Nick Wallis Profile picture
May 2 186 tweets 50 min read Read on X
Good morning from the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry. Former interim Post Office General Counsel (top lawyer within the country) returns to give evidence. Remotely. 🧵 Image
Flora Page starts asking questions. Says Lord Arbuthnot said that relations with the Post Office became "less open and more combative" after CA became GC.

CA can see how he can see how he came to that conclusion
CA but it was actually driven by the Project Sparrow team and the board
FP they were going into cover up mode and you were part of that
CA don't recognise that
CA agrees John Scott head of PO Security reported to him
FP takes him to a report by Second Sight's (2S) Ron Warmington (RW) into the PO Security team sent to him in Jan 2014


Image
Image
Image
Image
[It is enormously critical of the PO Security team]
FP needless adversarialism in the Post Office here
CA yes
FP failure to investigate and serious concerns
CA can't remember what I thought about the doc at the time, but I would have asked why it was commissioned and note it...
... was a draft.
FP it required immediate attention
CA in due course
Sir Wyn Williams (Chair, SWW) What happened to the document
CA it informed my thinking. I didn't do anything
FP brings up note of an off the record meeting with Sir Anthony Hooper, independent chair of the Mediation Scheme Working group 24 Feb 2014. Vennells says small sums in par 2. Hooper points out in par 7 PO might not have acted properly and might owe a lot of money

Image
Image
Image
FP calls this the death knell for the mediation scheme
CA disagrees
FP you make a distinction in your witness statement (WS) that on the one hand Horizon (H) was flawed and the litigation risk
CA yes
FP not a useful distinction tho, is it - risk of a claim succeeding is...
... linked to the strength of the allegations - ie that they might be true.
CA accepts
FP when faced with the risk that SAH might find against the PO it went running to Linklaters and Deloitte rather than continue paying 2S
FP takes him to a note drafted by Bond Dickinson to the CCRC from the Post Office - it doesn't mention the Clarke Advice, that Gareth Jenkins had given misleading evidence and the Misra case, mentioned 15 times in Brian Altmans review.
CA accepts
FP it's misleading isn't it?
CA it reflects my advice. I didn't see the Clarke Advice. This letter responds to a specific request and was drafted by BD
SWW are you saying you didn't see the Clarke Advice?
CA no I did see it
SWW not sure why you said you didn't just then, but you put your name to this...
... letter, right. Did you just sign it?
CA it reflected the totality of mu understanding having spoken to Cartwright King (CK) and BD

FP finishes, then Tim Moloney KC for more Subpostmasters. He starts on remote access.
TM has Jo Hamilton sitting to his left Image
TM is reading out this email Image
That was 9 May 2014, on 23 May 2014, CA receives the Deloitte report and he writes about it in his WS

Image
Image
Image
This is the next par in CA's WS
Image
Image
Two weeks later, there is an internal action summary of the problems raised by Deloitte and what the PO are going to do about it

Image
Image
Image
TM this is about deleting materia
CA it's about inserting fake transactions
TM and deleting it. Did you see this?
CA no recollection of seeing this
TM if you had seen this would it be incumbent on you to change PO's public position
CA I would have talked to tech people what this
... meant. If I did read this and didn't do anything it's a matter of great regret as our position as set out by Rodric Williams and BD was not correct.

TM goes to a new email based on the Zebra Action summary Image
End of the email.
TM you were in a meeting to discuss what you need to do to address things and get ExCo involved and the ARC
CA agrees
TM did you not think to tell 2S that Fujitsu (F) can deleted data
CA we did not see this as a critical matter Image
Sam Stein KC now asks questions for more Subpostmasters

SS goes through his experience of working for big companies which he characterises as demanding and data driven
CA agrees
SS PO was more political
CA yes
SS was the PO concerned more about its look and brand more than the other co's you'd worked for
CA any company dealing with consumers there is a concern about brand, but the political element was very unusual to me
SS your job was to bring together all the legal advice and...
... present to the board
CA yes
SS and diminish the risk to the co and high standard of legal compliance
CA yes
SS takes him to Mediation Scheme Working Group (WG) concerns about money paid by SPMs into PO suspense accounts
CA [caveatedly] agrees
SS takes him to an email CA wrote

SS this document is not an open and enquiring transparent attempt to answer the questions Image
CA I'm taking the approach we should answer the question, but not to give them information outside their investigation
SS so don't take any risks
CA this is not advice, this is for a newly-arrived CFO... it may be interpreted the wrong way - but there was more to this matter than
... a factual request for information
[???]
SS so you were risk-averse
CA agrees
SS you told FP that it was your job to advise the board on all the risks they were presented with. But when you were asked about the Clarke Advice and the Helen Rose report
... you said you assumed the PO board had been communicated prior to your arrival
SS you assumed this?
CA I was guided by CK
SS you seem to be ignoring a red hot topic and not taking it to the board
CA it should have been flagged as red hot
SS you have personal responsibility?
CA yes
SS so why not find out what happened to the Clarke Advice and if it was not taken to the board, take it
CA my brief on arrival was in relation to the CK Sift review
SS this was an incurious board, but you didn't make sure they were aware of these high risks
CA no I dealt
... with CK and I relied on them

Heather Oliver for Gareth Jenkins Image
HO asks him if he was aware of the duties of an expert witness [she lists them and he accepts]

HO says CA was taken to GJ's failings in the Clarke advice.
CA when I arrived on 14 Oct I was given a lot of material. I got a briefing on GJ on 16 Oct and there was NFA to be taken
HO so it was an historic issue
CA this was not identified as an ongoing issue
HO takes him to par 148 of Brian Altman's advice on GJ Image
CA nothing leaps off the page about a need to do anything
HO should you have told PO they needed to find out exactly what and how GJ was instructed as an expert witness?
CA i imagine by the time I read this my understanding of what had happened previously was relatively limited
... not sure I would have done anything
HO so you did not feel prompted to ask any questions of PO or CK about how GJ was instructed nor of any matters of disclosure
CA no I did ask about why he was tainted and I was told it was because he knew of two bugs in the system which
... he failed to disclose.
HO takes him to a note of 2 Sep 2013 by Rodric Williams about GJ "don't think he's ever been advised of his duties"
Image
Image
CA has no recollection of this note or the issue it raises in the first few weeks he was at the PO
HO do you agree the potential failures raised in this note were so serious they ought to have been shared with the board, 2S, the mediation scheme, Brian Altman and the CCRC
CA yes
HO raises remote access and knowledge within the PO of F's ability to insert transactions without SPM knowledge - takes him to an email chain with questions from RW
HO were you aware of this info being obtain from F?
Image
Image
HO takes him to the 23 May 2014 draft Project Zebra Deloitte report Image
HO do you agree that it was explained to the PO that a balancing transcation could be achieved without the SPM knowing
CA yes
HO TM took you to a holding response given to 2S which did not mention this fact - no approval needed for consent - in the light of that response...
... did the PO share this with 2S and the WG
CA we thought this was a very positive document and wanted to publish it. We did not understand the implications at the time
HO should it have been shared?
CA yes
SWW you don't need hindsight to say that when 2S ask a clear and...
... and specific answer to a question, it should have been answered?
CA yes sir
CA has now finished his evidence.

We will now have a break and resume with Martin Smith at 1125.
The most significant thing I think of this morning's session is RW's report to the Post Office telling them in clear terms in writing their investigation function is a disaster and CA doing nothing about it.
That alone should have set alarm bells ringing. I'm pretty sure we've never seen that doc before. I'll ask the Inquiry to publish it. This one: Image
Former Cartwright King Solicitor Martin Smith is back in the chair. Image
Julian Blake is asking the questions. He starts by asking about the recording MS made of part of his phone conversation with Jarnail Singh (JS) on 31 July 2013 Image
MS says he left it with the Cartwright King techies to get off his phone and he doesn't know what happened to it after that. JB says the inquiry will make enquiries about it.

More about this in my report on yesterday's dramatic shredding evidence.

postofficescandal.uk/post/martin-sm…
We pick up the story two days after the call. MS has told his colleagues about his conversation with JS at the PO and Simon Clarke has drafted his Shredding Advice (read that here )postofficescandal.uk/post/the-shred…
JB highlights one response to SC's Advice Image
MS isn't quite sure what is meant in this email, he assumes it means that there are suggestions being made to JS that CK would be blamed if anyone queries the destruction of minutes
JB asks if MS thinks CK were being intentionally blamed or there was a misunderstanding
MS says he felt it was a clear indication that this would happen and that was JS reporting what Dave Posnett had told him

JB we go to the Shredding Advice par 5 Image
JB asks if MS was the relayer of info to SC
MS agrees
JB unusual to record a client
MS v unusual
JB was your concern about the rep of CK?
MS yes if an allegation was made, but I was mainly concerned that the Head of Security at the Post Office was allegedly suggesting docs...
... should be destroyed.

We see the rest of par 5 Image
MS says that he discussed two things with JS which he relayed to SC - the order to destroy and the changing of process (ie not minuting the meeting) discussed at the meeting
JB asks who at PO did not want to minute the meeting
MS thinks it might be Rodric Williams
JB take him to a letter to CK from Susan Crichton drafted by Rodric Williams

Image
Image
Image
JB asks about the phrase "purpoted" - had docs been shredded
MS I was under the impression it had occurred. The order had gone out, and obviously not everyone's going to react immediately - but I was concerned an instruction had been given and docs had been destroyed
JB what about the PO's approach to transparency? was that an accurate representation of the PO's approach?
MS not in relation to John Scott no, otherwise why else ask for the docs to be destroyed
JB takes MS to a well-written email by Jarnail Singh
JB do you think this was written by JS
MS no
JB did CK draft emails sent by JS?
MS JS sometimes cut and pasted emails into his emails or wrote emails following conversations with me
JB in the light of the contents of this...
Image
Image
.... was there turf warfare going on between Bond Dickinson and CK
MS I was not happy about BD's influence over PO. this was a criminal matter
We go to Andy Parsons' response.

JB what fluidity was there in the meetings
MS they weren't fluid
JB looking back?
MS looking back, I don't think the minutes were that accurate - they underplayed certain issues
Image
Image
JB takes him to an email MS wrote
Image
Image
JB why don't you want F's lawyers there? Too awkward?
MS I didn't trust them. They would pursue their own agenda
JB concerned they might bring up the reliability of GJ
MS didn't think it would be appropriate to discuss GJ with F at that stage
JB so you were in favour of openness and transparency and properly recorded?
MS it changed. PO were keen to stop things going into the public domain - largely driven by Rodric and the civil lawyers
JB did you play a part in that, ultimately
MS no
JB takes him to a meeting on 23 March 2016
JB are these not litigation meetings
MS no if it was a Wednesday it was a Horizon Issues meeting, but in 2016 PO was dealing with civil litigation issues Image
The weekly meeting records a Horizon error. And you ask to ensure no SPM was prosecuted over this type of incident Image
MS follows it up with questions Image
The email finishes... Image
JB so an issue that MAY go back to 2005. This is an initial respons 5 Apr 2016 Image
This is the response. Point 3 will resonate with many SPMs Image
The response to q7&8 comes. It's worrying
JB were you concerned
MS I was about to leave the business so I copied it to Simon Clarke and Harry Bowyer
Image
Image
MS but this may have fallen into a gap
JB do you recall receiving this info
MS I don't recall it - I may have received it
JB takes him to meetings he may have been present at in May Image
MS says he was not an employee of CK, but was acting as an agent for them and acting for the PO. He is taken to his point about a time limitation which suggests he has seen the response to his questions 7&8 Image
JB notes RW wanting no email traffic on this matter. proper?
MS if his concern was to avoid cascading emails around. yes.
JB the concern there is disclosure. Is that proper?
MS I took the view that was RW's domain and not my issue
JB why were you at the meeting?
MS it was the Wed meeting to discuss issues with Horizon.
JB did you not have any views on whether there should not be email traffic on whether there was a bug affecting balances in H?
MS the issue had been flagged and the info existed
JB takes him to the action point Image
JB so it's being taken offline
MS it's on the record
JB after all you've been through - shredding, wrongful conviction etc etc - was this appropriate - offline meetings and discussions?
MS it's been flagged in the hub
JB but none of the details - you answer to the q - does...
... this affect prosecutions, is being kept out of the hub.
MS I didn't see it like that at the time
1 June 2016 - the Wimbledon bug matter is closed
Image
Image
JB turns back to a doc from the beginning of MS's evidence yesterday. 2015 advice from MS on Zen Elvins Image
About an embarrassment to PO.
JB by this stage were you concerned about embarrassment to your client.
MS felt it was our duty to flag it up
JB important to keep the PO onside - follow orders not to discuss things online
MS I did not question the civil lawyers decisions
JB goes to the issue of remote access.

He presents a 2012 email chain (this is the top of the chain) and asks why MS was cc-d on this

MS doesn't know why as he wasn't involved with Kim Wylie Image
This is the chain


Image
Image
Image
Image
MS says he didn't read it because it wasn't my case and was in a very small font and Harry Bowyer dealt with it v quickly

We move on to a Deloitte Project Zebra doc making balancing transactions
Image
Image
And another Advice from Simon Clarke 27 March 2015
Image
Image
JB did you assist with the drafting of this advice
MS it would not have been uncommon for him to share this - I may have seen it
JB he often says "we" in his advice
MS it may be his house style
JB takes him to par 6 Image
JB were you part of this conference
MS no memory of it
JB takes him to an Andy Parsons email of 15 July 2015 about balancing transactions - why are you the primary recipient of this email?
MS might have been involved. cannot remember it Image
JB why does AP think YOU and SC are involved?
MS I was the principle point of contact for the PO and CK, so I might have passed it on
JB you were very experienced by 2015
MS it had been going on for quite some time. It was impossible to remember what had been going on. It was...
... a whirlwind.

[Oh come on, that's a terrible excuse]

JB did this not raise any queries about the cases you had been prosecuting
MS I don't think it did as I didn't think anything sinister might be happening. This is the PO. This is Fujitsu. Why on earth would anything...
... sinister be happening?

JB moves to GJ and expert evidence
JB were you aware of the legal requirements with regard to the instruction of expert witnesses
MS no
JB is it unusual not to be aware of your duties as a prosecutor?
MS it is clear that when we instructed GJ
... it was done in a way which was not compliant. There were no formal instructions.
JB did you consider whether his WSs complied with legal requirements
MS no - I took the view we'd been asked to get a s9 statement and that's what we did. no more thought than that.
JB you got involved in trying to instruct new experts - Professor Kramer and Dr Doulay (???). Image
he advises not to look at historic cases in case it would require disclosure Image
MS says he didn't think the old H system could be investigated
SWW why not say that then - you say it can be investigated
MS counsel had advised that we shouldn't go looking before 2010
JB takes him to the Altman General Review of CK Sift Review
MS can't recall if he was part of the conference referred to
JB notes Altman noting CK concern that offenders might use mediation scheme to launch appeals
MS don't agree with the way that's written Image
MS the concern came from Post Office who were concerned about convicted applicants latching onto a throwaway comment
JB so not your concern about people you'd prosecuted
MS no it came from the PO. Simon Clarke and Harry Bowyer provided advice
JB were you not a three?
MS we were
JB there's no distinction between you in the papers we've seen
MS I was the main point of contact at CK and I often forwarded material on
JB so it's likely that that teleconference on 4 Oct involved you
MS maybe. don't remember
JB brings up Noel Thomas's case in which CK advise on principle that no mediation scheme applicant should get their offender or investigation report.
MS that's SC and HB's advice
JB you are a lawyer, communicating with your client. it's your view too
MS it is. I followed their... Image
... lead.

JB takes him to another email written byMS in which he says "I" a lot. He asks him what possible justification there could be for redacting those sentences.
MS has no answer
JB try
MS I was worried about things getting into the public domain
JB what's the problem with Image
... with that?
MS on reflection I got this wrong
JB part of a culture of withholding information from applicants
MS not intentionally, no

JB goes to another email by Andy Parsons.
[This is pure cover-up stuff] Image
Here's the end of the same email. Image
JB notes his name at the end of the email
JB was this an appropriate approach to the mediation
MS the lawyers at BD were dealing with applicants - it was a matter for them
JB why is your name on this email - why does it say Martin Simon and I are available - if this is entirely a
... BD affair, why are you involved?
MS we looked proposed responses to mediation applicants, but we were not advising the PO in mediation
JB you had been advising the PO for years - you are a key contact in a discussion about minimising the HR report. did you respond...
... to this email saying that was grossly inappropriate.
MS I don't remember this email
JB did you tell them I'm not a key contact and i have nothing to do with this
JB scrolls up -MS is a recipient. AP says he's just spoken to CK - not you?
MS don't remember Image
WE BREAK FOR LUNCH

I am doing four sold out shows on the Post Office Scandal tomorrow and Saturday, but Hayes on Sunday is half empty. It's the closest one to London I am doing. Please come along if you can. Parmod is a great talker. trafalgartickets.com/beck-theatre-h…
Actually I've just had a look - tomorrow's 2pm talk in Walton is not sold out - there are three tickets available. Please come to that if you can. But mainly come to Hayes. Details of Walton, Hayes and all the dates/other locations here:

postofficescandal.uk/live-events/
Back, after a co=op meal deal supplemented by macaroons (shared with the BBC's Emma Simpson, who is on the front media bench with me and the Telegraph's Fiona Parker today. John Hyde from the Law Gazette is lurking behind us this afternoon. MS is still giving evidence.
MS is taken to an advice written by Simon Clarke recommending the PO exclude applicants with criminal convictions from the mediation scheme.

Asked if he agrees with it. MS calls it "a sensible approach"
Image
Image
More of the Advice

Image
Image
Image
Here MS is taken to an email he sent trying to stop applicants to the media scheme having documents disclosed to them. Image
JB why not disclose material
MS just that they shouldn't have anything disclosed to them something they hadn't had disclosed
JB even if it helped them
MS I didn't think of that
We are taken to an email chain involving a discussion about Sir Anthony Hooper (SAH) the retired judge who chaired the Mediation Scheme Working Group

Image
Image
Image
JB what made the team at CK know better than SAH on the matter of mediating convicted claimants
JB you didn't consider the position of the appellants at all
MS I didn't want to inadvertently give applicants something which gave them the chance to get to the court of appeal
JB points out "ticket to the court of appeal" appears on this document
MS it was a phrase we used
JB brings up an attendance note re disclosure disco with Andy Parsons from BD
Image
Image
JB were you and Mr parsons in May 2015 concerned about disclosure because it may give her a "ticket to the court of appeal"
MS no when we first reviewed Mrs Misra's case we could not find her file. BD wanted to press ahead with their reviews of the cases for the Mediation Scheme
MS but I said I wanted it to be done properly and not to water it down
JB you were concerned about SM being able to appeal
MS if she appealed so be it
JB worried it might look bad on CK?
MS no
JB by 2015 did you not think you should of everything you could to HELP Seema Misra to get her case to the Court of Appeal
MS her file was reviewed by SC
JB GJ issues
MS no reference
JB bugs errors defects
MS no reference
Catriona (pron Ka-tree-na) Watt for the NFSP asks questions about Scottish prosecutions

CW in 2013 you knew GJ was discredited and 2 bugs in H
MS yes
CW it raised issues about lack of disclosure
MS yes
CW and you knew about the HR report
MS and yet you went to the Crown...
... Office to tell them there was nothing to see.
MS Susan Crichton sent us there as the PF was considering terminating all prosecutions. SC persuaded him to wait until we'd got a new expert.

CW takes him to a note of a conference call
Image
Image
CW why did you minimise what 2S and what they were doing
MS that part of the note is incorrect
CW you minimise to the Crown Office the GJ issue
MS no we don't that's an accurate representation Image
and more... Image
CW you did not know at that point if the PO would obtain an expert. This is just your thinking at the moment
MS points out they say it is an expectation
CW takes him to another meeting note - quite a bit of effort being put into going to see the Crown Office
MS says JS flew up and Simon came from Derby Image
CW your main concern was that the PF was going to terminate the cases
MS yes accompanied by an announcement on the integrity of the system it could have implications for the PO
CW indeed Image
CW reads on
Image
Image
CW if we take everything you know. were you aware there's higher bar for prosecutions in Scotland
MS did not consider that - just thought it might be better to get an expert report to assist
CW so pleased to note you achieved your objective
MS yes
CW by being disingenuous
MS I disagree
MS we thought to get an expert report to find out the true position
CW this is like going to the DPP to get them to continue prosecutions despite knowing an expert witness was unreliable
MS disagree
CW six convictions quashed this week - at least two from 2012/2013
CW what are your reflections
MS horrendous situation
SWW these meetings in Scotland took place in 2015?
JB 2013
SWW ah okay
JB comes back to ask about the meeting note of the PF and looks at par 12
JB why no mention of GJ or Legacy Horizon
MS don't know Image
JB so the reversal of the position described below came about after a very limited description of the situation. Image
MS if SC says he didn't mention GJ then he didn't
JB why are the words about GJ in a smaller font? Typed later?
MS don't know

Tim Moloney KC for SPMs

TM you went to see the judge in the case of Sama because you wanted to withhold from the defence what you'd heard from GJ...
... the likely contents of the 2S report Image
MS No that's not quite right. SC felt he wasn't in a position to comply with his disclosure obligations and so he didn't want to commence a trial without disclosure properly dealt with Image
TM you went to see the judge in private to make an ex parte application. A public interest immunity application - did you understand what that was?
MS not at the time
TM do you understand now what it was
MS I know that SC was just saying he was not in a position to discharge his
... disclosure obligations
SWW that's telling the judge what he can't do - what did he want the judge to do?
MS not sure
SWW did he want an adjournment or what?
MS I am afraid I can't remember. I just took notes
TM I'll try to assist you - a public interest immunity order was
... [sorry - APPLICATION] was made
TM this is an important procedure. Withholding information from a defence when in normal circs it should be disclosed. This is an IMPORTANT thing.
MS yes
TM did you understand the rules around this?
MS I can't say I'd come across a PI application before. it's new to me
TM did SC give any indication as to why he was making the application?
MS we were aware the 2S report was going to be released to members of parliament before it was going to be released generally
TM did SC say that one aspect of his application was an assertion of a widespread
... lack of confidence in the PO?
MS don't remember it
TM or a loss of trust in a system operated by the PO
MS no remember
TM was one the prevention of journalistic speculation as to the efficacy of systems universally relied on by the public
MS no remember
... what about speculation as to the nature of the report in the national press, causing damage to the Post Office's reputation
MS no remember
TM if SC set the above out in an attendance note to PO - would you have seen it
MS don't recall seeing it
TM would you have ordinarily
MS maybe
TM you can gather I have the attendance note
MS yes
TM were Mrs Samra's lawyers put on notice that you were going to make a PI application
MS no recall
TM this is your first PI application
MS can't recall
TM did you inform the solicitors
MS no idea
TM if this is made without notice to the defence as this would have the effect of disclosing the material that is the only circumstance they can't be informed
MS I was not aware of that

[this is serious legal ****, this]

TM were you aware the PI cert was granted and you had to
... inform the defence that a report had been commissioned. Then the report was given to MPs that day.
MS does not remember this

Sam Stein KC with more questions

SS were you following the CPS code
MS I am not sure we were
SS why say that
MS we were not aware of them...
... we were a defence firm.
SS you are personally held by the SRA to be competent for this work.
MS I didn't consider that I did not have the skills
SS did you look them up?
MS no
SS did you know that you had to act as a minister of justice
MS no
SS when you recorded a call with GJ you were at least suspicious
MS yes
SS you were conducting a mini-investigation
MS yes
SS which led to the Clarke Advice (brings up CApar38) Image
SS knowingly misled the courts. what criminal offence is being committed here if the above is true?
MS perjury and perverting the course of justice
SS why not call the police
MS no idea
SS you are witnesses to a crime. why continue to act for the PO?
MS I see your point
SS do you agree with it?
MS not sure I do
SS why not?
MS we told our clients and we assisted our clients by moving on.
SS but not telling the police. what did you tell Fujitsu?
MS nothing
SS why not?
MS I thought the PO might do it
SS you decided a criminal offence had happened - why not tell the PO that one of their clients' employees had on your view committed a crim offence
MS don't know

SS moves on to the Shredding Advice
SS the shredding advice does not say that CK were going to be blamed for issuing a shredding order if asked. why not?
MS don't know
SS you told CK
MS yes
SS you were hopelessly conflicted
MS didn't cross my mind
SS did you take advice
MS no
SS was the SC advice about GJ misleading the courts privileged
MS I'm not sure
SS what about the destruction of minutes advice - was that privileged
MS no

SS ends. We are on a break. We have our copy.
We're back. Ed Henry KC for several former SPMs including Seema Misra who is sitting alongside him. Image
EH this is the meeting during which Brian Altman advised there was no need to look at cases before 2010 Image
MS agrees
EH Susan Crichton suggests keeping Fujitsu on the outside - what does this mean?
MS doesn't know Image
EH moves down to note and tells MS he's sitting next to Seema. MS was not aware Image
Brian Altman - how are we going to deal if she comes forward? She has to come to us... Image
MS it feeds into the next point
EH yes and that's what happened
MS we decided any cases which were heard after 2010 which then included Mrs Misra
EH no one wanted to give her a ticket to the Court of Appeal
MS the Post Office was not keen for cases to go to CoA
EH and know...
... why that was
MS I'm sure you'll enlighten me
EH let's not play games. Seema Misra's case was the foundation stone for the pursuit of Subpostmasters in the courts
MS we did not have the full case file for Mrs Misra at the time of the conference
EH in view of the answers you...
... gave to SS - why wasn't Mrs Misra told immediately about her prosecutions
MS I don't know
EH her case for appeal was irresistable
MS senior counsel reviewed it - I didn't have much sight of it
EH looks at Brian Altman's advice Image
EH we see that Brian Altman did not want to apologise to Seema Misra
MS I don't think it was about GJ
EH what was it for then? why apologise?
MS this may have been discussing the way in which her mediation application may have been dealt with
EH said don't mediate with her Image
EH reads out Altman's advice. Don't mediate with her.
Image
Image
EH reads on - control the process - this is what you wanted to do. Keep a grip on disclosure
MS advising to be very careful on disclosure
EH vice-like grip
MS those words were not used.
EH nothing loose
MS he felt a casual word or apology could have substantial ramifications... Image
... for the PO.

EH takes him to a Dec 2013 CK document which says Seema Misra should have disclosure. Who wrote that.
MS If it just said CK at the end of the document it was likely Harry Bowyer
EH so why was HB taken off the Misra case? Image
EH because on 22 Jan 2014, Simon Clarke sent you an email with a full review of the Seema Misra case and his email to you was "Phew!!!" - who took HB off the case?
MS not sure anyone did
EH why didn't HB, who advised disclosure in Dec 2013 and then in Jan 2014 SC...
... there is a report saying no disclosure. Why did the firm do a complete backflip
MS I don't remember
EH are you being serious?!
MS deadly serious - the first review was made on the judge's summing up. the full review was on more material and SC reached his position
EH but in 28 June you knew GJ was fatally undermined and therefore every conviction he was involved with needed disclosure - what changed between Dec 2013 and Jan 2014
MS don't know
EH I suggest it was because it would have fatally undermined every prosecution
EH and the whole edifice will come crashing down
MS no not true
EH what happened between Dec 2013 and Jan 2014
MS nothing I was aware of

Heather Oliver for GJ now asking questions to MS
HO you have accepted you did not know your duties in terms of instructing GJ and CK did not instruct GJ properly - this did not happen
MS accepts
HO what about the way GJ was instructed by PO
MS I don't think GJ was ever properly instructed
HO serious failing on behalf of PO and CK
MS in terms of the way they instructed expert witnesses yes
HO did you know if SC was aware of GJ's lack of expert instruction
MS don't recall
HO takes him to Rodric Williams note she's raised a few times Image
HO is this a note of your call with RW?
MS possibly
HO did you tell GJ this
MS can't remember
HO were there any discos with anyone in PO that GJ had never been properly instructed
MS can't remember
HO if you were having this conversation with RW, did it make it likely you were having a convo about this with SC

HO moves on to MS's typed notes of the Brian Altman conference Image
HO what is SC saying here? Image
MS I think GJ wasn't aware or Fujitsu were not taking their obligations seriously
HP did you tell BA QC that GJ had never been properly instructed
MS no I don't think that occurred to me

HO takes him to the Clarke Advice pars 37/38. Why was the reasons for GJ's failure...
... to comply with his duties being beyond the scope of SC's review?
MS don't know
HO was the lack of instruction about GJ's instructions were hugely relevant
MS I can see that now, but not at the time
HO it would have been damaging to CK
MS not a consideration
HO had it become clear you had failed to instruct him properly it would be a massive...
... conflict and you could no longer act for the PO
MS it really didn't come into it. I just didn't think of it

We move on to the Samra case and the recording of the Jenkins call on 28 June 2013 Image
HO how was the call recorded?
MS can't remember
HO how was it transcribed?
MS can't remember
HO who made the note?
MS can't remember
HO and GJ had no warning of the call or knowledge it was being recorded?
MS true
HO this was to test GJ's credibility to see if he had provided info to 2S about bugs
MS SC just wanted to speak to him to get some info re the case of Mrs Samra
HO GJ could not check your note for accuracy

HO moves to Ishaq case. Do you recall GJ was invited to comment...
... on the first Ishaq defence statement.
MS yes
HO and you reviewed it
MS don't recall but accept I did Image
HO takes him to GJ's report
Image
Image
HO ARQ data had been obtained to the defence but not to GJ
MS I thought, being as he was at Fujitsu that would not be a problem
HO he was reliant on the PO for that
MS didn't know that
HO why not give GJ the data
MS didn't know he didn't have it
HO he is trying to assist the...
... defence. tried to get hold of it on the eve of trial
HO he is trying to get hold of the ARQ data to look into errors which he accepts can happen
MS yes

[We end for the day.]
So - Jarnail Singh tomorrow. I'm sadly not going to be here, but I suspect quite a few people will be. I'll watch the morning at home and then I'll be on various stages in Surrey, Sussex and Middx over the next few days.

I'm going to have a chat with Seema and Davinder and...
... then head back home. I can't imagine what was going through Seema's head as she was sitting next to Ed Henry earlier.

Thanks for all the replies and for reading. If you want to join the newsletter massive, the tip jar is here:
postofficescandal.uk/donate/
I'll get something up on the blog soon.

N
@threadreaderapp unrolls pls

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nick Wallis

Nick Wallis Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @nickwallis

May 1
I'm at the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry to hear the second day of former Cartwright King barrister, Harry Bowyer. We're already underway. Image
You can watch it live (or on catch up) here.
I was delayed by the need to iron some shirts (difficult with a broken wrist) and a last minute call from @BBCr4today who asked for my thoughts on the appointment of the new Post Office chair - last ten minutes here: bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0…
Read 190 tweets
Apr 30
Welcome to Aldwych House in London for the oral evidence of Hugh Flemington, former Head of Legal at the Post Office. Image
Much quieter today in the Inquiry room than it was last week. Had a quick chat with Ed Henry KC, one of Gareth Jenkins' barristers, Heather Oliver and David Enright from Howe and Co, who was in parliament yesterday for the latest reading of...
... the Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Bill. Enright is exercised on behalf of his clients that convicted Postmasters in Scotland are not included in this Bill. Says there's no good reason for this, but arguments in Parliament making the case seem to have failed.
Read 170 tweets
Apr 26
Good morning NOT from the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, but Wallis Towers where I have been marooned since marching to Walton station only to find someone had kidnapped all the trains. I am still going to live-tweet the inquiry thanks to the magic of the internet. 🧵 Image
Former top Post Office exec Angela van den Bogerd is giving her second day of evidence today and Jason Beer KC has started by asking about her role in the appalling case of Martin Griffiths. Image
Here is a letter Martin sent to his contracts manager. Image
Read 172 tweets
Apr 25
Good morning from Aldwych House, home of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry. Very busy today, with lots of media outside. Live tweets of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence and other bits and bobs follow. 🧵 Image
I wrote up former Post Office General Counsel Chris Aujard's evidence yesterday



#PostOfficeInquirypostofficescandal.uk/post/the-hatch…
... and his extraordinary multiple resignations the day before



(anyone know why?)

#PostOfficeScandalpostofficescandal.uk/post/former-po…
Read 244 tweets
Apr 24
I'm back at the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry to cover the evidence of two Post Office General Counsel (most senior internal lawyer in the business). First we have Day 2 of Susan Crichton's evidence. She left in October 2013. V long 🧵... Aldwych House, London
My write up of Crichton's evidence yesterday can be read here.


My wrist (which had a plate put in it 10 days ago) is hurting after yesterday, so I'm not going to do as much. But I'll do me best...postofficescandal.uk/post/the-bleat…
This is what Mrs Crichton looks like today. Image
Read 161 tweets
Apr 23
Okay. At the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry for former PO General Counsel Susan Crichton. She hasn't said anything in public since mysteriously disappearing out of the Post Office in Oct 2013. 🧵of docs and stuff arising today... Image
Julian Blake doing the questioning for the Inquiry (v surprised it's not Jason Beer KC). Crichton is sworn in.
She was first head of legal at the PO, but only became GC in July 2013. She officially left PO end Nov 2013, but left the building in Oct 2013. Then when to Lloyds TSB where she worked until retiring in 2018.
Read 212 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(