Paula Vennels being questioned at the Post Office Inquiry, followed by others - thread 2

[nauticant]

A continuation of the discussion started by@Sausagenbaconhere:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5080262-to-enjoy-hearing-paula-vennels-being-taken-apart

Paula Vennells' 3 days of evidence ends today but there are more hearings coming up and we can discuss those too.

When the hearings are going on, live-streaming can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/@postofficehorizonitinquiry947/featured

All of the previous hearings can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/@postofficehorizonitinquiry947/videos

Change in tempo between lawyers has worked well, I think.

Yy to all those saying Moloney's gentle speech and accent were very lulling... until the knife flicked open.

True, an excellent way to end it.

Indeed clever staging and absolutely planned with deadly precision. All accompanied with the wrongly convicted postwoman sitting by his side.

Ending with that horrible email was a triumph. I'm actually astonished that she ever committed those comments to an email it's quite extraordinary.

Oh, come come, you do yourself a disservice. If you're capable of accomplishing some very poor multitasking then you have a useful skill set. Have you ever considered a CEO role? [head tilt]

PV is off to the Priory no doubt to recover from her terrible ordeal.

Sadly it's more likely that she's off to sit on her hoard of gold like Smaug.

Off to prison if there is any real justice. ⚖️

But he didn’t steal it. When it goes to court, it’s clear he didn’t steal it. So how can he be penalised on the same way as if he had?

She should have been called Paula Venal.

I expect she’ll become a nun.

So how can he be penalised on the same way as if he had?

This point was touched on by one of the Lawyers - the revised Contracts were unfair, and had a clause which said that any lose incurred was the SPMs responsibility. Vennells didn't step in to question the terms of the Contracts - she waffled on about how clauses had been added to Contracts over the years. There was also a suggestion by the lawyer that they SPMs had been more or less forced to sign them, although that point wasn't fully clear to me.

It wasn't fully touched on either if at all, that if the PO had insisted that Fujistu fixed the bugs, that would also involve correcting any erroneous transactions cause by their system. The SPMs were also pressurised into admitting liability when they knew that they were innocent.

In all, it presents the senior management in a deplorable light, which to me is made much worse by the vastly inflated salaries that the got paid.

One thing I'm confused about as a line of questioning was when the tone of one of PV's emails, accidentally misdirected, was identified as being "cross". Why was that a bad thing?

It sounds like she had good reason to be cross about delays, and IMO she could have done with taking a much harder tone, and being much less worried about being seen to be cross, throughout her tenure! She seems to always have been worried about being pleasant and not rocking the boat. Sometimes as a boss it's ok to be cross, if an error has been made, and to express that irritation to underline the severity of the situation!

Well, if this inquiry is anything to go by, the Thirlwell Inquiry will be compelling viewing, can't wait to see those merry-go-round NHS career managers and their mates being eviscerated. It is just a shame people needed to die for this cabal of people to be brought to account.

One thing I'm confused about as a line of questioning was when the tone of one of PV's emails, accidentally misdirected, was identified as being "cross". Why was that a bad thing?

Mr Moloney invited Vennells to contradict how he read out the email and to go on about how nice she was in her interactions, and how she wrote lovely emails being kind to people.

This meant that when he read out her vile hatchet job of Jo Hamilton email it showed her up as someone who would actively seek to mislead the Inquiry and was a complete hypocrite. In other words: Do not believe what this woman says, no matter how nicely she dresses it up. She is not a nice and kind person.

Nick Wallis' report on how it went for Vennells yesterday:

https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/vennells-day-2-dispatches-from-the-bunker/

laclochette · Today 16:29
One thing I'm confused about as a line of questioning was when the tone of one of PV's emails, accidentally misdirected, was identified as being "cross". Why was that a bad thing?

Yeah, that was a really weird "correction" by Vennells - and such an insight!

I speak as someone who embarrassingly frequently sends follow-ups saying, "Sorry, I've just re-read my last email to you. That was unduly blunt, and I do apologise."

I don't wag my finger at people for potentially misunderstanding tone – it's not that they misunderstood my tone, it's that my tone was Wrong. I wrote it, I own the mistake. Even if they hadn't minded the tone.

I also don't pick and choose who I apologise to! Vennells only apologised for tone because the Wrong Person got the email.

She's clearly very keen to protect her priestly Paula persona in front of certain people. Her inner team of underlings get to see what's behind the mask.

[ETA post I was replying to]

I think the point he was trying to show is that she was an angry, spiteful and vindictive woman.

The wholesome, kind, thoughtful and jolly Paula Vennels who was a committed and upstanding member church and society was just a front.

I was struck by the way she never missed the chance to praise herself and her values. Even when presented with that ghastly email, she still maintained that it was a "mistake" and didn't align with her true values. It was as if someone else had written it.

As someone else said, religious people often have a lot vested in the fact that they are "good".

I can imagine people who dealt with her at public events may well find her approachable, engaging and interested. That woman is just an act.

The people who work with her day to day will quickly start to see the real Paula Vennels. That is the woman who wrote those horrible emails, who refuses to accept responsibility for her actions, who blames other people for their failings and, I suspect, has an absolutely foul temper. The only failings that she can see in herself is that she is "too kind", "too understanding", "too patient".

I've met religious people who are genuinely good people and if they have one thing in common, it's that they don't have the need to go around telling everyone how good they are.

Great analysis. I'm just rewatching the Moloney questioning. He really was a genius at how he started with 'just three questions', his delivery quiet and non-threatening, lulling her into a false sense of security, then in the end completely nailing her. The man's a viper! 👊

Nick Wallis actually wrote a second blog post about yesterday: https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/vennells-day-2-cover-up-finally-acknowledged/

I agree. I am not religious bu was educated in a schools that were very strongly associated with the church. Most people with true religious convictions are absolutely fine. That's not really what I'm talking about here.

To be honest, I've met too many Paula Vennels in my career. Now retired but watching the enquiry has helped me understand the culture I worked in.

Paula Venom, I reckon.

"I don't think I ever sent emails in the way that you read it." He set the trap beautifully and she fell right in! These guys are impressive AF!

Thanks to all who clarified for me! I see the point now about how he wanted to get her to say she was only ever a nice person and then come in later with her horrid triumphalist email (although I think you can be cross in emails without that making you the sort of person who crows triumphantly about others' misfortunes).

I'd have much more respect for her if she had just said, I sounded cross because I am cross. This is unacceptable and I am angry about it and it needs to be actions. (Personally I think it's fine to be cross in emails. God knows I've got enough cross emails from CEOs! And it made us sit up and sort our shit out. Not about scandalous coverups I hasten to add.)

To me what that corrective comment about "I don't mean to sound cross" revealed is that she is someone who was overly concerned about appearing - APPEARING - nothing but sweetness and moral light.

Wild idea I know, but Paula Vennels is coming over so utterly clueless that I'm starting to wonder if she might just be a scapegoat for much bigger people in the organisation?