|
Post by lordb on Apr 26, 2024 11:16:06 GMT
Sorry for repeat post , I feel like her ,I don’t know what I’m doing Unlike her you have appear to have realised this within minutes rather than when brought before the beak many years later Not that she is lying in any way
|
|
|
Post by pablos on Apr 26, 2024 11:56:23 GMT
Good point well made, wouldn’t like this bloke grilling me, keeps setting her up for a fall, she’s to stupid to see it coming.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 26, 2024 12:10:42 GMT
She is a lying bitch, more slippery than a tank full of eels.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Apr 26, 2024 12:15:04 GMT
She is lying bitch, more slippery than a tank full of eels. Just caught the clip on 1 o'clock news, not one ounce of remorse, "quick let's get a media lawyer" after suicide case. Disgraceful.
|
|
|
Post by pablos on Apr 26, 2024 12:15:14 GMT
The other chap has just nailed her
|
|
|
Post by pablos on Apr 26, 2024 12:17:12 GMT
Hope she loses pension,pays back bonuses and pays all legal costs, won’t be walking around with painted nails and designer glasses in HMP Foston
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Apr 26, 2024 12:42:41 GMT
Except the sub-postie lawyers have nothing to do with bringing a Criminal charge, Civil yes. My concern is that clearly some people in their evidence have obviously dobbed themselves in. I don't know enough about the law of how the Inquiry is structured but can evidence from an Inquiry be used or do they get a free pass because they cooperated with the Inquiry. This farce is more like a Truth and Reconciliation Session, I'm sure it's cathartic for the Subpostmasters to see their tormentors squirm and offer Mea Culpa's but really we need to get to a real Court and see some Gaol Time. I think it is still possible for the JFSA to launch private prosecutions against individuals such as VDB and Vennells that could result in imprisonment. I see no reason why evidence from the Inquiry cannot be used in a private prosecution case. The Inquiry acts as a precursor for that action. I don't think admitting that you are responsible for the financial ruin, conviction and in some cases, even deaths of innocent sub-posties should be an acceptable form of discharge. There is no such thing as a criminal private prosecution case not could JFSA bring one. It's semantic as I'm sure the Police are observing 👀 To satisfy my curiosity I looked it up The Chair can compel witnesses but a witness can refuse on the grounds it might incriminate them. A bit like damned if you do and Damned if you don't. VdB has almost certainly admitted Perjury www.wilmerhale.com/en/insights/blogs/wilmerhale-w-i-r-e-uk/20220525-public-inquiries-a-quick-guide-for-potential-witnesses
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Apr 26, 2024 12:55:34 GMT
The other chap has just nailed her He wasn’t messing about today.
|
|
|
Post by pablos on Apr 26, 2024 12:59:35 GMT
She has committed perjury, at least twice, she’s toast
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 26, 2024 13:59:30 GMT
Sam Stein now ... I bet she's shitting herself!
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Apr 26, 2024 14:17:53 GMT
Her recollection is that she can’t remember everything but she can remember that she did her best…
… but she can’t remember who else was definitely involved but everything was to the best of her ability…
… but she didn’t knowingly do anything right or wrong but she definitely did it to her best ability even though she’s not sure what her job was or what she was responsible for…
I’m about an hour behind but the chair has had to just intervene again with her. You know it’s going bad when Sir Wyns dulcet (yet stern) welsh tones are chirping in.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Apr 26, 2024 14:18:32 GMT
"that Mrs Angela van den Bogerd, is legal speak from a High Court Judge saying that if you told him it was raining, he would go outside to check."
Unbelievably good.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 26, 2024 14:37:18 GMT
Her recollection is that she can’t remember everything but she can remember that she did her best… … but she can’t remember who else was definitely involved but everything was to the best of her ability… … but she didn’t knowingly do anything right or wrong but she definitely did it to her best ability even though she’s not sure what her job was or what she was responsible for… I’m about an hour behind but the chair has had to just intervene again with her. You know it’s going bad when Sir Wyns dulcet (yet stern) welsh tones are chirping in. As an aside , it does make you wonder about competencies in medium sized and large businesses. Many of those that get promoted do so because ... they are confident ( particularly in interviews)( probably way beyond their ability)....they can talk well .....and they have learnt the right thing to say, the latest policy/ jargon/ initiative. It has made me recall an instance in my first year of teaching when a case of child ( physical) abuse was disclosed to me by a parent. I immediately reported it to the Deputy Head who said to me " Do you want me to get involved?"..!!!!..she was DH responsible for the pastoral side of things.It was her job. I did some team teaching with her, absolutely useless in the classroom, a hindrance to me, better off without her. For balance two other female Deputy Heads I've worked with were absolutely outstanding.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Apr 26, 2024 14:52:16 GMT
Her recollection is that she can’t remember everything but she can remember that she did her best… … but she can’t remember who else was definitely involved but everything was to the best of her ability… … but she didn’t knowingly do anything right or wrong but she definitely did it to her best ability even though she’s not sure what her job was or what she was responsible for… I’m about an hour behind but the chair has had to just intervene again with her. You know it’s going bad when Sir Wyns dulcet (yet stern) welsh tones are chirping in. As an aside , it does make you wonder about competencies in medium sized and large businesses. Many of those that get promoted do so because ... they are confident ( particularly in interviews)( probably way beyond their ability)....they can talk well .....and they have learnt the right thing to say, the latest policy/ jargon/ initiative. It has made me recall an instance in my first year of teaching when a case of child ( physical) abuse was disclosed to me by a parent. I immediately reported it to the Deputy Head who said to me " Do you want me to get involved?"..!!!!..she was DH responsible for the pastoral side of things.It was her job. I did some team teaching with her, absolutely useless in the classroom, a hindrance to me, better off without her. For balance two other female Deputy Heads I've worked with were absolutely outstanding. Don't get me started on the promotion/recruitment process into Senior Management in [higher] education. Or, let's drink pints and lock in the andecotes.
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Apr 26, 2024 14:59:00 GMT
I’m not sure what anyone else thinks after watching her these past couple of days, but for me I was disappointed she didn’t get the hard time I expected and has probably ridden this out well.
She got a bit of a ticking off basically, and that’s it. There is still a lack of tangible proof to tie her into this. Emails that suggests she should have known is not good enough. She’s hiding behind not having seen the Dec 2010 email, about the Second Sight report claiming there were no systemic failures etc, not being responsible for certain tasks,
The one thing I can tell so far that could nail her is a read receipt for that Dec 2010 email that could prove she saw it. If that could be achieved by means the Oatcake poster a few posts above advised, that would be critical. Otherwise, she can’t be prosecuted for gross incompetence.
|
|
|
Post by pablos on Apr 26, 2024 15:11:38 GMT
As someone said earlier, if you look the part sound the part have a degree you can climb the ladder, I was in that world and despised 80% of the people I worked with, the incompetence was astounding but they licked ass, glad I’m out of it ..
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Apr 26, 2024 15:57:16 GMT
It seems to get anywhere in the post office you needed to start on the counters and then get promoted waaaaay above your ability.
Hardly surprising the same people promoted waaaay above their ability would latch on to the gravy train.
Get them in a cell.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 26, 2024 16:16:45 GMT
Looking forward to the police, backed to the hilt by The Home Office pursuing those responsible with the full weight of the law and a truly tenacious attitude this was my sarcastic post from a few month ago was I being a bit harsh? are we actually going to see some of these criminals brought to justice?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 26, 2024 16:23:01 GMT
There's probably more to come from other parts of the PO soon, apparently some sub postmasters were jailed for shortfalls from the ATM's even after the PO were warned their were issues with the systems and communications between the PO and the banks, one sub postmaster was jailed after they said he'd lost £57k.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Apr 26, 2024 16:23:44 GMT
Looking forward to the police, backed to the hilt by The Home Office pursuing those responsible with the full weight of the law and a truly tenacious attitude this was my sarcastic post from a few month ago was I being a bit harsh? are we actually going to see some of these criminals brought to justice? I hope so.
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Apr 26, 2024 20:21:34 GMT
This guy was great
/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1783904141472866794¤tTweetUser=stugoo17
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Apr 26, 2024 21:31:43 GMT
I’m not sure what anyone else thinks after watching her these past couple of days, but for me I was disappointed she didn’t get the hard time I expected and has probably ridden this out well. She got a bit of a ticking off basically, and that’s it. There is still a lack of tangible proof to tie her into this. Emails that suggests she should have known is not good enough. She’s hiding behind not having seen the Dec 2010 email, about the Second Sight report claiming there were no systemic failures etc, not being responsible for certain tasks, The one thing I can tell so far that could nail her is a read receipt for that Dec 2010 email that could prove she saw it. If that could be achieved by means the Oatcake poster a few posts above advised, that would be critical. Otherwise, she can’t be prosecuted for gross incompetence. I don't know the level of metadata that is stored when it comes to Exchange servers. Read and unread emails are absolutely logged server side. Whether the specific date and time is another matter. She might be able to plead ignorance on those grounds?
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Apr 26, 2024 23:56:42 GMT
This guy was great /mediaViewer?currentTweet=1783904141472866794¤tTweetUser=stugoo17 Thanks for posting, I was unable to watch VdB's evidence in real time but the opening minutes satisfied what had been gnawing at me as to what might predgudice any subsequent Criminal Trial To properly prosecute someone the Police must arrest and caution and after that it will be up to the accused to answer or no comment At the opening of today's interrogation of VdB the prospect of self incrimination was raised by the Chair and the Barrister about to ask those questions confirmed that a caution to VdB was "desirable" Nevertheless the interrogation of VdB continued and although I find her responses despicable I must also find it clever She is proceeding on two layers. Firstly she is maintaining that she is a highly competent Executive and then while answering questions of fact she displays anything but competence in her actions or inactions. I think it highly unlikely she could be prosecuted for facilitating malicious prosecutions against the Postmasters as she could rely on her apparent incompetence while maintaining that she is a competent Executive. I think a Jury would conclude she is delusional but would be hard pressed to agree if we're actual or faked. A much stronger case could be made for Perjury in her previous evidence to the High Court of when she had Knowledge that the Horizon System could be accessed remotely independent of Postmasters. Again her defence would be Delusional Competence but the judgement would rest on irrespective of whether she through incompetence failed to understand the significance of what she was told she couldn't deny she was told and lied to the High Court that she hadn't been told "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive” - Sir Walter Scott
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Apr 30, 2024 9:26:05 GMT
I really hope the lot of the legal team from post office end up facing criminal charges.
The lot of them are corrupt.
This chap today can barely let the chap questioning him finish before he trots out the usual I can't remember.
Tosser.
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Apr 30, 2024 9:55:40 GMT
He wouldn't have survived at Royal Mail for 17 years if he didn't know what he was doing??"
Oh yes he would. 😂
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Apr 30, 2024 12:35:32 GMT
I really hope the lot of the legal team from post office end up facing criminal charges. The lot of them are corrupt. This chap today can barely let the chap questioning him finish before he trots out the usual I can't remember. Tosser. He’s been making me feel as angry as watching VDB last week. He knows what he is trying to do here, and is portraying himself as though he never made a decision (even though he was Head of Legal!). Unfortunately we are now seeing the true parasites of this whole scandal and the default pattern seems to be if you can prove I was there or did that thing with documented evidence, then I may have a vague recollection of it. Otherwise, I don't recall, I wasn't there, I didn't have any responsibility and I'm actually not that good at my job. That might not save VDB as that Dec 2010 email could have the CPS coming down on her. I hope the lawyers can throw something at this Flemington (Phlegmington?) guy to drop him in the shit.
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on May 2, 2024 9:00:57 GMT
Is someone else in the room with this guy giving evidence remotely (Aujard - head lawyer honcho type)?
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on May 2, 2024 12:52:48 GMT
Is someone else in the room with this guy giving evidence remotely (Aujard - head lawyer honcho type)? Vennels and Angela coaching him. Anyway bring your popcorn it will be a car crash tomorrow. The bloke in the box tomorrow appeared before and was a shambles. Deserves jail time. It was so bad if it wasn't so serious you'd mistake his last appearance as a comedy skit.
|
|
|
Post by potteringermany on May 2, 2024 14:06:54 GMT
Is someone else in the room with this guy giving evidence remotely (Aujard - head lawyer honcho type)? Vennels and Angela coaching him. Anyway bring your popcorn it will be a car crash tomorrow. The bloke in the box tomorrow appeared before and was a shambles. Deserves jail time. It was so bad if it wasn't so serious you'd mistake his last appearance as a comedy skit. i think the car crash is happening now
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 2, 2024 14:13:48 GMT
Vennels and Angela coaching him. Anyway bring your popcorn it will be a car crash tomorrow. The bloke in the box tomorrow appeared before and was a shambles. Deserves jail time. It was so bad if it wasn't so serious you'd mistake his last appearance as a comedy skit. i think the car crash is happening now Just catching up with this, are you talking about Martin Smith? Cheers
|
|