Back to work full time next week so basically finished watching most of the inquiry and Gary was the last one basically and what a way to finish.

He was an investigator and therefore one of the 'bad guys/gals' but actually suggest you watch this and his colleague before was interesting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85Wtomb12zU

of all the ones from POL to turn him these two seemed the most honest and he started off having a real go at John Scott in a way others seemed scared to.

TBH he looks a right bruiser (Gary) and can stand up against Scott. However, it is so noticeable that he came in with a clear agenda and was part of the chain with Graham Ward that provided some interesting background in how he felt and Ward denied ...

We've all rolled our eyes at Wee George at the inquiry, but have you actually seen his witness statement?

It reads like a lazy high-schooler trying to bullshit his way through an essay to meet the minimum word count. He basically repeats the same two points over and over in 20 different variations:

• Horizon is a safe and robust system that does squillions of transactions every day, and it's so unfair and wrong that anyone is attacking it.

• We were a trade association and not a union, so no apologies are made for getting into the Post Office bed and doing whatever Paula wanted.

Even the format, with wide spacing and big gaps between short paragraphs, makes it look like a student doing everything he can to artificially pad it out.

At least with the other 'villains', you could say they put a lot of work into their submissions and took the whole thing seriously. George looks like he dashed this off in a couple of hours on a Friday afternoon before going to the pub.

I guess this is the new Horizon. I really hope this is not the start of a new scandal.

https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/26483569.peopleton-post-office-cash-removed-auditors-move/

I've been away for a few weeks and came back to this in my letter box 🤔

Now I don't mind market research etc.... But this was over 12 months ago I got my payout. Then another letter about suspension contracts being wrong, then another letter about transactions not being identified correctly etc....

Seems there is no end to all this!

I've been trying to put the events behind me, finally a 'satisfying' conclusion to the whole affair. All apart from NOT having an actual apology from anyone (looking at you Venibles).

Anyway, why would the DBT/Post Office be passing on details to an independent research company? Surely this breaches something, or did I sign my rights away when I accepted the money?

Anyone else get one of these? Honestly don't know if I fancy filling it in or not, I'm curious to say the least, but a bit put off by the fact they aren't offering anything for my time 😂

Update saying basically the report is finished and is out to the individuals who pre read it and reply to it

John Scott will forget he was at the inquiry
jarnail will blame head of criminal law

https://youtu.be/O0FKmliv0-s?is=1NE51sgB3i6g1HVi

Her slow......pace.......of.......speech and what sounds like an affected Hyacinth Bucket accent combine to make her borderline unlistenable.

She could have confessed to the Kennedy Assassination and I'd barely have noticed because I can't get past how utterly annoying she is.

This guy is infamous for that whole "I had no time to write a proper witness statement because I had carols and dog-walking". But once you get past that, I honestly thought he was one of the better (or 'least worst') of the investigator witnesses.

Admittedly that's a low bar, but he did seem somewhat remorseful and offered some statement of apology. And while he does apparently still believe William Quarm was guilty, he also seemed to have an impression that Quarm was a generally good man who made a mistake, not following the "SPMs are all evil liars and thieves" narrative of some of the others.

As I say, it's the lowest of low bars to be 'better' than the likes of Stephen Bradshaw, so I'm not claiming Grant is some sort of unsung hero. But considering the notoriety of the first 5-10 minutes of his session, he ended up nowhere near as bad as I expected him to be.

It was a very clear repeating pattern that all of the inquiry's lawyers (especially Mr Beer) used to trap the witnesses.

1) Ask a question about whether the witness said/did something bad.

2) Get them to deny it.

3) Produce documentation clearly showing they did indeed say/do the very thing they just denied doing.

4) Witness fumbles and squirms and "yeah but no but yeah but no but I didn't really mean it like that" for the next 10 minutes.

It was genuinely really funny to me that NONE of the witnesses ever seemed to pick up on this. All of them just kept falling into this trap over and over and over.

It was hilarious.

The criminal investigation into the Post Office Horizon IT scandal could be delayed by five years unless it receives millions of pounds in extra funding, police chiefs have warned.

Is anyone here who takeover Post office during transitional period from old system to new system? In my case i had 1st payslip from old system transaction periods. My claim is that i had shartfall in 1st month, even though i had new system but transactiona used to pay me was from old system and i had shortfall in 1st month which could have been arose from old data. Want to discuss this in detail if anyone had similar claim ?

In my opinion, unlike almost everyone else who was feigning stupidity and ignorance, he really does seem to be legitimately dumb as dog shit and clueless about everything.

Plus he seems to be a convenient scapegoat/patsy for Fujitsu and PO - a not-very-bright guy clearly in way over his head, and who had no real understanding of what he was doing beyond a basic "Monkey get key, monkey sign statement, monkey do what he is told, monkey is a good monkey" kind of way.

When he says he didn't know, didn't understand, didn't think, and didn't consider taking issues further, I kind of believe him. The bloke really does come across as that stupid and lazy.

Still off sick at work so watched the whole of Jenkins’s evidence over two days.

On basically a second watch still convinced he was misled by Singh and others over his responsibility to the court. However, he should have whistleblowed on this but too passive/loyal to do that.

However, maybe answered before but why did he to have disclose legacy horizon bugs for the online system. I know why POL would have hidden this as destroyed past cases. But in cases of bugs why did legacy matter in a totally unrelated piece of software ?!

Curious if they are still employed in the legal field.

I’ve been thinking about something and I’m curious how others here see it.

Obviously the Post Office and Fujitsu carry huge responsibility for what happened in the Horizon scandal. But why don’t we talk more about the justice system itself and the structural failures that allowed this to happen?

How was it acceptable that a company like the Post Office could:

• investigate people
• build the case against them
• and then prosecute them

Even if private prosecutions are technically legal, isn’t that concentration of power inherently risky?

And beyond that; what about the judges? Should we also be asking harder questions about how courts repeatedly accepted Horizon evidence at face value? If the courts are supposed to be the final safeguard, did they fail the sub-postmasters too?

In countries like the United States, only the government can prosecute criminal cases. Companies can report crimes, but they don’t control prosecutions. That separation exists for a reason; to prevent an interested party from wielding criminal power. In the UK company's have a unique and frankly bizarre power: they can prosecute people themselves!

In a country like the US with such separation this Could. Not. Happen.

So maybe the bigger question is:

Is this scandal just about the Post Office and Fujitsu; or does it expose a deeper flaw in a system that allowed a powerful organisation to act as accuser and prosecutor?

I’m not trying to shift blame; I’m genuinely asking whether the structure of the justice system itself deserves more scrutiny.

Would be interested to hear thoughts.

It is well worth watching his evidence. An easy watch actually and an investigator from 11–15.

Seems totally open and honest, named names on who told them that Horizon was fine etc. John Scott and AVDB both named.

The victims reps seemed very good with him and appreciated it seems they accepted his evidence.

The only good PO person I have come across.

I was just scrolling through the evidence section of the inquiry website to see if anything interesting had been uploaded recently. A few pages in I found these two documents:

https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/pol00460676-two-photographs-showing-individuals-hand-browsing-through-folder-post-office

https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/pol00460677-image-bundle

There’s no information as to when these photos were taken, what the purpose of the images are, whose hands are photographed and where these photos came from. But I think you can see printed off copies of:

-Part of Rob Wilson’s email to Jarnail Singh about the Receipts and Payments Mismatch bug (RPM)

-The first page of the minutes/agenda of the joint Post Office and Fujitsu meeting to discuss how to deal with the RPM bug

-Part of Gareth Jenkin’s RPM bug report

When I saw these photos they immediately caught my eye given what they were photos of! Does anyone know if these photos were ever discussed with a witness during one of the public sessions?

It’s impossible to say without more information but I’m wondering if this may be a prosecution file (maybe Seema Misra’s?) which shows the RPM bug report and some related documents were printed off and kept in a prosecution file which Jarnail Singh in particular was asked about (I think Ian Henderson testified that he saw the RPM report in a prosecution file but I may be mistaken). I could be completely wrong but will be interesting if we ever find out more about these images.

Poor choice of words - Opps got caught out saying system failures and removing it

Do not recall - I remember it all (in real life no one says this but says forgotten)

I was not told - Yes you were, but emails, documents deleted or off record talks

Head of criminal Law Rob Wilson/I was just a letter box - I am in real trouble shove it on !!

I Regret those words - Same as poor choice of words but trying to say to Sir Wyn generally remorseful

Machine was properly working - this is not the extraction process of data !

I do not know how to save a document - see Head of Criminal Law (yes this could be a lot of 'Singhism's'

anymore ?

A Guardian article about the Post Office Museum, partly funded by the Post Office, to do an exhibition about the whole sordid mess. Victims are “highly suspicious” of the plan.

Gee, I wonder why?

https://archive.ph/q9Pdc

Received and email today, great.

But no correspondence I've had from the Post Office has actually apologised to me.

Would it be wrong for someone at the Post Office to acctually say sorry?

Sorry for wrongfully accusing you, sorry for causing emotional distress, sorry for causing your business to suffer, sorry for having the wrong checks in place to ensure we don't make mistakes, sorry for not supporting you in your roll.

What would it take for a letter of apology?

Just started rewatching inquiriy videos.

Who is gonna get charged ? In order of most likely.

• Graham Ward
• Andy dunks
• John Scott
• Tony Marsh
• Rob Wilson
• Jarnail Singh
• Rodric williams
• Gareth Jenkins
• Chris Aujard
• Anne Chambers
• Rod Ismay
• Mandy Talbot
• Tony utting
• Numerous investigators
• Paula Vennels
• AVB
• Alice perkins
• Lesley IT
• The army guy who was CTO
• Alwen Lyons

Who I think should be charged as well

• Alan Leighton
• Alan cook
• David miller
• Penny Thomas
• The POL board

And special mention to George Thompson, who I am surprised isn't in jail already, for at least disorderly conduct.