By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Scary how they can literally defend the indefensible, on legal advice, with scant regard for the people being fcked over. When people end up committing suicide then it all becomes a whole new level of evil.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 12:33 - Jan 8 by bluelagos
So looking forward there's three aspects.
1. Quashing all the convictions and giving people back their good name. 2. Suitable compensation 3. Holding those who messed up to account.
The first one I think they'll get right. Might take a while (does it ever) but there is some momentum here.
Second one - not convinced. How do you compensate someone for their tarnished reputation, for the years where they didn't run a business, for time in jail. Look at the compensation for Windrush victims - they are making a right balls up. Or the blood scandal? They'll balls it up cos they are incompetent or just trying to save money? Who knows but we are sh1t at this as a country.
Third one - lols. The idea that there are going to be people in jail (which is the only form of true justice) - for every one of them who lied under oath, who pushed for prosecutions knowing the system had question marks over it...yeah right. They might do a corporate prosecution but that's about it (for me)
Sounds about right to me
[EDIT - What you say will happen, not that it is any way fair/right]
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 11:08 - Jan 8 by DanTheMan
If anyone is interested in what went wrong from a technical perspective, there's a good run down here, explained in a way that you shouldn't need any prior knowledge of computing to understand.
What's astounding to me is how this wasn't spotted for so long in the first place, it's absolutely basic stuff when handling money.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 12:13 - Jan 8 by itfcjoe
I've not watched yet as been away, but have followed case via the BBC podcast and it really is one of the most shocking situations you can think of. The hiding the fact that lots of people were having the same issue, and going after people who were pillars of the community when they knew damn well it was their systems failing is just beyond the pale.
It sounds as though this is helping shine a light on it, and people will be punished now - but it's far too late for all the people involved, especially those no longer with us - justice delayed is justice denied
That whole line of theirs telling each individual SPM "you're the only one" was downright mental torture which the PO knowingly maintained for years. Absolute monsters in charge.
It wasn't just those pillars of the community feeling the effects but their families too - their elderly parents re-mortgaging or selling their homes to help cover the losses; their kids bullied at school etc. - at least one set of kids had to move school.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 12:33 - Jan 8 by bluelagos
So looking forward there's three aspects.
1. Quashing all the convictions and giving people back their good name. 2. Suitable compensation 3. Holding those who messed up to account.
The first one I think they'll get right. Might take a while (does it ever) but there is some momentum here.
Second one - not convinced. How do you compensate someone for their tarnished reputation, for the years where they didn't run a business, for time in jail. Look at the compensation for Windrush victims - they are making a right balls up. Or the blood scandal? They'll balls it up cos they are incompetent or just trying to save money? Who knows but we are sh1t at this as a country.
Third one - lols. The idea that there are going to be people in jail (which is the only form of true justice) - for every one of them who lied under oath, who pushed for prosecutions knowing the system had question marks over it...yeah right. They might do a corporate prosecution but that's about it (for me)
Re. point 3) I think this whole saga is shameful and should bring about new legislation. Such as the Enron scandal in the US which brought about new legislation (Sarbanes-Oxley Act or S-Ox), and new penalties where organisations fail to put in place proper controls to prevent wrongdoing/ misreport or (crucially here) deliberately obstruct investigations. Under S-Ox legislation, executives can face 20 years in clink and huge fines.
"A+++++", "Great Comms, would recommend", "Thank you, the 12 inch black mamba is just perfect" - Ebay.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 12:05 - Jan 8 by blueasfook
To me, the biggest failure was the POs unerring faith in Horizon and their insistence that the system was reporting correctly. The whole ethos of "the system is correct" was wrong. I work with Financial systems myself and if something goes wrong, the knee jerk reaction is NOT to suspect fraud but investigate the trail and see where the discrepancy is. The PO's default was to go after the Postmaster and accuse them of fraud.
It also seems incredible that no one thought, 'Hang on, an awful lot of our previously upstanding sub-postmasters now appear to be fraudsters'. Presumably, there were those that did, but either through incompetence or overconfidence in the system didn't push the issue.
1
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 13:48 - Jan 8 with 1446 views
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 12:05 - Jan 8 by blueasfook
To me, the biggest failure was the POs unerring faith in Horizon and their insistence that the system was reporting correctly. The whole ethos of "the system is correct" was wrong. I work with Financial systems myself and if something goes wrong, the knee jerk reaction is NOT to suspect fraud but investigate the trail and see where the discrepancy is. The PO's default was to go after the Postmaster and accuse them of fraud.
i'm quite surprised you can get a criminal conviction just on the basis of a software discrepancy without needing to demonstrate exactly what acts actually led to the money being taken out of the system.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
1
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 14:47 - Jan 8 with 1380 views
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 13:41 - Jan 8 by PhilTWTD
It also seems incredible that no one thought, 'Hang on, an awful lot of our previously upstanding sub-postmasters now appear to be fraudsters'. Presumably, there were those that did, but either through incompetence or overconfidence in the system didn't push the issue.
Yes exactly. I am sure that senior execs at the PO were aware of the system issues and there was a deliberate cover up - examples being the denial that remote access to branches was possible, call centre staff being instructed to tell individual postmasters that they were the "only ones" experiencing issues, the whistleblower from Fujitsu who admitted that Fujitsu staff were going in at branch level and altering accounting data. It beggars belief though that the preferred option rather than face up to the system issues was to prosecute innocent people. I think the PO has far too much power in being able to bring about their own prosecutions, and they certainly abused those powers.
"A+++++", "Great Comms, would recommend", "Thank you, the 12 inch black mamba is just perfect" - Ebay.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 13:48 - Jan 8 by lowhouseblue
i'm quite surprised you can get a criminal conviction just on the basis of a software discrepancy without needing to demonstrate exactly what acts actually led to the money being taken out of the system.
That is one of my points above. Why aren't the police also investigating the judge at the original Jo Hamilton case (for example). Clearly there wasn't any evidence but the trial judge let in continue. Judges and the legal processes need to be investigated, the judge failed in doing their job correctly.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 14:47 - Jan 8 by blueasfook
Yes exactly. I am sure that senior execs at the PO were aware of the system issues and there was a deliberate cover up - examples being the denial that remote access to branches was possible, call centre staff being instructed to tell individual postmasters that they were the "only ones" experiencing issues, the whistleblower from Fujitsu who admitted that Fujitsu staff were going in at branch level and altering accounting data. It beggars belief though that the preferred option rather than face up to the system issues was to prosecute innocent people. I think the PO has far too much power in being able to bring about their own prosecutions, and they certainly abused those powers.
In the program I got the impression re the remote access it was cunning answering of the question, ie the PO wasn't able to remote access, only Fujitsu could. Hence when the PO was asked 'can you remote access' they kept saying No, because technically that was correct.
1
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:03 - Jan 8 with 1337 views
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 14:57 - Jan 8 by BloomBlue
In the program I got the impression re the remote access it was cunning answering of the question, ie the PO wasn't able to remote access, only Fujitsu could. Hence when the PO was asked 'can you remote access' they kept saying No, because technically that was correct.
Yes maybe. But then the remote access thing is only a small part of the huge complicit cover up.
"A+++++", "Great Comms, would recommend", "Thank you, the 12 inch black mamba is just perfect" - Ebay.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 14:53 - Jan 8 by BloomBlue
That is one of my points above. Why aren't the police also investigating the judge at the original Jo Hamilton case (for example). Clearly there wasn't any evidence but the trial judge let in continue. Judges and the legal processes need to be investigated, the judge failed in doing their job correctly.
They were essentially Kangaroo courts where there was a low burden of proof. The PO knew this hence their tendency to bully postmasters into accepting a lesser charge of false accounting rather than theft. Most probably just pleaded guilty believing they'd likely avoid prison.
[Post edited 8 Jan 2024 15:07]
"A+++++", "Great Comms, would recommend", "Thank you, the 12 inch black mamba is just perfect" - Ebay.
I couldn't fin this on ITV's player, so watched the Panorama instead. Absolutely shocking on so many levels - feels like so many people are complicit and in a just world, ought to be charged with criminal offences if at all possible.
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 11:08 - Jan 8 by DanTheMan
If anyone is interested in what went wrong from a technical perspective, there's a good run down here, explained in a way that you shouldn't need any prior knowledge of computing to understand.
What's astounding to me is how this wasn't spotted for so long in the first place, it's absolutely basic stuff when handling money.
Thanks for sharing this - very helpful explanation. I would have thought some of these issues would have been able to have been replicated in a test environment and that, as issues began to be reported internally, that would have been the first thing that would have been tried to understand what was going on. Haven't watched the programme yet but will certainly do so.
0
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:44 - Jan 8 with 1278 views
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:07 - Jan 8 by blueasfook
They were essentially Kangaroo courts where there was a low burden of proof. The PO knew this hence their tendency to bully postmasters into accepting a lesser charge of false accounting rather than theft. Most probably just pleaded guilty believing they'd likely avoid prison.
[Post edited 8 Jan 2024 15:07]
Technically they were probably guilty of false accounting, as I understand it, because they signed off accounts they knew to be incorrect, or rather they were bullied into signing off accounts they knew to be incorrect and were incorrect due to the Horizon system rather than any of their wrongdoing. The fact that none of them seemed to be living particularly lavish lifestyles or were living beyond their means ought to have been another red flag.
0
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:46 - Jan 8 with 1275 views
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:44 - Jan 8 by PhilTWTD
Technically they were probably guilty of false accounting, as I understand it, because they signed off accounts they knew to be incorrect, or rather they were bullied into signing off accounts they knew to be incorrect and were incorrect due to the Horizon system rather than any of their wrongdoing. The fact that none of them seemed to be living particularly lavish lifestyles or were living beyond their means ought to have been another red flag.
True. If you put your name to something you know to be wrong then you're culpable.
Alan Bates refused to sign his accounts. Hence, they fired him.
"A+++++", "Great Comms, would recommend", "Thank you, the 12 inch black mamba is just perfect" - Ebay.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:46 - Jan 8 by blueasfook
True. If you put your name to something you know to be wrong then you're culpable.
Alan Bates refused to sign his accounts. Hence, they fired him.
Indeed. The other thing which surprised me watching the drama was that no one had questioned the legality of the contract before the point it was suggested that happened. I'd have thought that was an obvious thing to look at.
0
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 16:06 - Jan 8 with 1229 views
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:58 - Jan 8 by PhilTWTD
Indeed. The other thing which surprised me watching the drama was that no one had questioned the legality of the contract before the point it was suggested that happened. I'd have thought that was an obvious thing to look at.
I found the program hard viewing. Got quite angry at times watching it. But then, I am sure I am not alone. The worst scene was when that poor guy got robbed. That was horrible. Back home we had a local postmaster who got robbed. They broke into his house and then then took him to the post office to open it up so they could take the money. They duffed him up pretty badly too. Poor guy was never the same.
"A+++++", "Great Comms, would recommend", "Thank you, the 12 inch black mamba is just perfect" - Ebay.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 14:53 - Jan 8 by BloomBlue
That is one of my points above. Why aren't the police also investigating the judge at the original Jo Hamilton case (for example). Clearly there wasn't any evidence but the trial judge let in continue. Judges and the legal processes need to be investigated, the judge failed in doing their job correctly.
In her case I believe she pleaded guilty to false accounting, basically through fear of going to jail otherwise and under pressure from POL who told her they would drop a charge of theft if she did so, even though their own auditors had already found that there was no evidence of theft. That was how they got a conviction in her case and I do not doubt that many other convictions were obtained using similar tactics.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 16:39 - Jan 8 by GeoffSentence
In her case I believe she pleaded guilty to false accounting, basically through fear of going to jail otherwise and under pressure from POL who told her they would drop a charge of theft if she did so, even though their own auditors had already found that there was no evidence of theft. That was how they got a conviction in her case and I do not doubt that many other convictions were obtained using similar tactics.
So in any other legal sitting you have the police who collect evidence and that is given to the CPS for a charging decision and (if appropriate) who then prosecute.
They are quite rightly kept separate to ensure the police do not have too much power. This reduces the chances of dodgy coppers fitting up people (although of course this is still possible - but a lot less when someone else then reviews the evidence and makes the charging decision)
But the PO played both roles - they collected the evidence and their lawyers prosecuted the cases. This has to change - is so open to abuse (as we have seen)
A CPS lawyer wouldn't pretend he had evidence to frighten someone to accept a lower charge - that would be so unethical as to simply not be entertained (you'd hope) - but these guys did exactly that. People were bounced into pleading guilty through the (non existent) threat of prison.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 15:23 - Jan 8 by oldbeardy
Thanks for sharing this - very helpful explanation. I would have thought some of these issues would have been able to have been replicated in a test environment and that, as issues began to be reported internally, that would have been the first thing that would have been tried to understand what was going on. Haven't watched the programme yet but will certainly do so.
Yes, they would have been easily replicated, and any half-decent developer would know that these problems could happen. Given their nature, most would probably be fairly trivial to solve I'd have thought.
My experience tells me that the developers at Fujitsu probably weren't incompetent but probably were under a silly time constraint and overworked, before being moved onto another project. They probably knew these issues existed but management no doubt said "Eh, good enough, ship it". That sort of attitude can be fine in some applications but not when you're dealing with money.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 17:26 - Jan 8 by DanTheMan
Yes, they would have been easily replicated, and any half-decent developer would know that these problems could happen. Given their nature, most would probably be fairly trivial to solve I'd have thought.
My experience tells me that the developers at Fujitsu probably weren't incompetent but probably were under a silly time constraint and overworked, before being moved onto another project. They probably knew these issues existed but management no doubt said "Eh, good enough, ship it". That sort of attitude can be fine in some applications but not when you're dealing with money.
Spoke to someone who has worked on Horizon itself (not at the Post Office) and has had their career in managing implementations.
They basically said that any new system will have bugs, even with thorough testing, and you even those out after launching. Nothing unusual there.
What does seem to be unusual is that the people auditing / prosecuting the POs were unaware of and/or ignored the ongoing system issues. That's where the failure is for me - the decisions to prosecute rather than accept the system was flawed.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 17:31 - Jan 8 by bluelagos
Spoke to someone who has worked on Horizon itself (not at the Post Office) and has had their career in managing implementations.
They basically said that any new system will have bugs, even with thorough testing, and you even those out after launching. Nothing unusual there.
What does seem to be unusual is that the people auditing / prosecuting the POs were unaware of and/or ignored the ongoing system issues. That's where the failure is for me - the decisions to prosecute rather than accept the system was flawed.
“the decisions to prosecute rather than accept the system was flawed.”
The line of least resistance, least shame, and most financial benefit - to themselves - at the time.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 14:47 - Jan 8 by blueasfook
Yes exactly. I am sure that senior execs at the PO were aware of the system issues and there was a deliberate cover up - examples being the denial that remote access to branches was possible, call centre staff being instructed to tell individual postmasters that they were the "only ones" experiencing issues, the whistleblower from Fujitsu who admitted that Fujitsu staff were going in at branch level and altering accounting data. It beggars belief though that the preferred option rather than face up to the system issues was to prosecute innocent people. I think the PO has far too much power in being able to bring about their own prosecutions, and they certainly abused those powers.
That POL were allowed to bring their own private prosecutions, with pretty much no evidence, then act as judge and jury to sanction the SPMs, was one of the things I found most shocking about this. Seems like legalised vigilantism.
Mr Bates vs the Post office on 17:31 - Jan 8 by bluelagos
Spoke to someone who has worked on Horizon itself (not at the Post Office) and has had their career in managing implementations.
They basically said that any new system will have bugs, even with thorough testing, and you even those out after launching. Nothing unusual there.
What does seem to be unusual is that the people auditing / prosecuting the POs were unaware of and/or ignored the ongoing system issues. That's where the failure is for me - the decisions to prosecute rather than accept the system was flawed.
Yeah, software bugs are normal, in this case it's just the type of issues and their frequency that is quite surprising. You always find more bugs once you release it as hundreds of people use the systems in ways you didn't predict. Just part of the job.
As you say, the biggest issue isn't the fact that we're bugs, it's how they were responded to which is just utterly baffling.
My best mate was one of the victims of this. Sadly he’s also one of the 18 who have died with no justice (56 just over a year ago). we’ll never know if the stress was a factor in bringing on his cancer (he was fit as …. before being diagnosed - able to cycle from the foot of Italy over the Alps and back to the UK). May sound stupid I can’t watch the series; I wouldn’t enjoy it. The things he told about the way he was being treated during this was truly awful.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
