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

It hasn't. No suicide in custody has led to a corporate manslaughter charge. No employers have been prosecuted following an employee suicide. The only suicide-related cases of which I am aware are NHS trusts being prosecuted after suicides by inpatients on psychiatric wards. Maybe it should be different, but this is where we are at the moment.

Can any action be taken against Vennells for Dereliction of duty as CEO? Because her whole testimony appears to be that of she didn't know, she didn't question, which surely she should have done.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uB3-hID1-aw

This guy is often pretty good at explaining legal things....

Thankyou for this thread and the link . I managed to watch the first link for a couple of hours . Could someone in the know please tell me how to watch the whole enquiry and will the enquiry continue and when.?

Thankyou

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

Upcoming witnesses:

https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/phase-5-and-6-timetable

The victim list goes wider. The knock on effects from the loss of good character. No longer a good character witness or sponsor for visa applications. Some people have been deported as a result.

The loss of home and income impacts the whole family.

The Post Office people involved didn't care. Even when they knew their evidence was false they doubled down on it.

I couldn’t agree more.

I’ve only just started watching the live streaming and watched the PV sessions, but have subsequently read far more about the others involved and the Simon Clark advice.

I can’t imagine what some of those wrongly convicted must be feeling when they are hearing the endless “I can’t recall”. For those who’ve been directly affected and had their lives ruined to then see these major players desperately trying to not incriminate themselves by all manner of avoidance just adds to their injustice in this awful travesty

Not to mention those that were /arewaiting for their convictions to be overturned. There was a poor guy on the news a while ago who struggled to find employment due to his 'conviction' and having a criminal record. He said even things like getting insurance could be affected. Absolutely disgraceful.

I think that the whole shoddy crowd should give their bonuses back and, if the evidence is there (which it seems to be) be prosecuted and justice should be served.

But…. I do have some sympathy with the ‘I do not recall’ responses. I very much doubt I would remember e mails that I sent more than a decade ago.

Can I ask this about criminal activity

https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/vennells-day-2-cover-up-finally-acknowledged/

in this blog it says the head of legal, Hugh Flemington, would give “signals” to the Criminal Case Review Board (or whatever it’s called).
For me, this is sufficient evidence that he knew the convictions didn’t stand up, and he wanted to delay or undermine attempts to put the miscarriages of justice right.

Would that be enough in and of itself to lead to a prosecution of perverting the course of justice?

10 years ago I was working for a company that had a terrible tech system and when I joined the company, not particularly having any tech expertise, I asked a lot of relevant questions and significantly improved matters. I wouldn’t remember individual emails but I would remember clearly what I had been trying to do and the problems we were facing and not make vague ‘i can’t recall’ ‘nobody told me’ statements. And if put on the stand I would answer clearly and not add insult to injury by not even trying to answer. If she’s not been working except on this inquiry (as she states) it beggars belief that she hasn’t refreshed her memory on some of these details before taking the stand. She’s a disgrace to herself, let alone anyone else.

That isn't a criminal offence. However, she could possibly face a charge of misfeasance in public office, which is similar.

That isn't a criminal offence. However, she could possibly face a charge of misfeasance in public office, which is similar.

One thing which has been puzzling me - the phantom missing money went into suspense accounts, which in due time the PO pocketed as profit. What happened to the money that so many SPMs actually paid over? Did that also go towards profits? The CEO and other high ranking employees' handsome bonuses were partly rewarded on the basis of profits made. In which case weren't those in receipt of bonuses guilty of receiving money gained as a result of what they supposedly believed was genuine crime?

Post Office believed the money they extracted from subpostmasters was money they legitimately owed Post Office so yes, it contributed to Post Office's profits. However, trying to make that somehow into Post Office employees being guilty of receiving the proceeds of crime won't wash. If it did, no organisation could ever recover money stolen from it. You are only guilty of receiving the proceeds of crime if you are not the rightful owner of the money.

You are only guilty of receiving the proceeds of crime if you are not the rightful owner of the money.

But at the point that they began to realise that the convictions were unsound but yet still took bonuses, would it not be questionable whether they were entitled to those bonuses?

Morally, yes. But that won't give rise to a criminal conviction.

Moral values seemed to be in short supply in the higher echelons of the PO.

Surely there would have been a discrepancy between the balances in the horizon system and the PO bank account. The bank account might have shown a higher amount unless I'm being a bit dense. I probably am so will wait for someone cleverer than me to explain the technicalities.

How much did the PO pay their 'clever accountants'?

Yes apparently they had lots of extra money they couldn’t account for so kept it for 3 years (rolling presumably) in a separate account and then absorbed it into their profits. All money from the spms.

I believe nick Wallis has written about it on his blog postofficescandal.uk.

Apparently they weren’t much motivated to investigate the source of the extra money

I suppose technically this counts as ‘false accounting’, which is ironic 😑

But they had the same money twice - they got sub postmasters to repay sums that were already sitting in the PO's own accounts. Are they just allowed to keep money they cannot account for and pay bonuses to their senior management on the basis of increased "profits"? ... then prosecuted people to make them pay twice

.... if the bank pays £1,000,000 into my account can I just keep it?

The original sums didn't exist, they were computer generated errors.

But otherwise, I think I was asking the same thing. Once they knew that the Horizon system was generating these errors and innocent people were being forced to pay up, then to me it would appear that they were doing something criminal, they were extorting money.

I also wonder about the people who paid over sums of money but weren't prosecuted, and coerced into paying. Are they going to get compensation. They are still victims.

The key is "When they knew" though, and this is why these people are having such astonishing lapses of memory, and when confronted by documentary evidence say that it doesn't mean what the words say.

That's fine for Alice in Wonderland, but that is fiction. This was people's lives and livelihoods.

Which firm of accountants did the PO use?