To draw your attention to Mr Bates vs The Post Office

[5foot5]

There is already a thread about this on the Telly Addicts forum here

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/telly_addicts/4970440-mr-bates-vs-the-post-office-mon-to-thur-itv-9pm-tv-pace-no-spoilers

However this seems like such an important subject that I thought I would draw attention to it on AIBU.

The first episode aired tonight but the whole series is available on itvx.

Most of you will no doubt have heard about the Horizon scandal, but whether you have or you haven't this program is compelling. It will probably make you furious but it deserves as wide an audience as possible.,

Seema Misra has rejected Smith’s apology, telling Sky News: “They are apologising now but they missed so many chances before. We had my conviction overturned, nobody came at that time to apologise.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/11/former-post-office-md-sorry-for-celebrating-pregnant-operators-conviction

I don't blame her. I feel absolutely furious every time more is revealed about the despicable corporate culture that enabled and encouraged so much damage to people. I have no personal involvement, don't know anyone affected but the active persecution of so many innocent people is beyond belief. I wish I could believe the PO management will be paying a price for it but I'd happily bet that appearing at this enquiry will be it. And those responsible will shuffle off into obscurity clutching their pensions and a few more directorships. Utterly sickening.

Is anyone watching Rodric Williams (litigation lawyer at the Post Office) give evidence today? He seems to struggle horribly to give a straight answer to any question. Overall, the impression he's giving is: frightened weasel.

Astonishingly he's now Head of Legal (Dispute Resolution & Brand) at Post Office Ltd, and as I understand it, and I could be wrong, he has a significant position in solving the mess the Post Office is currently in.

Am reading the BBC site - he is shocking... and still in place...

This is where the evidence is starting to get really interesting. So far we've had the top people at the Post Office and Royal Mail shrugging stuff off as it being so far beneath them they weren't to know, and relying on the fact that they were so insulated, the bad news didn't reach them. (Or at least proving that it did is difficult.)

But below them in seniority, at level of the Rodric Williams and others, there's loads of evidence of knowledge and of them being dismissive, sneery, deceitful etc. This is where the action is for this Phase of the Inquiry.

Overall, the impression he's giving is: frightened weasel.

Yes, spot on

O.M.G. They're now looking at an utterly explosive email from Tim McCormack that went to the top people at the Post Office.

I am reading the BBC live blog, is that the email about suppressing documents?

Edited to say that that email came from Amy Prime, so different one.

That was the Bond Dickenson email where there's the conspiracy by the lawyers to withhold documents from the court because it would be useful to the SPMs in their court case. The Tim McCormack one was one basically setting out what was going to happen to the Post Office unless they came clean, and that's what came to pass.

Fed up of hearing them claim amnesia when it comes to important documents. You wouldn't expect them to remember precisely that they sat down on a Tuesday at 9:31 and read it, but you would think they'd retain the gist of it.

BBC has caught up now with the McCormack email:

The inquiry is presented with an email from campaigner Tim McCormack to Paula Vennells - chief executive of the Post Office between 2012 and 2019 - about the bug in the Horizon system.

McCormack writes that it’s the last chance for Vennells to accept what he's been telling her – there is evidence of the bug in Horizon.

The money doesn’t exist, he says in the email, adding the error could be the reason for many of the Justice For Sub-postmasters Alliance (JFSA) cases.

McCormack asks her to travel to the branch in question and see for herself.

McCormack continues that he wants to “appeal to your sense of decency and compassion” and accept that many of the claimants in the JFSA saga are honest.

If she ignores the email she will be exposed and possibly be open to criminal charges, McCormack adds.

The inquiry sees emails in which the execs discuss how to respond to this.

Williams then emails a reply saying that McCormack is a "bluffer" who expects the board to march to his tune. Williams says they should respond with a “straight bat”.

Counsel to the inquiry asks Williams if by this time he was aware of the bugs.

Williams replies that he was.

He's asked what he meant by a straight bat - Williams says it means "appropriately."

Here's the man himself: https://twitter.com/Jusmasel2015

I'd imagine he would not be the most biddable person the Post Office had to deal with.

Thank you for the summary.

I haven't been able to watch much over the last few days, but this matches to a T the bits I did catch!

It's amazing evidence today. For example, Rodric Williams was saying just before lunch that just before Second Sight were about to hand over their report to the Post Office, the Post Office were looking into the possibility of suing Second Sight for defamation when they had no idea what Second Sight might say in the report that had been commissioned by the Post Office.

"I don't remember. I don't recall " terrible memories some of these important people have. I'm surprised they're able to make their way back home at the end of the day.

This email, from the Post Office's external litigation lawyers to internal litigation lawyer Rodric Williams, from this morning's evidence is extraordinary:

"For now, we'll do what we can to avoid disclosure of these guidelines and try to do so in a way which looks legitimate. However, we are ultimately withholding a key document and this may attract some criticism from Freeths [SPMs' lawyers]. If you disagree with this approach do let me know. Otherwise, we'll adopt this approach until such time as we sense the criticism is becoming serious.
[...]
Kind regards,
Amy"

Yeah. People need to go to jail.

And not the ones who did.

I haven't watched the TV Programme but I am watching the Inquiry (Live), probably more than I should, but it's compelling viewing. It's almost like a public evisceration so sometimes a bit painful to watch but the various explanations of I didn't know, it wasn't me, I don't the answer and today's favourite, "can you repeat the question" basically says I'm a complete idiot as their defence/explanations, etc.

I haven't watched the TV programme because I know I would find it too upsetting; not because I have any connections with any sub-postmasters but because I know what it's like to be steamrollered by 'professionals'. I've taken them on 3 separate times in my life - won 1, lost 1, drew on 1 but won on goal difference and took away the 'sporting' cup.

Only because they tried getting away with fucking me or my ds over, it wasn't my choice. I knew about the injustice of the Horizon Scandal for a few years before the Mr Bates programme but will watch it one day.

Lawyers withheld evidence in the Sally Clark case as well. I have no idea how they get away with it.

The Law Society Gazette is reporting on this. I think chickens might come home to roost for some of these lawyers. And rightly so. A solicitor's first duty is to the court. It's drummed into you on Day One. Or it used to be.

The writer of that email was very junior. Who was supervising her? In my day letters, the old school kind typed on paper and signed in ink, were read by a partner or at least a senior associate before they left the building.

The Sally Clark case was so very sad, and she was a solicitor! before her life got destroyed over and over and over again.

I'd have a teeny bit of respect for Rhodri if he at least admitted that it was his job to defend, under civil law, his employers (Post Office Ltd) to the hilt.

But he pretends to be/or actually is really stupid or has developed some condition that affects his ability to remember. In which case he shouldn't find any similar employment again, if any.

The writer of that email was very junior. Who was supervising her?

Amy Prime was being supervised by the much more experienced Andrew Parsons who controlled what went into the email. Andrew Parsons will be up in front of the Inquiry in May. Apparently there are drafts of the email.

Rodric Williams has another day of testimony tomorrow.

I know lawyers are sometimes guilty of withholding evidence that should be disclosed (as are the police), but in the Sally Clark case the failure was down to the prosecution's pathologist, Alan Williams, not the lawyers. Williams knew there was evidence that one of the children had died of natural causes but did not share that information with other medical witnesses, the police or the prosecution lawyers.