PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

115 charges …it’s a big number, so big that it must include a fair old degree of guilt.
Over 900 charges it’s a big number too, so big that it must include a huge degree of guilt, but that’s what the post office issued to sub-postmasters and we all know how that went!
It’s actually insane how easily people are roped in to making assumptions based merely on the number of charges.
 
It’s actually insane how easily people are roped in to making assumptions based merely on the number of charges.
Not just the similarities in using large numbers as implication of guilt, but the fact that the PO went on issuing charges despite their knowledge of who and what were actually responsible and culpable.
Could the PL be acting in a similar manner?
 
Not just the similarities in using large numbers as implication of guilt, but the fact that the PO went on issuing charges despite their knowledge of who and what were actually responsible and culpable.
Could the PL be acting in a similar manner?

Basing their evidence on “everyone knows……”
 
If we haven't got the evidence then perhaps they are the ones who should now explain why their false accusations were legalized.
As far as I am aware city passed on information requested by the PL after the tribunal ruling, that's according to the legal bulletins I receive at work.

I might be seeing this a bit too simply but either city provided the info requested and are clear on the non cooperation charge or they did not comply with the ruling by the tribunal and thus I would expect a ruling of this being proven on balance of probabilities.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top