Anyone watch Mr Bates vs The Post Office ?

[st13phil]

Aren’t all legal cases “suspect?” Innocent until guilty?

True enough.

I should have been more specific: there was a great deal of suspicion about the completeness of the evidence that the PO was bringing to court in its role of prosecutor, especially in terms of what it was thought to not be bringing that may undermine its case. It lied when it told courts that no such evidence existed.

 

[philnewmerc]

The post office didn’t have police powers. These are civil cases, created by dull clerks in middle management, and taken to court by lawyers, defended by lawyers, and judged by local magistrates, the likes of you or I, who looked at the evidence and said “here’s the judgement.”

Sorry Mike, you're wrong. The Post Office have powers that are akin to being the police and CPS rolled into one - that was the main issue that caused hundreds of people to plead guilty when they knew they were innocent. They were for all intents and purposes blackmailed: you plead guilty to X and we'll drop Y which means you won't go to prison. Mr Bates was a stubborn man... he said prove it, then they backed off, but not before ruining his small business.

 

[philnewmerc]

Sorry Mike, you're wrong. The Post Office have powers that are akin to being the police and CPS rolled into one - that was the main issue that caused hundreds of people to plead guilty when they knew they were innocent. They were for all intents and purposes blackmailed: you plead guilty to X and we'll drop Y which means you won't go to prison. Mr Bates was a stubborn man... he said prove it, then they backed off, but not before ruining his small business.

Add to that the fact that in some cases the PO told the sub poster master they had evidence when they did not (imagine the police doing that these days!) in order to force confessions... utterly corrupt and in my opinion evil practices.

 

[st13phil]

Two sets of lawyers make the case and then the magistrate or judge determines an outcome?

The legal system has an appeal process if that decision is to be challenged.

And when one side conspires to tell lies to the court - either overtly or by omission - and denies the other side access to evidence that would undermine their case? How does that work in the interests of justice?

Which is how we’re now in the fourth year of a massively expensive public enquiry into an IT system what was implemented 25 years ago.

No, we're in the fourth year of a massively expensive public enquiry into an IT system what was implemented 25 years ago because there was an ongoing conspiracy to cover up its shortcomings, and those shortcomings were used to secure criminal convictions against individuals who were deliberately denied access to evidence that would likely have resulted in their acquittal. It's also why the Met are now investigating potential cases of Perjury and Perverting the Course of Justice against both PO and Fujitsu current and previous employees.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

True enough.

I should have been more specific: there was a great deal of suspicion about the completeness of the evidence that the PO was bringing to court in its role of prosecutor, especially in terms of what it was thought to not be bringing that may undermine its case. It lied when it told courts that no such evidence existed.

Wouldn’t the magistrates or judge have thrown out these case when the defence outlined their concerns? “Innocent until proved guilty?”

We know that a lot of cases were thrown out

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

And when one side conspires to tell lies to the court - either overtly or by omission - and denies the other side access to evidence that would undermine their case? How does that work in the interests of justice?

No, we're in the fourth year of a massively expensive public enquiry into an IT system what was implemented 25 years ago because there was an ongoing conspiracy to cover up its shortcomings, and those shortcomings were used to secure criminal convictions against individuals who were deliberately denied access to evidence that would likely have resulted in their acquittal. It's also why the Met are now investigating potential cases of Perjury and Perverting the Course of Justice against both PO and Fujitsu current and previous employees.

Would another rigorous four year enquiry into the actions of the previous rigorous four year enquiry help?

Wouldn’t cost more than another £40 million, surely?

Mmm 4 years at £10 million a year ? No, that sounds like not enough….

 

[st13phil]

Wouldn’t the magistrates or judge have thrown out these case when the defence outlined their concerns?

AIUI, in a number of cases the defendant plead guilty in the face of what they saw as "evidence" that they couldn't counter because the PO denied that contrary evidence existed. The "evidence" would not - AFAIK - be tested by the court in those circumstances.

Would another rigorous four year enquiry into the actions of the previous rigorous four year enquiry help?

I suspect that post was made with tongue firmly in cheek, but no, I don't think that would help.

The problem with unwinding all this is the sheer industrial scale of the actions the PO undertook. The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is simply not set up to undertake the number of reviews required in a timely fashion.

 

[m80]

Wouldn’t the magistrates or judge have thrown out these case when the defence outlined their concerns? “Innocent until proved guilty?”

We know that a lot of cases were thrown out

As here have been successful appeals, even pre the CBE 2019,
I guess not.

Computer says yes, in these cases.

 

[m80]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-67922410

She's gotta give the CBE back.

Will this involve a public ceremony?
Will the Spaniel get a chance to cut 'er 'ead off?

 

[philnewmerc]

Wouldn’t the magistrates or judge have thrown out these case when the defence outlined their concerns? “Innocent until proved guilty?”

We know that a lot of cases were thrown out

Perhaps.
But as stated, the PO do have powers akin to the police and CPS - they prosecute with expensive lawyers and tech experts and if you're in a very modest position then pleading guilty to false accounting rather than theft (on the promise of probably not going to prison) seemed attractive to some. Also, if you as a sub postmaster were to loose your case you'd have 100s thousands of costs... big gamble for some who just wanted to move on and start again. Dreadful choice.

 

[philnewmerc]

It was a truly awful situation to be in for everyone caught up in this, an d especially the Post Masters.

Those middle managers are just ordinary people too. Unless you know otherwise, then the Post Office didn’t purposefully recruit, promote and incentivise their middle management to be “downright evil”, and so it’s within us all to do whatever was done or not done, and your comments are a reflection of you and I just as much as it was those middle managers.

There is always an exception to prove the rule, and middle management will have been working hard and trying to do the right thing.

Awh, the poor PO managers, who will think of the managers! Seriously, who else, apart from those poor sods being prosecuted, thought they were in an awful situation? My comment was not that every one of the middle managers were evil. My comment was that the incentive to get ahead, do well, not rock the boat, say 'no problems here boss' and get the pay rise, probably contributed to the perpetuation of this scandal. Just watch the documentary (or the drama, they're both good).

Just think: many sub post masters were told that the PO (NB acting as police and CPS remember, i.e. scary to some people) had proof they were guilty of fraud: The PO have powers similar to the police and CPS rolled into one, i.e. they brought the prosecutions but often misled people into admitting guilt with the threat of prison. If the police had pressured someone into a plea bargain based on zero evidence I think you'd agree that would be wrong.

 

[Harrythedog]

Perhaps.
But as stated, the PO do have powers akin to the police and CPS - they prosecute with expensive lawyers and tech experts and if you're in a very modest position then pleading guilty to false accounting rather than theft (on the promise of probably not going to prison) seemed attractive to some. Also, if you as a sub postmaster were to loose your case you'd have 100s thousands of costs... big gamble for some who just wanted to move on and start again. Dreadful choice.

There was also the initial advice given to Mr Bates I believe, that you could win your case against the PO but they would keep appealing and appealing until he (Mr Bates) ran out of money

 

[philnewmerc]

I think the lesson is power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. 'The power' in this case was allowing the PO to act like a private police force and CPS bringing prosecutions that would never normally have been deemed fit for trial (no evidence - i.e. relying on confessions to lesser offences). The other lesson is stick to your guns as you're innocent until proven guilty, though you have to be stout hearted for that when the options presented (with no lawyer present) is please guilty to this and you won't go to prison. I am baffled why some people don't think this is a public outrage.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

My comment was not that every one of the middle managers were evil. My comment was that the incentive to get ahead, do well, not rock the boat, say 'no problems here boss' and get the pay rise, probably contributed to the perpetuation of this scandal.

Whether it’s every one of the middle management or not you specifically said that hundreds of them and implied that they were capable of war crimes and atrocities. I didn't include the reference to being evil or else it would be a huge quote, but you’re quite clear here:

And you're right, it was tens or hundreds of middle management types who only care about their next promotion and a pay rise based on their "performance", ie nicking innocent postmasters. And to use a very old worn out cliche, they really are the same sort of people who would have stood at Nuremberg and said "look I was just following orders like everyone else"...

It’s easy to use sweeping generalisations to blame anonymous people, in this case middle management, and what you’re implying above is that “they” deliberately chose to do the wrong thing for personal gain.

Was there an exception who did? Almost certainly. Was there hundreds of them who did? I’m not so sure. Would you personally “nick innocent postmasters” for promotion or pay rise, and if you wouldn’t then why do you believe “they” would?

 

[philnewmerc]

Whether it’s every one of the middle management or not you specifically said that hundreds of them and implied that they were capable of war crimes and atrocities. I didn't include the reference to being evil or else it would be a huge quote, but you’re quite clear here:

No, I did not say they were capable of war crimes, come on now be fair I was talking about the similar excuses these people tend to use... I was implying this attitude of turning a blind eye in order to be the yes wo/man to get ahead or at least keep one's job is the common theme. Perhaps I did not make that clear enough. So, to be clear: evil actions, not evil people. Small proportion, not all. Too much power is corrupting, PO should never be able to use police/CPS style prosecution powers again - or any other company.

It’s easy to use sweeping generalisations to blame anonymous people, in this case middle management, and what you’re implying above is that “they” deliberately chose to do the wrong thing for personal gain.

But anonymous people are to blame, both at PO and at Horizon, ideally we'd get to know who and ask them what they were doing and why, but in the absence of that and in the meantime the chief exec is to blame.

Was there an exception who did? Almost certainly. Was there hundreds of them who did? I’m not so sure. Would you personally “nick innocent postmasters” for promotion or pay rise, and if you wouldn’t then why do you believe “they” would?

No I would not turn a blind eye to people being put in prison in order not to rock the boat for money (whether I was a middle manager or the COE), but some (small proportion perhaps) will do that. Most of the time yes men/women are harmless annoyances, but sometimes they cause havoc... and yes, evil deeds occur as a result. (It doesn't follow that they are necessarily evil but to the victim that hardly matters.)

 

[philnewmerc]

On the subject of evil actions for gain: one of the PO prosecutors (not an actual KC or CPS lawyer or policeman - I mean a PO employee with police style statutory powers) told a postmistress that they had proof of theft. As a result she took a plea bargain to plea guilty to false accounting. He knew he was lying to get a conviction... was that evil?

I know people seem to think the sorts of people who became Nazis landed from outer space or were a peculiar anomaly of Germany c1939. Obviously they did not come from Mars and it wasn't because Germans are uniquely susceptible to evil, these people are everywhere, and in the right environment (absolute power over someone else and not wanting to be seen as a trouble maker in the organisation) their unpleasant nature emerges.

 

[Dryce]

On the subject of evil actions for gain: one of the PO prosecutors (not an actual KC or CPS lawyer or policeman - I mean a PO employee with police style statutory powers) told a postmistress that they had proof of theft. As a result she took a plea bargain to plea guilty to false accounting. He knew he was lying to get a conviction... was that evil?

It's certainly immoral.

The problem here is that if somebody had to do some accounting forensics using paper then there is a gating mechanism - you can only process so many cases. If the defendant produced much of the paper then in principle they have access / recollection of it.

When you have a computer system and it flags somebody as guilty - and the computer contains all the records then that puts the individual defendant at a greater disadvantage. And it means the investigators can have more cases flagged and also givens them more power.

If this is happening then the PO needs to sort out its procedures - a revamp is needed along the lines of the police and PACE.

 

[grober]

Why Adolf Eichmann’s final message remains so profoundly unsettling | Giles Fraser: Loose canon

Loose canon: The request for clemency by one of the key architects of the Holocaust is a grim reminder: being ordinary is no protection against doing great evil

www.theguardian.com

 

[baxlin]

And what makes you think that Building Society clerks were such paragons of virtue that they would always declare an “over?”

Guilty until proven innocent?

 

[Bellow]

Sorry to have to say this but the insistence that more do than don't have their hands in the till wherever the opportunity arises smacks of the same mindset that set the PO down its disastrous path. Is this not what we call 'groupthink'? Or merely cynicism? Or projection?

To my mind any that did have their hands in the till are far too few to prevent a wholesale exoneration of the 700. Time here, is of the essence (I saw the real Mr (Alan) Bates interviewed and he reckons 70 of them have died already). Justice for the remaining ones before it is too late is paramount.