So, this post office palaver then

DustyMiller said:
Not wanting to stand up for Kier Starmer here, but the majority of the prosecutions were brought by the Post Office themselves and not the CPS, as the Post Office has the ability to bring private prosecutions like the RSPCA does.
Click to expand...


Yes but Starmer denied this happened on his watch initially and when later challenged for the ones that were on his watch refused to apologise for the resulting miscarriages of justice. The suggestion that the CPS are both infallible and not responsible for the veracity of the evidence they use is disturbing.


edit - @GordyR it's really not funny what these people went thorough and just because the CPS was only involved in a relatively small proportion of cases its entirely correct that they are scrutinised as well.
 
Last edited:
n111ck said:
Yes but Starmer denied this happened on his watch initially and when later challenged for the ones that were on his watch refused to apologise for the resulting miscarriages of justice. The suggestion that the CPS are both infallible and not responsible for the veracity of the evidence they use is disturbing.


edit - @GordyR it's really not funny what these people went thorough and just because the CPS was only involved in a relatively small proportion of cases its entirely correct that they are scrutinised as well.
Click to expand...
Totally agree that the CPS need to be scrutinised, and that those at the top need to be held to account, but the CPS cases are a drop in the ocean to the horrendous activities of the Post Office, and those they employed / paid to prosecute the PostMasters.

The Post Office held all the power in these prosecutions, they held all the evidence and only disclosed that evidence that helped their case, and from what it seems actively prevented access to evidence that was contrary to their prosecution. Under those limitations imposed by the Post Office the CPS was limited into what it could do.
 
I kinda knew about this when it was happening as I was seeing a girl who's parents was post masters in the village.
With it being such a small turn over, they was impacted but not as badly as some post masters.

I kinda jokely said... "Are you sure it's not the IT system, taking all the half pennies like in superman?" at the time...

I've kinda kept an eye on this since then but since nothing major was in the news thought it was mainly all done and dusted.

The person I saw on TV today looked like a right old timer bully, thank god I'm not the one dishing out punishment as it would be "Off with his head!!"
 
DustyMiller said:
Totally agree that the CPS need to be scrutinised, and that those at the top need to be held to account, but the CPS cases are a drop in the ocean to the horrendous activities of the Post Office, and those they employed / paid to prosecute the PostMasters.

The Post Office held all the power in these prosecutions, they held all the evidence and only disclosed that evidence that helped their case, and from what it seems actively prevented access to evidence that was contrary to their prosecution. Under those limitations imposed by the Post Office the CPS was limited into what it could do.
Click to expand...


Yes but that slightly sinister old bag that was running the PO has no plans to be the next Prime Minister so the CPS angle is also important..

The PO should def be stripped of those powers bizarre that they even had them..
 
DustyMiller said:
Not wanting to stand up for Kier Starmer here, but the majority of the prosecutions were brought by the Post Office themselves and not the CPS, as the Post Office has the ability to bring private prosecutions like the RSPCA does.
Click to expand...

I said before but would be interesting to know specifically why those few cases were referred and not prosecuted by the post office.
My suspicion is they actually uncovered, or thought they did, something dodgy outside their remit, and as such passed those cases to the CPS.

Have any of the cases referred specifically to the CPS as opposed to the post office been confirmed as dodgy?
 
JonRGV250 said:
Click to expand...

I mentioned earlier, but it should be remembered, my recollection was part of the reasoning for the updated post office systems was that the old mainly manual systems didnt really allow cost effective auditing.
Horizon was in effect supposed to be self auditting and hence very effective in rooting out crime.
There was undoubtedly some crime within the post office network.
The practically always is whenever cash is involved. At that point in time the post office was basically 100% cash based.
 
Davey said he was lied to. A lead investigator says he wasn't technical enough. Vennells says the lawyers lied to her.

So unbelievably fishy.
 
doodah said:
Davey said he was lied to. A lead investigator says he wasn't technical enough. Vennells says the lawyers lied to her.

So unbelievably fishy.
Click to expand...


Sounds more like Davey was just incompetent rather than corrupt but as he is so fond of demanding resignations he should be falling on his sword.

Although no one gives a toss about the Lib Dems so I think he'll get away with it...
 
n111ck said:
Yes but Starmer denied this happened on his watch initially and when later challenged for the ones that were on his watch refused to apologise for the resulting miscarriages of justice. The suggestion that the CPS are both infallible and not responsible for the veracity of the evidence they use is disturbing.


edit - @GordyR it's really not funny what these people went thorough and just because the CPS was only involved in a relatively small proportion of cases its entirely correct that they are scrutinised as well.
Click to expand...

Good grief man, just listen yourself. You're beyond ridiculous - embarrassingly so.

  • Our current Conservative Government awarded Paula Vennells a CBE in 2019, even after all of the details around the scandal had already emerged.
  • Our current Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, during his time as Chancellor of the Exchequer, oversaw the awarding of a further £4 billion worth government contracts to Fujitsu, even after all of the details around the scandal had already emerged.
If anyone should be apologising who hasn't already, it's the people involved in awarding her a CBE in 2019, or the people who continued to line the pockets of the company responsible with public money - In the full knowledge of what both the Post Office and Fujitsu had done.

Yet here you are, completely ignoring things like the above, things that happened with the full knowledge of the wrongdoing; while simultaneously screaming at the rooftops that you want an apology from the person who was the head of the CPS at the time, who's prosecutors did exactly what they were supposed to with the evidence they were given, by presenting it to a public jury; and they did so prior to any knowledge that there was a coverup by the Post Office or that they had withheld information.

Presumably you're expecting the members of the public who were jurors on the three CPS prosecuted cases who found them guilty, based upon the fraudulent evidence provided by the post office to apologise also?

It's beyond ludicrous, your feverish ranting seems completely unhinged and you appear to have some kind of bizarre derangement syndrome when it comes to anyone who wears a red tie.

More embarrassing still, is the fact that with your edit, you've just dishonestly attempted to paint my laughter at the sheer imbecilic-ness of the mental gymnastics you've displayed in your rabid frothing, as me laughing at the victims of the scandal; which is absolutely grotesque.

You're an embarrasment.
 
From watching the enquiry this afternoon, I have to say that their lead investigator sounds like a very dodgy and inept investigator, with a very narrow field of vision when it came to the investigations he was party to.
 
Aye. Catching up too. This Bradshaw clown is utterly reprehensible. Signing off drafts of statements, written by solicitors, where he clearly had no competence or expertise to validate or verify to then be used as his own witness testimony on criminal cases! WTF!
 
I’ve been following this for quite a few years and the PO are grade A idiots at saying one thing and doing another. On the one hand they are stating that people should appeal their convictions but on the other they are refusing and worse still using the allocated pot to take money from to say no!

You really couldn’t make this pile of do do up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom