Thread by @nickwallis

With regard to Paula Vennells bulshittery about the mediation scheme (see her letter here: committees.parliament.uk/publications/1…) I have been pointed to the document sent to potential scheme applicants which stated:
"In order to carry out the Inquiry, Second Sight...

… will be entitled to request information related to a concern from Post Office Limited, and if Post Office Limited holds that information, Post Office Limited will provide it to Second Sight.”

No ifs no buts. What is Ms Vennells saying in her letter to parliament…?

"The decision that was made, collectively by the Board sub- committee, was that Second Sight would not be given access to the internal files. Firstly because the documents were legally privileged and, as I understood it, it had never been agreed that Second Sight...

… would be given access to privileged material. Secondly, it was the view of Post Office that the conduct of prosecutions was outside the scope of the Scheme. Thirdly, Second Sight, as forensic accountants, had no expertise to consider legal matters."

Smells a bit whiffy, at this point, doesn’t it? Don’t forget that in front of the BIS Select Committee on 3 Feb 2015, Paula Vennells told MPs: "If there had been any miscarriages of justice, it would have been really important to me and the Post Office that we surfaced those."

So at the same time she was telling MPs that, she was taking the decision to explicitly stop any potential miscarriages of from being surfaced, by stopping Second Sight from looking at them…

… despite previously having assured applicants the investigators would have full access to documents.

(@RonRwarming @forensicgod)

@RonRwarming @forensicgod That’s the cover up. Right there. Well that and the campaign to discredit Second Sight and dismiss the concerns of MPs and journalists as unfounded.

@threadreaderapp unroll pls