct, then someone , somewhere in the Legal / Judiciary system should have realised this.

[LimmerickLad]

Cameron seems to be genuine so far.

[Short Grain]

Just starting to watch this, with his apology being the first thing he does of course!

When I read the schedule, for some reason my brain 'saw' Alistair Cambell, the often mouthy politician and thought "Ooh, this'll be fun!" I was quite disappointed when this guy appeared!

[Wills2]

At last we appear to have a senior exec willing to break ranks and tell some truths.

[Short Grain]

Wills2 said:

At last we appear to have a senior exec willing to break ranks and tell some truths.

Refreshing isn't it. Still playing catchup but he does seem honest and actually open to answering questions as opposed to using a 'selective memory'

[vaud]

"there may be a bug or anomaly"

[Wills2]

Short Grain said:

Wills2 said:

At last we appear to have a senior exec willing to break ranks and tell some truths.

Refreshing isn't it. Still playing catchup but he does seem honest and actually open to answering questions as opposed to using a 'selective memory'

It is, I think he said he has been stunned by the testimony he'd watched so far, he is blowing the lid off it all describing what posters on this tread have been calling out, it's good to hear it being admitted to at last.

[Short Grain]

Still playing catchup to an extent but, 'Paula meet bus, bus meet Paula!'

[Short Grain]

vaud said:

"there may be a bug or anomaly"

Just reached that bit! Nice one Mr Beer!

[Wills2]

I love the fact that Vennell's has desperately thrown a note he wrote to her at the inquiry last night, panic mode or what.

[balise]

Wow! Mr. Campbell is a very different witness - I wonder how many people he'll implicate. Audjard not coming out of it well at the moment.

[Stussy]

Yes, 11:30pm, that’s when you’d normally submit documents isn’t it!
No doubt a lame attempt from PV to sideswipe him with a conveniently found arse licking letter.
Shame it’s fallen flat on its face by him saying his opinion of her changed later

[LimmerickLad]

Stussy said:

Yes, 11:30pm, that’s when you’d normally submit documents isn’t it!
No doubt a lame attempt from PV to sideswipe him with a conveniently found arse licking letter.
Shame it’s fallen flat on its face by him saying his opinion of her changed later

Should she not have disclosed this evidence earlier?

[TwinKam]

Hoping that her sleep of late has been as disturbed as it must have been for the wrongly accused... and that her every waking moment is wracked with worry, as theirs must have been, about the questioning to come.