I've known people who make accusations and smears and falsely claim they are justified by a press release which exists only In their imagination.
Did you ever apologise for doing that?
Mr Bates and the post office
- Thread starter gas112
- Start date
I've known people who make accusations and smears and falsely claim they are justified by a press release which exists only In their imagination.
Did you ever apologise for doing that?
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 13,197
- Reaction score
- 1,044
- Country
But he has reacted before the enquiry has finalised.
Or did something make him think it would be good to act?
Either way it's been known about for years. Want to argue over how many years, but support the sudden action ?
It's a legal fiction lawyers invented to make money from suckers like Brigadier.
There must be a way, always reading of claims brought decades after the event
Sponsored Links
the miscarriage of justice occurs at the time somebody is wrongly imprisoned.
not when the it’s proven in court.
It is state owned.
therefore the govt did everything they could to keep a lid on thi….going back to around 2008
The reason for the term "legal person" is that some legal persons are not people: companies and corporations are "persons" legally speaking (they can legally do most of the things an ordinary person can do), but they are not people in a literal sense.
npr.org
nothing to do with the point Brigadier or myself was making
It gets worse
"Panorama journalists Matt Bardo and Tim Robinson were invited to Post Office HQ for an on-the-record briefing about the Horizon system.
Network manager Angela van den Bogerd joined PR boss Mark Davies and another senior manager, Patrick Bourke.
Ms van den Bogerd insisted nobody could change the sub-postmasters' accounts without their knowledge.
She said any alterations "would leave a footprint. And that's the important bit."
Matt Bardo asked: "So in sum, it is not now and never has been possible for anybody from Post Office or Fujitsu to interfere with transactions, without the clear knowledge of the sub-postmaster?"
Mr Bourke said: "It is 100% true to say we can't change, alter, modify, existing transaction data, so the integrity is 100% preserved."
"And that's true now and has been for the duration of the system?" Mr Bardo asked. "Yeah," said Ms van den Bogerd.
That wasn't true. Not then, and not for the duration of the system."
Post Office lied and threatened BBC over Horizon whistleblower
The firm smeared postmasters in a failed bid to suppress evidence of their innocence, the BBC reveals.
www.bbc.co.uk
"Panorama journalists Matt Bardo and Tim Robinson were invited to Post Office HQ for an on-the-record briefing about the Horizon system.
Network manager Angela van den Bogerd joined PR boss Mark Davies and another senior manager, Patrick Bourke.
Ms van den Bogerd insisted nobody could change the sub-postmasters' accounts without their knowledge.
She said any alterations "would leave a footprint. And that's the important bit."
Matt Bardo asked: "So in sum, it is not now and never has been possible for anybody from Post Office or Fujitsu to interfere with transactions, without the clear knowledge of the sub-postmaster?"
Mr Bourke said: "It is 100% true to say we can't change, alter, modify, existing transaction data, so the integrity is 100% preserved."
"And that's true now and has been for the duration of the system?" Mr Bardo asked. "Yeah," said Ms van den Bogerd.
That wasn't true. Not then, and not for the duration of the system."
Last edited:
"A report by consultants Ernst and Young sent to Post Office directors in 2011 warned that Fujitsu staff had "unrestricted access" to sub-postmasters' accounts, that "may lead to the processing of unauthorised or erroneous transactions".
The misleading on-the-record briefing was just the first step in the Post Office's onslaught to frustrate the 2015 Panorama investigation.
When it learned the names of experts Panorama was interviewing, lawyers and senior managers sent them intimidating letters.
Ian Henderson, from the independent forensic accountants Second Sight, had uncovered other evidence of miscarriages of justice at the Post Office. He was warned he did not have the legal expertise to comment on prosecutions and the Post Office threatened to sue him.
"If your statements go as far as to harm Post Office's reputation then we may have to take even more serious action in order to protect our brand," he was told. "For the avoidance of doubt, Post Office does not condone you speaking to Panorama and all our legal rights are fully reserved."
To protect the whistleblower from similar correspondence, the Panorama team did not tell the Post Office Richard Roll's name. Instead, the journalists said they had spoken to a Fujitsu insider, and outlined the allegations he was making."
The misleading on-the-record briefing was just the first step in the Post Office's onslaught to frustrate the 2015 Panorama investigation.
When it learned the names of experts Panorama was interviewing, lawyers and senior managers sent them intimidating letters.
Ian Henderson, from the independent forensic accountants Second Sight, had uncovered other evidence of miscarriages of justice at the Post Office. He was warned he did not have the legal expertise to comment on prosecutions and the Post Office threatened to sue him.
"If your statements go as far as to harm Post Office's reputation then we may have to take even more serious action in order to protect our brand," he was told. "For the avoidance of doubt, Post Office does not condone you speaking to Panorama and all our legal rights are fully reserved."
To protect the whistleblower from similar correspondence, the Panorama team did not tell the Post Office Richard Roll's name. Instead, the journalists said they had spoken to a Fujitsu insider, and outlined the allegations he was making."
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,123
- Reaction score
- 2,743
- Country
And this is the problem with LIPs, they ask the wrong questions. Its easy for van den Bogerd to say there was no remote access or changes to the system would leave a trail, but an experience litigator will ask questions about the audit trail, access to these logs, separation of duties etc etc.
As any half trained tape monkey will know, there are many ways to change data on a system. Modern IT systems have separate audit databases "audit vaults" and the system admins have no access to that data. Attempts to access and change data will be logged. If the LIP asks question at this level, they establish doubt that the audit trail is real and tamper proof, if no such controls exist. But they aren't experts in IT.
As any half trained tape monkey will know, there are many ways to change data on a system. Modern IT systems have separate audit databases "audit vaults" and the system admins have no access to that data. Attempts to access and change data will be logged. If the LIP asks question at this level, they establish doubt that the audit trail is real and tamper proof, if no such controls exist. But they aren't experts in IT.
and how do we know the conviction is wrong at the time? think it through.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,123
- Reaction score
- 2,743
- Country
No - its 6 years, there could be angle of deception, but its weak, because it appears that the deception was largely the PO.
the term is 'pwned' and since you haven't come up with any argument you are still incorrect.Ad hominem, because you've been thoroughly owned.
Keep on truckin'.
Sponsored Links
