Mr Bates vs the Post Office

[yerwot?]

logistics are irrelevant... the fact it was not acted on immediately, the ruthless pursuit of innocent people, the stonewalling to protect the board, dwarf all other considerations. For far too long, passing the buck has been the de facto escape strategy for those who are in charge, unchallenged in the partisan msm. Simiilar examples of board-room bullet-proofing are legion, asbestos, lead water-pipes, aluminium-chloride, tainted blood, thalidomide, Steven Lawrence, Hillsborough, Orgreave, all deadly, all white-washed, swept under the carpet, ignored, even when culpability is proven beyond doubt. It is not left versus right, it is more embedded wealth and power versus democracy. Collateral damage never reaches board-rooms lodges and the like.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

logistics are irrelevant... the fact it was not acted on immediately, the ruthless pursuit of innocent people, the stonewalling to protect the board, dwarf all other considerations. For far too long, passing the buck has been the de facto escape strategy for those who are in charge, unchallenged in the partisan msm. Simiilar examples of board-room bullet-proofing are legion, asbestos, lead water-pipes, aluminium-chloride, tainted blood, thalidomide, Steven Lawrence, Hillsborough, Orgreave, all deadly, all white-washed, swept under the carpet, ignored, even when culpability is proven beyond doubt. It is not left versus right, it is more embedded wealth and power versus democracy. Collateral damage never reaches board-rooms lodges and the like.

You can add the Birmingham 6 / Guildford 4 to that list

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

I think it was appropriate action, IF ( and it is a big IF) someone was stealing. In these cases it would appear that very early on it was found that they were not stealing but those who could make the changed decided that overnight almost all sub postmasters had become thieves.

I’m afraid I disagree, it wasn’t appropriate action even if they WERE stealing because of the sheer volume of them. If there is a systemic issue where multiple postmasters are seen to be stealing then appropriate action is absolutely not to investigate and prosecute them all individually in silo and deliberately take steps to hide or ignore other instances.

Appropriate action would be to set up an investigative (preferably independent) panel to review the root causes of the problem. Based on that, if and only if that panel finds direct proof of thieving with intent… only then would you move to prosecution.

Maybe the first one or two times it happened, it could be hard to identify as a systemic issue. But this went far far beyond the reasonable expectations within which such an issue would be identified and addressed.

Appropriate action would also be to thoroughly understand the competency of the technology platform upon which all of your evidence is based.

From day one, Post Offices actions evolved from insufficient, to negligent, to mendacious, to complete self-preservation. At no point did they do the right thing.

 

[Blue Maverick]

I’m afraid I disagree, it wasn’t appropriate action even if they WERE stealing because of the sheer volume of them. If there is a systemic issue where multiple postmasters are seen to be stealing then appropriate action is absolutely not to investigate and prosecute them all individually in silo and deliberately take steps to hide or ignore other instances.

Appropriate action would be to set up an investigative (preferably independent) panel to review the root causes of the problem. Based on that, if and only if that panel finds direct proof of thieving with intent… only then would you move to prosecution.

Maybe the first one or two times it happened, it could be hard to identify as a systemic issue. But this went far far beyond the reasonable expectations within which such an issue would be identified and addressed.

Appropriate action would also be to thoroughly understand the competency of the technology platform upon which all of your evidence is based.

From day one, Post Offices actions evolved from insufficient, to negligent, to mendacious, to complete self-preservation. At no point did they do the right thing.

Totally agree, those investigating must have known the more and more cases, no way over 500 people have the same story it’s impossible. The lady who was convicted they even had a letter from the investigators saying they couldn’t find anything wrong, those people should’ve done something about it and if they were hushed up then it came from above. Get the bastards in court.
When you see the news now it seems to be gathering pace after this program so hopefully it’s speeded up.

 

[Cellarite]

I’m afraid I disagree, it wasn’t appropriate action even if they WERE stealing because of the sheer volume of them. If there is a systemic issue where multiple postmasters are seen to be stealing then appropriate action is absolutely not to investigate and prosecute them all individually in silo and deliberately take steps to hide or ignore other instances.

Appropriate action would be to set up an investigative (preferably independent) panel to review the root causes of the problem. Based on that, if and only if that panel finds direct proof of thieving with intent… only then would you move to prosecution.

Maybe the first one or two times it happened, it could be hard to identify as a systemic issue. But this went far far beyond the reasonable expectations within which such an issue would be identified and addressed.

Appropriate action would also be to thoroughly understand the competency of the technology platform upon which all of your evidence is based.

From day one, Post Offices actions evolved from insufficient, to negligent, to mendacious, to complete self-preservation. At no point did they do the right thing.

The root cause would be that they're all stealing. You wouldn't want them knowing that they're all being investigated because they would then have the chance to collude.

 

[kashmir]

Isn’t he working for itv now?

Bloody hell, I'd forgotten about that clown....

 

[oakiecokie]

One of the most hideous things to come out of this was the fact that one of the lady Post Masters was unable to give her version of accounts at the hearings because she had a criminal record ... due to the Post Offices incompetence,lies and fuckwittery.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

The root cause would be that they're all stealing. You wouldn't want them knowing that they're all being investigated because they would then have the chance to collude.

But that’s not the root cause is it? That is entirely my point. If you have literally thousands of postmasters accused of being on the rob of which 700+ were convicted, then there is a problem somewhere. Even if it turns out they were actually stealing. There’s a problem with your security processes, or recruitment, or systems. You can’t just bury your head in the sand and pretend there isn’t a problem and they’re stealing so *shrug* let’s just move on.

To conduct no broader review of a systemic problem is dereliction of duty on the part of the senior staff members.

And these reviews and audits happen all the time in business, performed at the highest levels of confidentiality. There would be no need for every postmaster to be looped in so that they can collude.

 

[i8therags]

Still no mention of Adam Crozier, but the omission has been flagged by a couple of media outlets.

Googled Crozier. He left ITV a few years back. He is now the head gaffer at Grt Ormond st Hospital. So basically a bloke who seems not to give a sh1t about hundreds of innocent families, many with children who also would have been effected, is in charge of the wellbeing of children. Think he still has some sort of link with media through some consultancy company. It's sickening that the very basic requirement isn't met with these very responsible, CEO type jobs. Basically, just not being a TW4T.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Googled Crozier. He left ITV a few years back. He is now the head gaffer at Grt Ormond st Hospital. So basically a bloke who seems not to give a sh1t about hundreds of innocent families, many with children who also would have been effected, is in charge of the wellbeing of children. Think he still has some sort of link with media through some consultancy company. It's sickening that the very basic requirement isn't met with these very responsible, CEO type jobs. Basically, just not being a TW4T.

His roles to date