To be absolutely aghast after watching Mr Bates v the Post Office

[Vistada]

I binged all of this in one go, no spoilers (although the current state of play is easily findable...)

AIBU to be absolutely aghast that this happened, and happened for so long.
Absolutely dystopian!

Personally I think it's time that, for anything more compelx than "he punched me in the nose m'lud" there should be professional jurors

I absolutely get the principle, but that may be a very risky road to travel given that such jurors would probably have to be public employees, trained in whatever the current "rightthink" happens to be

I'd almost rather see some sort of test of reasoning/understanding included in the present system, but realise that would be fraught with complications too

Unfortunately, its a bit like our system of government. It is the worst system except all the others that have been tried throughout history.

Oh interesting, I didn’t know that. I wonder how they feel now?

They were probably a bunch of thick racist misogynists.

I’m actually listening at the moment to the enquiry testimony of the PO in-house solicitor and external barrister who prosecuted her. It’s eye-opening stuff.

Thanks. I just don’t get how the post office has the power to prosecute people. It seems so wrong.

How many went before an actual court and were these cases not publicized?!

The early cases were publicised, yes, as with any other crime - so when people were found guilty it was in the local paper.

It took time for the victims to gather together and start to publicise the wider issue, there were some early articles in Computer Weekly and Private Eye. Computer Weekly first published in 2009?

Many organisations have the power to bring a prosecution. Personally I think that is fine if there are appropriate checks and balances and things are done properly - I am not in favour of their right to bring a prosecution being removed, as that will end up in more crime going unprosecuted, but I think there should be real scrutiny of which cases are taken forwards (as with the police and CPS now).

IMO the issue is not Post Office's right to pursue prosecution, but the way it was done, the lack of oversight of decisions, the cover up, the lack of interest from the government, the lack of interest from the media etc.

All of this

Each individual was prosecuted separately and as they were spread out geographically and this was the early days of internet use it took a while for people to realise they weren't the only one.

My friend's dad's case was certainly reported the local press at the time, as were many others.

as they were spread out geographically and this was the early days of internet use it took a while for people to realise they weren't the only one.

In sheer numbers, given the size of the UK, they still represent a small proportion of post offices.

Of course at an individual level it was a staggering, egregious situation to find oneself in.

The Times has been republishing interviews from 2020 on, conducted with affected postmasters. Many of those stories formed the basis of the drama. There was little political or public reaction to the interviews - it really has been the drama series that has captured the public imagination & finally, shamefully belatedly, the politicians.

@Everanewbie most countries don't use the jury system. Is the criminal justice system in say, Germany, or Switzerland less fair as a result?

@puncheur I can't say I know anything about these systems, and even the UK beyond I suppose common knowledge of a moderately informed layperson. But it just doesn't seem right that a jury of random people with no prior knowledge of computers, accounting etc. could possibly grasp the evidence enough to send someone to prison.

i would rather her cbe have been stripped rather than her giving it back like shes some saint

just seen on my local news that they sent apregnant woman to jail over this scandal fucking pregnant-its bloody disgusting

therewasno jury afaik just a judge (s)

A huge investigation is needed, and urgent reparation to the postmaster's whose lives were ruined. But let's not over simplify the factors that led to this by putting it all on one woman's shoulders

There is a statutory enquiry underway right now.

I don't understand the compensation offers and people saying it doesn't cover their losses. Surely everyone should be paid back what was wrongly paid to the PO, and any compensation should be on top of that?

How stupid do you have to be, though, to re-mortgage your house, and drain your savings to pay money you don't owe to your employer?

The amounts wrongly paid 'back' to the PO is such a small part, there's:
-Loss of earnings when contract terminated
-Loss of investment in premises & lease costs
-Costs incurred in fighting the accusations
-Loss of home/pension/other as a result of loss of income
-Loss of reputation
-Compensation for the experience

Don't think you're looking at this the right way, really.

The people affected are not stupid, they were in a very stressful situation at risk of losing their business and threatened with prison.

Some people refused to pay and were prosecuted.

Also, it’s worth noting that postmasters aren’t employees. They are self employed franchises. So it’s their whole businesses/retail at stake, not just a job.

In sheer numbers, given the size of the UK, they still represent a small proportion of post offices.

You’re forgetting that this went much wider than the 700 odd SPMs that were prosecuted. There were SPMs that paid money ‘back’ on ‘shortfalls’ who weren’t prosecuted. Although they don’t have a criminal conviction (like Alan Bates), they were still effectively stolen from. Many gave up their PO counters rather than continue to suffer the losses.

Then there were individual staff, employed locally by SPMs, who were the subject of suspicion when losses were incurred and resigned because, (although innocent), they realised they weren’t trusted. In some cases they’d have been accused of taking money by SPMs off the back of what the PO was telling them.

On top of that, the PO ran a trial of the first version of Horizon before they rolled it out nationally. Discrepancies were seen then, and at least two SPMs were prosecuted for theft / false accounting, and many others forced to make up their non-existent shortfalls. They’re not included in the current investigation / numbers being quoted either.

How stupid do you have to be, peakygold, to fail to understand the pressure and threats to which those who did re-mortgage, etc. were exposed? If I had the power to prosecute you for false accounting, fraud, other assorted criminal acts and I could provide the evidence. You were unable to prove your innocence. Offering you jail or paying the debt, what would you choose? Understand that you're not remotely stupid so spending 3 years in the nick would have been your choice? Clever.

Absolutely, and thanks for mentioning it.

I mean this only in terms of the wider public's knowledge. Overall, even including the figures you provide, given the size of the UK, it's easy (relatively so) for the cases to be unnoticed / hidden (along with the strenuous efforts of the PO to make it so).

I say that in comparison with Ireland, where I am, in terms of the geographical size.

So discrepancies occurred during a system TRIAL when, by definition surely, they could not be sure the system was working perfectly, yet people were still successfully prosecuted?!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67954810?xtor=AL-72-%5Bpartner%5D-%5Bbbc.news.twitter%5D-%5Bheadline%5D-%5Bnews%5D-%5Bbizdev%5D-%5Bisapi%5D&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_link_origin=BBCPolitics&at_medium=social&at_format=link&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_type=web_link&at_link_id=6A4DE90E-B1E5-11EE-B32E-6D66D0B4AF07&at_campaign=Social_Flow