While many of these people appear to be suffering from selective memory at this hearing there is nobody in judgement of them apart from the public. I would dearly like to see them trying to convince a 12 person jury in the same manner where the outcome would be a lot different.
My Dad used to say 'it's not what you know, but who you know', that certainly seems to be the norm in business.
I do think that the likes of Angela van den Bogerd and Paula Vennells will be brought to book, the evidence of wrong doing is just too compelling to ignore and a lot of people are determined to see justice. There are many more big players still to give evidence to the Inquiry.
There are people working hard to make sure that those who profited from the Covid ppe scandal are brought to justice and with a probable change of Government that looks far more likely.
I totally agree. If their moral compass is heading in the same direction when they are brought to book then I think the best bet for any successful prosecution is that they will bring the others down with them. I feel any prosecution through the courts will be a minefield. 'Oh, we won't get a fair trial' will be the first cry and months of legal argument hoping any momentum will wear off.
We can add the name of at least one Fujitsu engineer and a couple of lawyers who worked for PO, to the list of perjury suspects. Even that shadiest of all closed shop self-interest cabals, The Law Society feels the need to admit it is looking into members' conduct (nobody will get struck off unless they go to prison obvs). It is now abundantly clear that several convictions were unsafe because the integrity of Horizon could be compromised. That's the only "reasonable doubt" the defendants ever needed. What's also emerging is how far back (2010) and how widely known at PO that susceptibility was. PO executives, staff, lawyers and Fujitsu staff actively suppressed that fact and have subsequently lied about what they knew. The trouble with our thirst for vengeance on these individuals is that all this damning evidence is out in the public domain, any young defence barrister worth their salt will plead their client "can't have a fair trial", "who can sit on a jury and not know some or all of this already", "tried in the court of public opinion..." etc etc Vennells, vdB, et al won't see the inside of prison for any of this. We the taxpayer will be footing the bill for redress and compo for all the sub PM's affected for years to come. Fujitsu obviously ought to repay every single penny they ever took from PO for Horizon but they're so deeply ensconced in government procurement corruption that they're still being awarded contracts despite the blatantly rotten conduct at PO.
My Dad used to say 'it's not what you know, but who you know', that certainly seems to be the norm in business.
I do think that the likes of Angela van den Bogerd and Paula Vennells will be brought to book, the evidence of wrong doing is just too compelling to ignore and a lot of people are determined to see justice. There are many more big players still to give evidence to the Inquiry.
There are people working hard to make sure that those who profited from the Covid ppe scandal are brought to justice and with a probable change of Government that looks far more likely.
I totally agree. If their moral compass is heading in the same direction when they are brought to book then I think the best bet for any successful prosecution is that they will bring the others down with them. I feel any prosecution through the courts will be a minefield. 'Oh, we won't get a fair trial' will be the first cry and months of legal argument hoping any momentum will wear off.
We can add the name of at least one Fujitsu engineer and a couple of lawyers who worked for PO, to the list of perjury suspects. Even that shadiest of all closed shop self-interest cabals, The Law Society feels the need to admit it is looking into members' conduct (nobody will get struck off unless they go to prison obvs). It is now abundantly clear that several convictions were unsafe because the integrity of Horizon could be compromised. That's the only "reasonable doubt" the defendants ever needed. What's also emerging is how far back (2010) and how widely known at PO that susceptibility was. PO executives, staff, lawyers and Fujitsu staff actively suppressed that fact and have subsequently lied about what they knew. The trouble with our thirst for vengeance on these individuals is that all this damning evidence is out in the public domain, any young defence barrister worth their salt will plead their client "can't have a fair trial", "who can sit on a jury and not know some or all of this already", "tried in the court of public opinion..." etc etc Vennells, vdB, et al won't see the inside of prison for any of this. We the taxpayer will be footing the bill for redress and compo for all the sub PM's affected for years to come. Fujitsu obviously ought to repay every single penny they ever took from PO for Horizon but they're so deeply ensconced in government procurement corruption that they're still being awarded contracts despite the blatantly rotten conduct at PO.
This reads true to me. All those lives ruined but the establishment people will very likely get away with it.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
My Dad used to say 'it's not what you know, but who you know', that certainly seems to be the norm in business.
I do think that the likes of Angela van den Bogerd and Paula Vennells will be brought to book, the evidence of wrong doing is just too compelling to ignore and a lot of people are determined to see justice. There are many more big players still to give evidence to the Inquiry.
There are people working hard to make sure that those who profited from the Covid ppe scandal are brought to justice and with a probable change of Government that looks far more likely.
I totally agree. If their moral compass is heading in the same direction when they are brought to book then I think the best bet for any successful prosecution is that they will bring the others down with them. I feel any prosecution through the courts will be a minefield. 'Oh, we won't get a fair trial' will be the first cry and months of legal argument hoping any momentum will wear off.
We can add the name of at least one Fujitsu engineer and a couple of lawyers who worked for PO, to the list of perjury suspects. Even that shadiest of all closed shop self-interest cabals, The Law Society feels the need to admit it is looking into members' conduct (nobody will get struck off unless they go to prison obvs). It is now abundantly clear that several convictions were unsafe because the integrity of Horizon could be compromised. That's the only "reasonable doubt" the defendants ever needed. What's also emerging is how far back (2010) and how widely known at PO that susceptibility was. PO executives, staff, lawyers and Fujitsu staff actively suppressed that fact and have subsequently lied about what they knew. The trouble with our thirst for vengeance on these individuals is that all this damning evidence is out in the public domain, any young defence barrister worth their salt will plead their client "can't have a fair trial", "who can sit on a jury and not know some or all of this already", "tried in the court of public opinion..." etc etc Vennells, vdB, et al won't see the inside of prison for any of this. We the taxpayer will be footing the bill for redress and compo for all the sub PM's affected for years to come. Fujitsu obviously ought to repay every single penny they ever took from PO for Horizon but they're so deeply ensconced in government procurement corruption that they're still being awarded contracts despite the blatantly rotten conduct at PO.
I really wouldn't be concerned about the defence arguing their client cannot get a fair trial on the basis everyone has a predetermined view due to the high profile of the case.
It doesn't really happen in UK criminal cases. Judges are very good at issuing directions to the jury about what to disregard, moving the case to a different area, etc. Otherwise no high profile cases would ever get heard.
I still don't believe we'll see any of these individuals in any sort of criminal case but it won't be on that basis though tbh.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
Strangely I think that saying you didn’t know how to do computer stuff back in 2010 could well be actually true. Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now. For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error. Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say. Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
If I were the judge I would probably allow an incompetence defence.
Those responsible for the non disclosure of the "mismatch bug" document that would have stopped all Post Office prosecutions should go to jail. No ifs, no buts. Apologies mean nothing now and there has to be a deterrent to this sort of behaviour.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
Strangely I think that saying you didn’t know how to do computer stuff back in 2010 could well be actually true. Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now. For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error. Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say. Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
If I were the judge I would probably allow an incompetence defence.
Someone in his position would definitely know how to save a file in 2010. Saving files is pretty basic stuff. There would be other files saved by him around that time, which would prove that he knew how to do that. They may have been deleted, but an expert would be able to find them on the hard drive.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
Strangely I think that saying you didn’t know how to do computer stuff back in 2010 could well be actually true. Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now. For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error. Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say. Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
If I were the judge I would probably allow an incompetence defence.
Someone in his position would definitely know how to save a file in 2010. Saving files is pretty basic stuff. There would be other files saved by him around that time, which would prove that he knew how to do that. They may have been deleted, but an expert would be able to find them on the hard drive.
Fair enough. If there is evidence that he knew how to save files, and he had already done it at the time then he is a liar. I didn’t know that saving files is basic stuff.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
Strangely I think that saying you didn’t know how to do computer stuff back in 2010 could well be actually true. Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now. For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error. Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say. Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
If I were the judge I would probably allow an incompetence defence.
Someone in his position would definitely know how to save a file in 2010. Saving files is pretty basic stuff. There would be other files saved by him around that time, which would prove that he knew how to do that. They may have been deleted, but an expert would be able to find them on the hard drive.
Fair enough. If there is evidence that he knew how to save files, and he had already done it at the time then he is a liar. I didn’t know that saving files is basic stuff.
I'm 66 and have known how to save files for many years. It's beyond credibility that a solicitor wouldn't know how to do that in 2010.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
Strangely I think that saying you didn’t know how to do computer stuff back in 2010 could well be actually true. Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now. For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error. Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say. Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
If I were the judge I would probably allow an incompetence defence.
Someone in his position would definitely know how to save a file in 2010. Saving files is pretty basic stuff. There would be other files saved by him around that time, which would prove that he knew how to do that. They may have been deleted, but an expert would be able to find them on the hard drive.
Fair enough. If there is evidence that he knew how to save files, and he had already done it at the time then he is a liar. I didn’t know that saving files is basic stuff.
I'm 66 and have known how to save files for many years. It's beyond credibility that a solicitor wouldn't know how to do that in 2010.
Indeed. Just ludicrous. The is no way (unless the Post Office was totally and utterly useless) that a lawyer could have held an in-house job in a quasi-governmental business at that time without knowing how to do basic tasks on a computer.
We will have to wait and see but Judges/Courts really hate being lied to/mislead by prosecutors. They will see this as more heinous than the alleged offences themselves. I would be gob smacked if there are not further action in this matter. (I would also anticipate that the Solicitors Regulation Authority and/or Bar Standards Board, would be looking to get solicitors and/or barristers struck off.
The KC showed an email that was found on Jarnail Singh's computer drive which mentioned the receipts and payments mis-match files. Jarnail Singh said that in 2010 he didn't know how to save a document on his computer and he never saw the email. Does he really think that anyone would believe that someone using a computer wouldn't know how to save a file. The man is lying through his teeth and should go to jail. The evidence is so compelling that surely the fact that they can't get a fair trial can't be used.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
Strangely I think that saying you didn’t know how to do computer stuff back in 2010 could well be actually true. Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now. For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error. Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say. Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
If I were the judge I would probably allow an incompetence defence.
Someone in his position would definitely know how to save a file in 2010. Saving files is pretty basic stuff. There would be other files saved by him around that time, which would prove that he knew how to do that. They may have been deleted, but an expert would be able to find them on the hard drive.
Fair enough. If there is evidence that he knew how to save files, and he had already done it at the time then he is a liar. I didn’t know that saving files is basic stuff.
I'm 66 and have known how to save files for many years. It's beyond credibility that a solicitor wouldn't know how to do that in 2010.
Indeed. Just ludicrous. The is no way (unless the Post Office was totally and utterly useless) that a lawyer could have held an in-house job in a quasi-governmental business at that time without knowing how to do basic tasks on a computer.
Unfortunately, I think you've nailed it there.
I've had the "pleasure" of watching Mr Singh's testimony before and was left in little doubt that the bloke is nothing more than an over-promoted incompetent buffoon who didnt' know his arse from his elbow. Oh, he was trying to be clever with some of his answers (when I watched him before), but it was all so far beyond his intellect and comprehension that I ended up wishing someone would just come along and put the bloke out of his misery.
THAT'S the level of competence we're looking at here. Yes, lying and cover-ups as well, most probably, but industrial scale levels of sheer unbelievable incompetence too. And all whilst picking up a hefty salary and finding the time to run a conveyancing business on the side as well.
Barrister for sub postmasters told Angela Van der Bogerd that she was either incompetent or a liar. I think it highly likely she'll end up in jail for perjury.
I can't believe that so many CEO's/Upper management seem to have missed so many important emails. As you say, either incompetent or a liar. Can't believe it was incompetence because they wouldn't have held the post that long if important emails were regularly not being read or replied to.
If they were incompetent then the Government should be asking for part of the salaries to be paid back as they were obviously out of their depth & receiving money under deception.
Or just lock 'em all up. Paula Vennells hearing will be just more of the same I bet !
The Post Office has lost its Special Reporting Agency status in Scotland.
North of the border, it will no longer be able to investigate and report direct to the Crown. It will have to report suspicions to the police, like the rest of us.
Comments
Some very big players coming up in the next few weeks. Gareth Jenkins has a whole week of questioning from 25th June.
It is now abundantly clear that several convictions were unsafe because the integrity of Horizon could be compromised. That's the only "reasonable doubt" the defendants ever needed. What's also emerging is how far back (2010) and how widely known at PO that susceptibility was. PO executives, staff, lawyers and Fujitsu staff actively suppressed that fact and have subsequently lied about what they knew.
The trouble with our thirst for vengeance on these individuals is that all this damning evidence is out in the public domain, any young defence barrister worth their salt will plead their client "can't have a fair trial", "who can sit on a jury and not know some or all of this already", "tried in the court of public opinion..." etc etc Vennells, vdB, et al won't see the inside of prison for any of this. We the taxpayer will be footing the bill for redress and compo for all the sub PM's affected for years to come.
Fujitsu obviously ought to repay every single penny they ever took from PO for Horizon but they're so deeply ensconced in government procurement corruption that they're still being awarded contracts despite the blatantly rotten conduct at PO.
All those lives ruined but the establishment people will very likely get away with it.
At the very least they should all pay back their bonuses.
It doesn't really happen in UK criminal cases. Judges are very good at issuing directions to the jury about what to disregard, moving the case to a different area, etc. Otherwise no high profile cases would ever get heard.
I still don't believe we'll see any of these individuals in any sort of criminal case but it won't be on that basis though tbh.
Some philistines like me can’t do shedloads of computer stuff even now.
For me it has always been, and likely will always be, random trial and error.
Many others, especially younger people, will doubt the credibility of what I say.
Often those people use the words ‘just’ and ‘obvious’ rather a lot.
I didn’t know that saving files is basic stuff.
We will have to wait and see but Judges/Courts really hate being lied to/mislead by prosecutors. They will see this as more heinous than the alleged offences themselves. I would be gob smacked if there are not further action in this matter. (I would also anticipate that the Solicitors Regulation Authority and/or Bar Standards Board, would be looking to get solicitors and/or barristers struck off.
I've had the "pleasure" of watching Mr Singh's testimony before and was left in little doubt that the bloke is nothing more than an over-promoted incompetent buffoon who didnt' know his arse from his elbow. Oh, he was trying to be clever with some of his answers (when I watched him before), but it was all so far beyond his intellect and comprehension that I ended up wishing someone would just come along and put the bloke out of his misery.
THAT'S the level of competence we're looking at here. Yes, lying and cover-ups as well, most probably, but industrial scale levels of sheer unbelievable incompetence too. And all whilst picking up a hefty salary and finding the time to run a conveyancing business on the side as well.
Former Post Office GC ‘won’t co-operate’ with public inquiry
Former Post Office lawyer Jane MacLeod ‘won’t co-operate’ with inquiry | Law GazetteThe Post Office has lost its Special Reporting Agency status in Scotland.
North of the border, it will no longer be able to investigate and report direct to the Crown. It will have to report suspicions to the police, like the rest of us.