|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Feb 20, 2024 8:46:31 GMT
It's absolutely clear that people at the very top of the Post Office and in government knew that Fujitsu employees could remotely change the accounts in branches but maintained in court that they couldn't. That is perverting the course of justice. There has to be criminal prosecutions as a result of what has been uncovered. I hope so But....playing Devil's advocate With a top Barrister Needing proof beyond reasonable doubt. Basing their evidence on " what we believed at the time" I'm so cynical about this whole affair and other things of recent governments that I can believe that "they" could get away with it , despite what seems blatantly obvious. There is documentary evidence that senior management knew that Fujitsu employees could change accounts in the Horizon system and that they took action to suppress this in the prosecution of sub masters. I'm not a legal expert but I think we are definitely in beyond reasonable doubt territory here.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 20, 2024 8:48:31 GMT
Your constant digs at the lib dems contradict your statement that you are “not proposing to get involved in politics”. I have interest in the post office scandal. Compensation for the victims is very much part of it and should be paid tomorrow as far as I am concerned. If you had interest in anything other than defending the tories, you would also be concerned that the victims of the miscarriages of justice are potentially being purposefully delayed in receiving compensation due to the current government. Tell me which leaders of which parties have had their hands on this To repeat myself I've been all over this since I became aware of it and the two real guilty parties are the post Office and Fujitsu. I bumped the thing repeatedly with very little interest from more than a few members of this board. You have only become interested to have a dig at the government at least be a little honest about it. I'm not interested in the Liberal Democrats apart from reminding people like you that they've also got their dirty hands on this whilst being in power. Jo Hamilton (one of the victims focused on in the Mr Bates show) agrees with me and disagrees with you. She thinks the government shouldn’t be delaying compensation payments. She told Newsnight Staunton’s claims of a payment delay “rings true.” It was, she said, the “first time ever” she has believed a Post Office bigwig. Everyone in power is partially responsible for the whole affair. But only kemi Badenoch and the tories are trying to delay compensation payments. Badenoch just shouted a lot as usual giving no evidence whatsoever to back up her defence.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 20, 2024 9:01:50 GMT
It will be interesting to know how far up the ladder that went and which ministers were involved, accessory to perverting the court of justice, some top ministers at the time doing some jail time would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Feb 20, 2024 9:07:14 GMT
It will be interesting to know how far up the ladder that went and which ministers were involved, accessory to perverting the court of justice, some top ministers at the time doing some jail time would be nice. By the sounds of it this clearly didn't get as far as No 10 so, as you say it'd be interesting to see what the civil servants and ministers of the day were up to, uncovering that paper trail ought to keep someone busy.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 20, 2024 9:09:48 GMT
I hope so But....playing Devil's advocate With a top Barrister Needing proof beyond reasonable doubt. Basing their evidence on " what we believed at the time" I'm so cynical about this whole affair and other things of recent governments that I can believe that "they" could get away with it , despite what seems blatantly obvious. There is documentary evidence that senior management knew that Fujitsu employees could change accounts in the Horizon system and that they took action to suppress this in the prosecution of sub masters. I'm not a legal expert but I think we are definitely in beyond reasonable doubt territory here. I'd have thought so......but I still don't trust that prosecutions will happen. The whole thing is beyond integrity and decency....so I just don't think it will be that simple...perhaps it should be.....but let's see
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 20, 2024 9:10:37 GMT
It will be interesting to know how far up the ladder that went and which ministers were involved, accessory to perverting the court of justice, some top ministers at the time doing some jail time would be nice. By the sounds of it this clearly get as far as No 10 so, as you say it'd be interesting to see what the civil servants and ministers of the day were up to, uncovering that paper trail ought to keep someone busy. It does say in the article that Cameron wasn't aware.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Feb 20, 2024 9:13:26 GMT
By the sounds of it this clearly get as far as No 10 so, as you say it'd be interesting to see what the civil servants and ministers of the day were up to, uncovering that paper trail ought to keep someone busy. It does say in the article that Cameron wasn't aware. I omitted the word 'didn't' from my last post BJR, just inserted it.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 20, 2024 9:18:10 GMT
For anyone to be held accountable an investigation needs to take place.....to see if anyone IS legally accountable ( nit an enquiry) and then a case needs to be made, with evidence, against a specific law....dies anyone know if such an investigation is taking place....or will things happen in the " fullness of time" Quite possibly a specialist in corporate law could take a forensic look at the myriad of documents/evidence available and then trying to prove wrongdoing or law breaking. There's clearly been wrongful imprisonment so there must be cases of perjury but nailing any of it down would probably take years. The current inquiry should continue in my view. It was originally due to conclude in September of this year which will inevitably be delayed and if lucky we may see the Final Report sometime next year depending on how long the incumbent Government wishes to sit on it. The conclusions and recommendations will be mostly structural relating to Corporate Governance specifically related to PO but if applicable generally. It may criticise certain individuals but this in itself doesn't lead to prosecutions There is no legal impediment why say the NCA couldn't have a team concurrently investigate I think the 700 who were prosecuted the other 3,500 can be compensated on a sliding scale relative to their loss plus punitive damages. The NCA could do well to co-opt Mr Bates onto the investigative team and if he had a son Master Bates. On first examination to investigate 700 individual cases streching back 20 years seems daunting, but its not. There will be case files of each of the 700 cases and a commonality of persons who investigated and separately those who took the decision to prosecute and crucially why. It has already been established from the Inquiry that information was withheld from investigators and prosecutors the decision for which could only have come from higher up the Food chain. In this way you build up a pyramid of culpability hopefully reaching the Top. This NCA team should be composed of primarily Forensic Criminal Investigators familiar with evidence gathering and if the correct methods in the 700 was used if not why not and who frustrated. This is a Criminal Investigation I'm quite certain in the course of this Criminal Investigation actions and inactions by Fujitsu will become apparent. As a Corporate entity it can not be Criminally Prosecuted but pursued for Civil Damages. Employees of Fujitsu can be Criminally Prosecuted if found to be Corporately Reckless of Negligent The Bill for Compensation currently sits at £1.2Bn and I'd estimate it will have cost the British Taxpayer at least 3 Times that in inquiries, legal and prosecution costs etc before this whole debacle is concluded And where is the Money, You may ask? There was no money except a faulty Computer System which said Money was missing. Unlike Mr Bates many used their life savings, remortgaged properties to make good on this non existent missing Money. And what happened then? The Money that the subpostmasters Begged, Borrowed but never stole went back into the Coffers of the Post Office, inflating their Profits such that large Bonuses could be paid to those who oversaw this monstrosity. Do I think any serious Criminal Investigation will take place? Do I eck It only remains for the final tally in compensation to be calculated before the establishment throw a great big carpet over this mess to finally Bury it under.
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 20, 2024 9:49:32 GMT
Looks like a good apple is in a barrel of rotten ones Why o why were the pist office given prosecution powers and nit the cps
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 20, 2024 9:55:23 GMT
Very strange timing for this huge article to be released today given what's happened the last couple of days. I wonder when the bbc got the info they're reporting on or how long they've sat on it for.
Article is even stranger as the headline suggests the government knew. But 90% of the article is pretty much trying to remove all blame from the government and put it solely on post office.
I guess what makes it strange for me is the fact only a month ago it was all strangely Ed Daveys fault, the one post office minister who wasn't a tory over the last 14 years.
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Feb 20, 2024 10:07:45 GMT
I do find it interesting that the bloke who has been on the wrong end of this injustice has said he doesn't blame Ed Davey.
He did as much as he could do but the PO and senior officials were lying to him.
If a bloke that has been through it can give the benefit of any doubt to Davey then I'm in no position to argue.
No doubt senior officials im the PO knew what was happening and seemed to obfuscate at every available opportunity.
What a guy Mr Bates is.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 20, 2024 10:22:08 GMT
Quite possibly a specialist in corporate law could take a forensic look at the myriad of documents/evidence available and then trying to prove wrongdoing or law breaking. There's clearly been wrongful imprisonment so there must be cases of perjury but nailing any of it down would probably take years. It seems to me that prosecutions may never take place or , as you say , will take years. Is there an offence of " Failing to act , or taking action which knowingly results in someone being wrongly convicted of an offence"? ....I doubt it, because the get out clause would be " It's up to the courts to decide " Is there evidence that any of the suspects actually committed perjury in a court leading to a conviction.....I don't know.....They of course would claim that they were acting upon someone else's expert information and , at the time , believed what they said to be true. Then how many decisions were made in the name of the organisations, possibly separate legal entities?. From Huddy's link above ... "The secret investigation adds to evidence that the Post Office knew Horizon's creator, Fujitsu, could remotely fiddle with sub-postmaster's cash accounts - even as it argued in court, two years later, that it was impossible. The revelations have prompted an accusation that the Post Office may have broken the law - and the government did nothing to prevent it. Paul Marshall, a barrister who represented some sub-postmasters, said: "On the face of it, it discloses a conspiracy by the Post Office to pervert the course of justice."
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 20, 2024 10:29:12 GMT
I do find it interesting that the bloke who has been on the wrong end of this injustice has said he doesn't blame Ed Davey. He did as much as he could do but the PO and senior officials were lying to him. If a bloke that has been through it can give the benefit of any doubt to Davey then I'm in no position to argue. No doubt senior officials im the PO knew what was happening and seemed to obfuscate at every available opportunity. What a guy Mr Bates is. I agree (particularly with your last sentence, he is an extraordinary person).
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 20, 2024 10:42:46 GMT
It seems to me that prosecutions may never take place or , as you say , will take years. Is there an offence of " Failing to act , or taking action which knowingly results in someone being wrongly convicted of an offence"? ....I doubt it, because the get out clause would be " It's up to the courts to decide " Is there evidence that any of the suspects actually committed perjury in a court leading to a conviction.....I don't know.....They of course would claim that they were acting upon someone else's expert information and , at the time , believed what they said to be true. Then how many decisions were made in the name of the organisations, possibly separate legal entities?. From Huddy's link above ... "The secret investigation adds to evidence that the Post Office knew Horizon's creator, Fujitsu, could remotely fiddle with sub-postmaster's cash accounts - even as it argued in court, two years later, that it was impossible. The revelations have prompted an accusation that the Post Office may have broken the law - and the government did nothing to prevent it. Paul Marshall, a barrister who represented some sub-postmasters, said: "On the face of it, it discloses a conspiracy by the Post Office to pervert the course of justice." I know that Paul. Knowing that and actually securing a prosecution are two different things
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 20, 2024 10:58:12 GMT
A procedural question.
Who would do the prosecuting? The government prosecuting itself or a prosecuting a " governmental" agency ( or I guess it would be against its employees, or agents)?
Clearly it should be someone independent or someone acting on behalf of the sub postmasters
Who pays?
I'm sure someone on here will know a precedent
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 20, 2024 12:00:06 GMT
This is an absolute scandal. The tory party actively trying to delay Post Office compensation payments until the next election so they can try and blame labour. Lots of talk on here about who is to blame. Well the tories don’t care about any compensation. They want to play politics. In the meantime, the people whose lives have been ruined have to wait even longer for compensation payments if the tories get their way. It's an absolute scandal that the Conservative party, the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Post Office, Fujitsu, the Civil Service have allowed it to get this far..... apologies to any parties I've missed out. The earliest it can be legally established that Fujitsu Staff could gain remote access was from the June 2014 Deloitte Zebra Report presented to the Post Office Board. Of course Fujitsu could do this from installation but who in Post Office or Government knew before June 2014 is open to conjecture This is a clear starting point. In its opening statement to the Inquiry the Government had this to say. UK Government Investments (UKGI), the government body which owns the Post Office, addressed what the board knew about these successive reviews and investigations in an opening statement in 2022 to the ongoing public inquiry into the Horizon scandal.
It said there was no indication in the minutes of the Post Office board meeting in June 2014 that the board had received the Project Zebra briefing. UKGI said Mr Callard "does not recall ever receiving such a briefing".
The statement said the board had not asked for a copy of Deloitte's full report at the time of Project Zebra. UKGI said the board had been given an executive summary by the Post Office general counsel Chris Aujard, which was "focused on Deloitte's approach to the review but importantly did not set out its findings".So there we have it With all sorts of allegations flying around the Post Office Minister Baroness Neville-Rolfe requested (let's give credit for that and the assumption you dont request something you already know the answer to) an Independent Report into allegations heretofore denied by the Post Office that Fujitsu Staff could access Horizon remotely and without the knowledge of the subpostmasters. We are now meant to believe from the Governments Opening Statement to the Inquiry that neither the Post Office Minister who commissioned the Report nor the Post Office Board had any great curiosity in the Report when presented and contented itself with a summary which miraculously did not contain the main finding and the reason the report was Commissioned in the first place. Yeah Right These Charlatans can begin the Mea Culpa's The fact that High Court Action continued up to 5 years later by the Subpostmasters trying to overturn Criminal Convictions without the benefit of Full Disclosure is an outrage and certainly a Criminal Act by anyone aiding and abetting such proceedings.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 20, 2024 12:11:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 20, 2024 12:27:28 GMT
From Huddy's link above ... "The secret investigation adds to evidence that the Post Office knew Horizon's creator, Fujitsu, could remotely fiddle with sub-postmaster's cash accounts - even as it argued in court, two years later, that it was impossible. The revelations have prompted an accusation that the Post Office may have broken the law - and the government did nothing to prevent it. Paul Marshall, a barrister who represented some sub-postmasters, said: "On the face of it, it discloses a conspiracy by the Post Office to pervert the course of justice." I know that Paul. Knowing that and actually securing a prosecution are two different things Calm down BJR You asked the question "Is there evidence that any of the suspects actually committed perjury in a court leading to a conviction.....I don't know" And I simply provided a link to a barrister who thought that there was. "On the face of it, it discloses a conspiracy by the Post Office to pervert the course of justice."
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 20, 2024 12:31:37 GMT
A procedural question. Who would do the prosecuting? The government prosecuting itself or a prosecuting a " governmental" agency ( or I guess it would be against its employees, or agents)? Clearly it should be someone independent or someone acting on behalf of the sub postmasters Who pays? I'm sure someone on here will know a precedent Who would do the prosecuting? The CPS Who would pay for it? The tax payer
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 20, 2024 13:53:28 GMT
I know that Paul. Knowing that and actually securing a prosecution are two different things Calm down BJR You asked the question "Is there evidence that any of the suspects actually committed perjury in a court leading to a conviction.....I don't know" And I simply provided a link to a barrister who thought that there was. "On the face of it, it discloses a conspiracy by the Post Office to pervert the course of justice." Im perfectly calm Paul, are you? I simply replied to your post.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 20, 2024 14:54:49 GMT
More in depth reporting on Project Zebra. What an utter shitshow ...
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 20, 2024 19:33:01 GMT
It's an absolute scandal that the Conservative party, the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Post Office, Fujitsu, the Civil Service have allowed it to get this far..... apologies to any parties I've missed out. The earliest it can be legally established that Fujitsu Staff could gain remote access was from the June 2014 Deloitte Zebra Report presented to the Post Office Board. Of course Fujitsu could do this from installation but who in Post Office or Government knew before June 2014 is open to conjecture This is a clear starting point. In its opening statement to the Inquiry the Government had this to say. UK Government Investments (UKGI), the government body which owns the Post Office, addressed what the board knew about these successive reviews and investigations in an opening statement in 2022 to the ongoing public inquiry into the Horizon scandal.
It said there was no indication in the minutes of the Post Office board meeting in June 2014 that the board had received the Project Zebra briefing. UKGI said Mr Callard "does not recall ever receiving such a briefing".
The statement said the board had not asked for a copy of Deloitte's full report at the time of Project Zebra. UKGI said the board had been given an executive summary by the Post Office general counsel Chris Aujard, which was "focused on Deloitte's approach to the review but importantly did not set out its findings".So there we have it With all sorts of allegations flying around the Post Office Minister Baroness Neville-Rolfe requested (let's give credit for that and the assumption you dont request something you already know the answer to) an Independent Report into allegations heretofore denied by the Post Office that Fujitsu Staff could access Horizon remotely and without the knowledge of the subpostmasters. We are now meant to believe from the Governments Opening Statement to the Inquiry that neither the Post Office Minister who commissioned the Report nor the Post Office Board had any great curiosity in the Report when presented and contented itself with a summary which miraculously did not contain the main finding and the reason the report was Commissioned in the first place. Yeah Right These Charlatans can begin the Mea Culpa's The fact that High Court Action continued up to 5 years later by the Subpostmasters trying to overturn Criminal Convictions without the benefit of Full Disclosure is an outrage and certainly a Criminal Act by anyone aiding and abetting such proceedings. I'm sure there are many starting points..... www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67941495Not aimed at you but for the hard of thinking on here this is in no way any defence of this current government.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 20, 2024 23:03:01 GMT
The earliest it can be legally established that Fujitsu Staff could gain remote access was from the June 2014 Deloitte Zebra Report presented to the Post Office Board. Of course Fujitsu could do this from installation but who in Post Office or Government knew before June 2014 is open to conjecture This is a clear starting point. In its opening statement to the Inquiry the Government had this to say. UK Government Investments (UKGI), the government body which owns the Post Office, addressed what the board knew about these successive reviews and investigations in an opening statement in 2022 to the ongoing public inquiry into the Horizon scandal.
It said there was no indication in the minutes of the Post Office board meeting in June 2014 that the board had received the Project Zebra briefing. UKGI said Mr Callard "does not recall ever receiving such a briefing".
The statement said the board had not asked for a copy of Deloitte's full report at the time of Project Zebra. UKGI said the board had been given an executive summary by the Post Office general counsel Chris Aujard, which was "focused on Deloitte's approach to the review but importantly did not set out its findings".So there we have it With all sorts of allegations flying around the Post Office Minister Baroness Neville-Rolfe requested (let's give credit for that and the assumption you dont request something you already know the answer to) an Independent Report into allegations heretofore denied by the Post Office that Fujitsu Staff could access Horizon remotely and without the knowledge of the subpostmasters. We are now meant to believe from the Governments Opening Statement to the Inquiry that neither the Post Office Minister who commissioned the Report nor the Post Office Board had any great curiosity in the Report when presented and contented itself with a summary which miraculously did not contain the main finding and the reason the report was Commissioned in the first place. Yeah Right These Charlatans can begin the Mea Culpa's The fact that High Court Action continued up to 5 years later by the Subpostmasters trying to overturn Criminal Convictions without the benefit of Full Disclosure is an outrage and certainly a Criminal Act by anyone aiding and abetting such proceedings. I'm sure there are many starting points..... www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67941495Not aimed at you but for the hard of thinking on here this is in no way any defence of this current government. Of course I agree with you, but why start there www.theguardian.com/business/2024/jan/07/post-office-suspected-of-more-wrongful-prosecutions-of-operators-over-horizonIt becomes a chicken/egg conundrum. My point was that June 2014 some may possibly argue 2016 is when there is irrefutable evidence that Government and Post Office were completely aware of flaws in Horizon System and continued prosecutions or defended previous prosecutions without giving full disclosure. This is a Criminal Act of Perverting the course of Justice. It meets the Criminal Threshold of beyond reasonable doubt or Civil Threshold of on the balance of probability Like Ian posted earlier maybe I too am a vindictive bastard and I'd like to see someone in Authority punished. I daresay the sub postmasters would too If earlier culprits escape prosecution through lack of firm evidence that's too bad but when Rats are cornered there's no telling what they might remember Am I holding my breath for Criminal or Civil Protections to take place, No, but that says more about our Society or who is subject to the Law and who isn't.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 21, 2024 6:30:18 GMT
Politicians politicianing.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 21, 2024 6:33:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 21, 2024 9:33:15 GMT
Politicians politicianing. His memo of the meeting he has produced backs him up too. With this, and Badenoch being exposed as a liar in respect of the breakdown of trade negotiations with Canada, this is really damaging for her. I guess the bright side is that ITV made the Mr Bates show and forced the government to change policy and speed up compensation payments. But it makes you realise how little the government cares for the public.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 21, 2024 9:46:35 GMT
All governments are like HR departments. You operate under the illusion that they're there to support you, when in reality their one and only priority is the business. You're all just faceless numbers in either scenario.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 21, 2024 9:48:15 GMT
Looks like a good apple is in a barrel of rotten ones Why o why were the pist office given prosecution powers and nit the cps The Post Office Investigation Branch has held powers of prosecution virtually since Post office & Royal Mail started over 300 years ago. This is worth a read and may explain its powers. theweek.com/law/how-the-post-office-got-its-prosecution-powers#
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 21, 2024 10:11:19 GMT
Politicians politicianing. There's a couple of things noticeable about that letter ... 1. Why isn't it dated? and 2. Why is there a cursor mark immediately after the word 'delivering' in item 3?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 21, 2024 10:12:14 GMT
All governments are like HR departments. You operate under the illusion that they're there to support you, when in reality their one and only priority is the business. You're all just faceless numbers in either scenario. Very long story, but I was once involved in trying to change the law in respect of cautions for under 18s and disclosures at interviews/ job applications. My local MP understood my point and agreed. When she took it to the Home Office, I received some sort of bland , non committal letter, which , whilst not disagreeing with me said something like " not a priority for the government at this time". It didn't matter that it was a priority for many young people and affected their life chances. On reflection I think the Home Office letter meant" There's nothing in it for us( the Government, the Party) so it is not worth pursuing". The law was eventually changed but it literally took years.... changes of governments, changes of Ministers, not the right time, delays etc. If the government can delay any action on the Post Office scandal until after the next election , we are possibly in a different ball game( again). Some key players may have even died.
|
|