Mr Bates vs The Post Office
Discussion
She was CEO, if she was incurious about what was being done in her name she did not deserve the job or the rewards.Pupp said:
Whilst PV clearly has been found seriously wanting, she’s equally obviously not the only person complicit in this matter. She should not, therefore, be disproportionately scapegoated as I suspect might be about to happen.
Her watch, yes; but myriad others informed and bolstered the culture that allowed, indeed encouraged, innocent people to be criminalised on the back of entirely compromised evidence that magistrates and crown court judges were in no place to doubt.
This is far wider than this wretched woman; even if she does not realise it (maybe she’s starting to). Exposing wrongdoing is one thing; hounding someone into self-immolation is quite another. I hope we’re not in the latter territory notwithstanding her testimony these last 3 days has been abhorrent.
She should be in jail, as should many of her colleagues.Her watch, yes; but myriad others informed and bolstered the culture that allowed, indeed encouraged, innocent people to be criminalised on the back of entirely compromised evidence that magistrates and crown court judges were in no place to doubt.
This is far wider than this wretched woman; even if she does not realise it (maybe she’s starting to). Exposing wrongdoing is one thing; hounding someone into self-immolation is quite another. I hope we’re not in the latter territory notwithstanding her testimony these last 3 days has been abhorrent.
I think the bigger thing is how could she not have been aware given the amount of blatantly obvious signs that were there? As one of them said to her today, you’re not stupid, and the wording of pretty much every message, email, text or whatever shows, it was all worded as to suggest she was fully aware of what was going on, and constantly tried to steer the main narrative to say nothing to see here, we’re all above board!
As mentioned above, the link to religion and telling the truth, plus her overall cold hearted facade remind me of part of a poem called The Genius of the crowd:
and the best at murder are those who preach against it
and the best at hate are those who preach love
and the best at war finally are those who preach peace
those who preach god, need god
those who preach peace do not have peace
those who preach peace do not have love
beware the preachers
As mentioned above, the link to religion and telling the truth, plus her overall cold hearted facade remind me of part of a poem called The Genius of the crowd:
and the best at murder are those who preach against it
and the best at hate are those who preach love
and the best at war finally are those who preach peace
those who preach god, need god
those who preach peace do not have peace
those who preach peace do not have love
beware the preachers
Pupp said:
Whilst PV clearly has been found seriously wanting, she’s equally obviously not the only person complicit in this matter. She should not, therefore, be disproportionately scapegoated as I suspect might be about to happen.
Her watch, yes; but myriad others informed and bolstered the culture that allowed, indeed encouraged, innocent people to be criminalised on the back of entirely compromised evidence that magistrates and crown court judges were in no place to doubt.
This is far wider than this wretched woman; even if she does not realise it (maybe she’s starting to). Exposing wrongdoing is one thing; hounding someone into self-immolation is quite another. I hope we’re not in the latter territory notwithstanding her testimony these last 3 days has been abhorrent.
No disagreement that the problem spreads wider than PV and indeed wider than just Post Office Limited.Her watch, yes; but myriad others informed and bolstered the culture that allowed, indeed encouraged, innocent people to be criminalised on the back of entirely compromised evidence that magistrates and crown court judges were in no place to doubt.
This is far wider than this wretched woman; even if she does not realise it (maybe she’s starting to). Exposing wrongdoing is one thing; hounding someone into self-immolation is quite another. I hope we’re not in the latter territory notwithstanding her testimony these last 3 days has been abhorrent.
Against that there needs to be a measured view that the buck stops somewhere.
FiF said:
No disagreement that the problem spreads wider than PV and indeed wider than just Post Office Limited.
Against that there needs to be a measured view that the buck stops somewhere.
As was quite clear from PV’s testimony, much of the legal apparatus was inherited from Royal Mail at the point of split. I am prepared to believe that somebody along the way said something like “don’t listen to the bleating of the SPMs - there are always bad apples with their hands in the till. We’ve been dealing with them for years. Just let legal handle it.”Against that there needs to be a measured view that the buck stops somewhere.
If we look at this issue in the round we’re saying somebody somewhere should have seen a pattern of complaints. But would they? Or would the cynics (and let’s be honest, anyone working in POL/RM investigations would essentially have a job description of being thick-skinned and impervious to SPM protestations) think to themselves “this is all the fault of the Internet - in the past they’d be bang to rights, but now they’ve read somebody saying it is Horizon’s fault and now they’re all trying it in with that line.”
Hindsight is a very exact science. What is abundantly clear is how poor our courts are at establishing guilt or innocence, and how very difficult it is to disprove the evidence of a computer system.
What’s also very clear is that, even when the evidence started to reach a tipping point, people in POL still stuck to their guns. My sense from many witnesses is that many really still don’t believe that Horizon was really at fault.
The big smoking gun is around Second Sight. Who shut them down? Why was it allowed to happen?
skwdenyer said:
FiF said:
No disagreement that the problem spreads wider than PV and indeed wider than just Post Office Limited.
Against that there needs to be a measured view that the buck stops somewhere.
As was quite clear from PV’s testimony, much of the legal apparatus was inherited from Royal Mail at the point of split. I am prepared to believe that somebody along the way said something like “don’t listen to the bleating of the SPMs - there are always bad apples with their hands in the till. We’ve been dealing with them for years. Just let legal handle it.”Against that there needs to be a measured view that the buck stops somewhere.
If we look at this issue in the round we’re saying somebody somewhere should have seen a pattern of complaints. But would they? Or would the cynics (and let’s be honest, anyone working in POL/RM investigations would essentially have a job description of being thick-skinned and impervious to SPM protestations) think to themselves “this is all the fault of the Internet - in the past they’d be bang to rights, but now they’ve read somebody saying it is Horizon’s fault and now they’re all trying it in with that line.”
Hindsight is a very exact science. What is abundantly clear is how poor our courts are at establishing guilt or innocence, and how very difficult it is to disprove the evidence of a computer system.
What’s also very clear is that, even when the evidence started to reach a tipping point, people in POL still stuck to their guns. My sense from many witnesses is that many really still don’t believe that Horizon was really at fault.
The big smoking gun is around Second Sight. Who shut them down? Why was it allowed to happen?
Who was it?
Article on the inability of the Inquiry to compel McLeod to appear
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/refusenik-solici...
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/refusenik-solici...
skwdenyer said:
As was quite clear from PV’s testimony, much of the legal apparatus was inherited from Royal Mail at the point of split. I am prepared to believe that somebody along the way said something like “don’t listen to the bleating of the SPMs - there are always bad apples with their hands in the till. We’ve been dealing with them for years. Just let legal handle it.”
If we look at this issue in the round we’re saying somebody somewhere should have seen a pattern of complaints. But would they? Or would the cynics (and let’s be honest, anyone working in POL/RM investigations would essentially have a job description of being thick-skinned and impervious to SPM protestations) think to themselves “this is all the fault of the Internet - in the past they’d be bang to rights, but now they’ve read somebody saying it is Horizon’s fault and now they’re all trying it in with that line.”
Hindsight is a very exact science. What is abundantly clear is how poor our courts are at establishing guilt or innocence, and how very difficult it is to disprove the evidence of a computer system.
What’s also very clear is that, even when the evidence started to reach a tipping point, people in POL still stuck to their guns. My sense from many witnesses is that many really still don’t believe that Horizon was really at fault.
The big smoking gun is around Second Sight. Who shut them down? Why was it allowed to happen?
I think that's a great summary of the likely culture and how the senior people were treating the issue. If we look at this issue in the round we’re saying somebody somewhere should have seen a pattern of complaints. But would they? Or would the cynics (and let’s be honest, anyone working in POL/RM investigations would essentially have a job description of being thick-skinned and impervious to SPM protestations) think to themselves “this is all the fault of the Internet - in the past they’d be bang to rights, but now they’ve read somebody saying it is Horizon’s fault and now they’re all trying it in with that line.”
Hindsight is a very exact science. What is abundantly clear is how poor our courts are at establishing guilt or innocence, and how very difficult it is to disprove the evidence of a computer system.
What’s also very clear is that, even when the evidence started to reach a tipping point, people in POL still stuck to their guns. My sense from many witnesses is that many really still don’t believe that Horizon was really at fault.
The big smoking gun is around Second Sight. Who shut them down? Why was it allowed to happen?
But some of the SPM had supposedly stolen £200k! It was outlandishly preposterous, based on a bag of s
te IT system - I’m sure we’ve all had to use completely wk IT systems / programmes at work so you’ll know what it’s like. But we don’t rely on them for prosecutions!
This guy jailed for 3 years for £206k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...
This couple £200k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-6...
te IT system - I’m sure we’ve all had to use completely wk IT systems / programmes at work so you’ll know what it’s like. But we don’t rely on them for prosecutions!This guy jailed for 3 years for £206k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...
This couple £200k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-6...
CoolHands said:
But some of the SPM had supposedly stolen £200k! It was outlandishly preposterous, based on a bag of ste IT system - I’m sure we’ve all had to use completely wk IT systems / programmes at work so you’ll know what it’s like. But we don’t rely on them for prosecutions!
This guy jailed for 3 years for £206k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...
This couple £200k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-6...
Exactly it's preposterous to put this down to an off cuff statement during the handover that all the SPMs have their fingers in the till (which is just completely made up BS by that poster) te IT system - I’m sure we’ve all had to use completely wk IT systems / programmes at work so you’ll know what it’s like. But we don’t rely on them for prosecutions!This guy jailed for 3 years for £206k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...
This couple £200k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-6...
It's clear to anyone that has looked into the scandal with an open mind that once they realised the issue the decision was made to protect the POLs reputation at all costs, hence the la la fantasy world they created (see the inquiry witness sessions for more details on that)
They decided to sacrifice the SPMs affected by Horizon at the bloody altar of POLs reputation, rather than admit to the issues they had.
CoolHands said:
But some of the SPM had supposedly stolen £200k! It was outlandishly preposterous, based on a bag of ste IT system - I’m sure we’ve all had to use completely wk IT systems / programmes at work so you’ll know what it’s like. But we don’t rely on them for prosecutions!
This guy jailed for 3 years for £206k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...
This couple £200k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-6...
This is what gets me. I would imagine a PO's sales (particularly back then) would have been pretty consistent year-on-year so any spike in period sales would immediately ring alarm bells / questions to any normal business leader. Couple that with no cash to show for it, it should have shouted IT error (miss-keyed entry or bug).te IT system - I’m sure we’ve all had to use completely wk IT systems / programmes at work so you’ll know what it’s like. But we don’t rely on them for prosecutions!This guy jailed for 3 years for £206k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...
This couple £200k: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-6...
If you're skimming from a business you deliberately don't put it through the till.
Go right back in time. If they were so sure of their case why did they rely on abuse of process in the Lee Castleton trial, by not turning up to the first trial, then throwing everything at the appeal incl probable perjury by one or more witnesses safe In the knowledge that he, Lee, had no more funds for legal defence support.
Or try to recuse the judge in the later trial A Bates and others vs POL.
Something rotten in POL and incompetence in various other places.
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
Or try to recuse the judge in the later trial A Bates and others vs POL.
Something rotten in POL and incompetence in various other places.
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
The fact that there was obviously no reconciliation of payments and inventory is utterly damning of everyone involved.
The alleged missing money was not missing. There was no hole in the accounts, Horizon was allowing an alleged balance to be taken as gospel rather than the actual balance.
After decades in banking I can’t begin to explain how unacceptable it is, or how unacceptable it is to allow unaudited and ad-hoc “balancing” payments to be made.
The system itself should have been found to be unfit for purpose whether these payments ever happened or not. You can’t have a “back door” into an accounting system to just fiddle the numbers.
The alleged missing money was not missing. There was no hole in the accounts, Horizon was allowing an alleged balance to be taken as gospel rather than the actual balance.
After decades in banking I can’t begin to explain how unacceptable it is, or how unacceptable it is to allow unaudited and ad-hoc “balancing” payments to be made.
The system itself should have been found to be unfit for purpose whether these payments ever happened or not. You can’t have a “back door” into an accounting system to just fiddle the numbers.
FiF said:
Go right back in time. If they were so sure of their case why did they rely on abuse of process in the Lee Castleton trial, by not turning up to the first trial, then throwing everything at the appeal incl probable perjury by one or more witnesses safe In the knowledge that he, Lee, had no more funds for legal defence support.
Or try to recuse the judge in the later trial A Bates and others vs POL.
Something rotten in POL and incompetence in various other places.
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
Apologies for bad form in quoting myself.Or try to recuse the judge in the later trial A Bates and others vs POL.
Something rotten in POL and incompetence in various other places.
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
Wanted to add, even the Sub Postmasters 'union' were more concerned about "protecting the brand" than getting to the bottom of blatantly improper accounting procedures and dodgy prosecutions based on lies.
FiF said:
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
I'm not sure she did know. I think it is potentially possible that like many CEOs she didn't want to know and also didn't have the basic technical knowledge to ask the right questions, and didn't hire a good advisor who could have helped her ask the right questions... while operating in a highly dysfunctional organisation where nobody seemed to have a clear view of their role and accountabilities/responsibilities.
I took over the equities division of an investment bank once. I sat down with everyone with any seniority and asked them about present or historic issues,
I read write-ups of technical systems, communications with regulators, used the booking systems myself, asked for any known weaknesses, and so on.
What I did not do was to assume that unless someone brought an issue to my attention that all was fine.
This should be normal, and expected.
I read write-ups of technical systems, communications with regulators, used the booking systems myself, asked for any known weaknesses, and so on.
What I did not do was to assume that unless someone brought an issue to my attention that all was fine.
This should be normal, and expected.
vaud said:
FiF said:
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
I'm not sure she did know. I think it is potentially possible that like many CEOs she didn't want to know and also didn't have the basic technical knowledge to ask the right questions, and didn't hire a good advisor who could have helped her ask the right questions... while operating in a highly dysfunctional organisation where nobody seemed to have a clear view of their role and accountabilities/responsibilities.
Even if there is a highly dysfunctional organisation with nobody having a clear view of role or responsibilities just whose job was it ultimately to get that identified and sorted. How many years in post?
FiF said:
At a granular at the coal face level maybe she didn't / doesn't have the technical knowledge, but considering some of the briefings to the board and things that would have had to be signed off by the board to then claim no knowledge / recollection as we've seen over the last 3 days just doesn't wash.
Even if there is a highly dysfunctional organisation with nobody having a clear view of role or responsibilities just whose job was it ultimately to get that identified and sorted. How many years in post?
Oh she is accountable I completely agree.Even if there is a highly dysfunctional organisation with nobody having a clear view of role or responsibilities just whose job was it ultimately to get that identified and sorted. How many years in post?
The issue with boards (and I have sat on one for 6 years as a non-exec) is that they tend to be more mature executives and the level of technical or even basic IT knowledge is shockingly low. They might receive the reports but they often have no idea of the implications.
vaud said:
FiF said:
Vennels and others knew I'm convinced of that.
I'm not sure she did know. I think it is potentially possible that like many CEOs she didn't want to know and also didn't have the basic technical knowledge to ask the right questions, and didn't hire a good advisor who could have helped her ask the right questions... while operating in a highly dysfunctional organisation where nobody seemed to have a clear view of their role and accountabilities/responsibilities.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff