Sam Stein KC saying individuals in Post Office may have perverted course of justice in Bates litigation strikes he as a very important point. Day3 #PostOfficeInquiry
Also his points on what helped PO cover up. And then this…
In reality, this Inquiry is not about the Horizon
System, with all of its faults and problems, but about
a sickness which lay at the core of the Post Office. 2/
The Post Office was employer, victim, investigator and
civil and criminal prosecutor and it is now the arbiter
of which of its victims should receive compensation and
how much. 3/
It held extraordinary power over each and
every one of its subpostmasters and wielded that power
with impunity and, we suggest, in bad faith. 4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It has a strong ‘let the finger pointing’ begin vibe. The claim is the Board we’re kept in the dark. The admission is the non execs did not do their job until 2018 at any rate. And while they do appear to have learnt several lessons, I predict they’ll learn more 2/
Key point one is the claim there is no evidence the Board were ever shown the Clarke Advices. Instead they focused on how Second Sights investigations might open them up to attack. 3/
I’m now reading the submissions from @edwardhenry1 he makes the really important and under appreciated point that, even on the evidence as it was, false accounting should arguably not have been run. #postofficeinquiry
And the equally important point about equivocal pleas. A point almost ignored so far, including by me. The customary anguish when I read about @CastletonLee or @Janetsk20073533 is accentuated with gut wrenching economy
Here’s an example. About Janet Skinner, “She enters a plea, an unequivocal, I suppose, but false plea, because she had been crushed.”
Lord Pannick’s opinion on behalf of Boris Johnson continues to make the news (theguardian.com/politics/2022/…). There is a suggestion this is was a misuse of public funds by the Johnson Government.
Interestingly too, the Commons Committee savaged by his opinion has raised a stern retort. I am not going to analyse the opinion in depth. David Allen Green has it right, I think, when he says (davidallengreen.com/2022/09/the-cu…):
So, the idea it’s a Gov diversion tactic to blame lawyers: from the Russia Report…51. It is not just the oligarchs either: the arrival of Russian money resulted in a growth industry of enablers – individuals and organisations who manage and lobby for the Russian elite in the UK.
…Lawyers, accountants, estate agents and PR professionals have played a role, wittingly or unwittingly, in the extension of Russian influence which is often linked to promoting the nefarious interests of the Russian state. 2/
A large private security industry has developed in the UK to service the needs of the Russian elite, in which British companies protect the oligarchs and their families, seek kompromat56 on competitors, and on occasion help launder money… 3/