At last!
Paula Vennells and Fujitsu deserve their day in court
A statutory public inquiry will be held into the Post Office Horizon scandal, the UK government said today – and MPs want to know why Fujitsu has largely been out of the limelight in the case so far. The existing inquiry, chaired by retired judge Sir Wyn Williams, has no legal powers to force witnesses to give evidence, …
There’s also “perverting the course of justice” and “conspiracy to pervert the course of justice” that ought to cop a fair number of Fujitsu and PO staff.
Fujitsu’s expert witnesses Gareth Jenkins and Anne Chambers will probably be hung out to dry (deservedly so) and used as a human shield for everyone else, I suspect.
Paula Venells, all of the Post Office staff who aided her, the post office lawyers and Fujitsu including the individuals involved should all be in court for their malicious and criminal actions to cover up the shortcomings of the system and the failures to address them in a an honest and professional way.
However, in my crystal ball all I see is a bucket with a brush sticking out of the top.
I'd love to see some "smoking gun" emails pointing at Venells and others..
No fucking chance.
The establishment looks after its own. Any evidence that might convict that evil shit Vennels and her coven will get "lost" or be deemed 'insufficient to secure a successful prosecution".
That's how it's worked in this country for decades. Who got prosecuted or went to jail for the HIV-tainted blood scandal? Or the Equity Life scandal? Or the collapse of RBS or HBOS or Rover? Who went to jail for Bloody Sunday? Or Hillsborough? Or the BAe, GPT and Rolls-Royce bribery scandals?
Not being British, technically I'm probably not entitled to a vote. But screw that, I upvoted you anyway because there are evil shits in every society and somehow they manage to cover each others asses every time. If you are a low shit you face prison and ruin. If you are a high shit at worst it's another lawyer's fee but with "proper" fixing it never gets that far.
The thing is, none of these people ought to be mates of the current government. This scandal started in 1999, and carried on for 15 years. Labour was in power and would have been appointing their mates for at least 11 of those 15 years.
No, I suspect that the issue actually lies elseware. Have you ever watched "Yes Minister?"
In this case civil servants have provably committed crimes that have resulted in innocent people being jailed, and at least one of whom has committed suicide. These are of course serious criminal matters, and should they come before a court it is near certain that a number of civil servants will end up in jail for perverting the course of justice, criminal malfeasance in office etc.
And at this prospect civil servants appear to be closing ranks and protecting their own by attempting to delay and limit the enquiry into the mess until everybody involved has died of old age. I mean, unless you think that the ministers wrote those terms of reference personally instead of leaving the job to the civil servants employed to do it...?
The only way that it's likely that this is done as everybody but the civil service wants is MP's changing the wording the civil service supply with a pen in the house of commons, and then immediately voting on that.
But in buying ICL there may very well be information that means they have to be treated as British. Fujitsu and ICL were playing together in the early 80s so there may be 40 years of communications between governments and bosses to accidentally be released into the public domain should the PR dept need some squirrels and dead cats.
Are Amstrad even a company any more?
It used to be that many Sky boxes used to say "Made by Amstrad", but now they say "Made by Sky", at least the ones I've seen.
Hmm. Amstrad is still listed at Companies House, but it has been declared as dormant, with a total value of £16!
The directors (3) also all seem to be directors of other Sky companies.
If this is the case why has the inquiry have been given more teeth?
These sorts of inquires, particularly with the focus on one specific system generally do come out with all the information and any underhand dealings. The courts have already quashed the convictions.
I feel that this is one where those culpable are going to have great difficulty in hiding.
This post has been deleted by its author
If I falsify testing results on aircraft parts, I can be held liable even though I'm working for a company... we all sign the paperwork off all the way through the process from recieving the purchase order all the way through to delivery to our customer.
Fujitsu and the post office KNEW horizons was not fit for purpose and that its data should not be relied on , if we tried that sort of thing, the company would be kicked off the customer's approved contractors list and I'd be kicked out of a job.. and god forbid an aircraft went down through our falsifying records...
The suits in charge of the PO and fujitsu should in in the dock answering why they decieved the courts into thinking horizons was telling the truth and explain why they falsely jailed so many people over it.
And then suffer a f'ing long prison sentence to deter other c-level execs from doing that sort of thing too
Re "If I falsify testing results on aircraft parts, I can be held liable even though I'm working for a company"
Not saying it's right, but it seems sometimes the punishment for the crime is inverse to the scale of the crime. Look at HMRC. If, as a lone tax payer, you owe them a couple of hundred, or even a few thousand pounds, they will threaten you, and actively chase it. Raise the amount you owe them to a couple of billion (as Bernie Ecclestone did), and they want to negotiate.
Regarding the Horizon scandal, people have killed themselves as a result of these bugs. Hundreds of others have endured prison, or other negative consequences for things they did not do. Those in charge at both the Post Office *and* Fujitsu covered this up, and they should be made to *pay* for their crimes. Probably won't though.
"If I falsify testing results on aircraft parts, I can be held liable even though I'm working for a company... we all sign the paperwork off all the way through the process from receiving the purchase order all the way through to delivery to our customer."
Airworthiness certificates for aircraft are governed by quite strict laws and regulations (Boeing 737 Max notwithstanding). For example, in the RAF a commanding officer is not legally permitted to order a mechanic to certify any aircraft as airworthy, whereas in the IT world, a senior manager can usually decide the level of importance of any known 'bugs' and therefore whether the service should 'go live' or be relied upon.
I'm sure a lot of the Register's readers have encountered management changing the severities of known bugs in order to get software released and meet some inconvenient payment deadline. (I know I have, but cannot reveal the details for obvious reasons.)
Your post title "Typical bullcrap" is entirely appropriate.
.. the ability, mentioned in the excellent BBC Radio 4 series detailing the history of the Horizon Scandal, for people on the Horizon operations staff to view and/or make changes to the database content of the live system. IOW I'd like to know:
As soon as the radio program mentioned that a terminal was available to the operations team that could give that level of access, regardless of whether, as the program implied, it supported designed-in auditing and account manipulation functions or was merely a login with access to a DBA's SQL command utility, the fact that it was accessible to an apparently ordinary member of the operations team was an obvious warning that all was not well with Horizon, e.g.:
>methinks that gobby Labour MPs should keep their traps shut
You're obviously not old enough to have watched "Yes, Minister", a documentary that was disguised as a sitcom. MPs are like worker bees in business; they have a nominal role but they're not necessarily part of the management team and are invariably excluded from decision making until their 'soundness' is verified.
I don't have much faith that the everyday MP was involved in any decisions about Horizon. They'd have been fed the Powerpoint pablum like everyone else -- and not encouraged to ask any questions. Once bitten, though....
On the other hand, the first case of fraud brought by the PO was in 2007, just as Gordon Brown became Prime Minster. By the time Cameron came in in 2010, Labour had had 3 years of seeing multiple caes being brought and an action group being set up to contest the alarmingly growing number of supposed fraud cases. Even in 2009, back under Labour, at least one case was deferred due to questions over the IT system. It was known about and on the public record under Labour.
The Torys were worse thoiugh, they have presided of all of the rest of the process and not taken action, but as pointed out above, it did start under Labour and the warning flags had already been raised.
Actually it was first piloted in 1995 and the contract was awarded in 1996 having started the procurement in 1994…. Labour inherited it from the Tory government that were in power until May 1997. The Labour government actually stopped the Social Security aspect of the system in 1999 - which only left the Post Office counters part to continue which was managed by the Post Office themselves (or at least Consignia, their holding company)
At the time a lot of this was happening, the Post Office was in the process of being 'privatised'. I think at one reason for the denial that there were any problems, was to avoid screwing up the sale.
Not saying that's a good reason, just that it may have been a reason.
"this Horizon shit was introduced by the Labour party"
It wasn't. It was introduced by the Post Office. Which has never been run by any political party. The Post Office was run by a different bunch of evil, corrupt, lying bastards. Though I can see how you might confuse the two.
...a criminal offence of 'reckless prosecution', along similar lines to 'reckless driving'.
Prosecutors and witnesses, as in this case, have the power to destroy lives as effectively as a dangerous driver - and when their conduct in using those powers amounts to recklessness, they should face similar penalties, including imprisonment.
And this, I think, is one of those very rare cases where the conduct was so serious and persistent that it could be argued the proposed law should be applied retroactively.
That might possibly 'get' the post office prosecutors, although it could be argued that since the PO was privatised they're no longer 'in a public office', and it wouldn't touch the Fujitsu employees who were equally central to this.
No, I stand by my suggestion of 'reckless prosecution' - although perjury could also apply to individuals.
The Post Office seem to have been aware of the problems with Horizon for some time, and the only way that the Post Office would have known is if Fujitsu told them. It's mystifying what happened after that and I'd love to know why these legal cases against postmasters were brought. The expert witnesses from Fujitsu surely must have been advised by Fujitsu's legal team, and it's beyond belief that they would have advised those witnesses to commit perjury.....There's more to this than meets the eye.
"The expert witnesses from Fujitsu surely must have been advised by Fujitsu's legal team, and it's beyond belief that they would have advised those witnesses to commit perjury.....There's more to this than meets the eye."
You've clearly never had any dealings with Fujitsu, if their legal team is internal, providing that advice would make complete sense and would be in-keeping with how all the other Fujitsu departments conduct themselves...
Don't worry, anyone at the top-level, may they be ministers, judges or part of the C-suite will be left off the hook. Subalterns will pay instead.
Those people know how to defend each others. The castes who dominate us feel rightly that they are above the common law.
Up to a point. Some scandals are so bad that every now and then one of the big people has to be sacrificed, just to keep the mob* happy. Sending a pregnant woman to prison, and at leat one of the innocent people committing suicide and over a decade of lying in court will need quite some sacrifice, although Vennells would almost certainly be considered a non-violent offender (if found guilty) and probably get a nice cushy low security prison apartment.
Just remember that the Maxwells and Rebekah got off by assuring the inquiries that they had no personal knowledge of hacking into people's phones or any illegal activities conducted by staff at the News of the World, despite one of their managers stating to the parliamentary committee that they had paid police officers for information 'legally' even though it is illegal to pay police officers for information. There would have to be good evidence that Vennells knew Horizon was faulty and deliberately withheld that from the Post Office prosecution teams.
I fear you may be right, but hope that you are wrong.
*In this case 'the mob' refers to the UK public, not the organised crime syndicates allegedly working out of various parts of those fair states known as Italy, or the USA.
Those who were prosecuted are the obvious ones to feel aggrieved. Then there are many others (thousands?) who were audited, came up short and had to pay it back out of their own money (or face sacking/prosecution).
No doubt there are crooks everywhere, but surely very few amongst those many who ran post offices for decades. I hope they get it returned, even though it can't fix the wrong it would be the right thing to do.
As a one time FJ employee and worked as a Horizon field engineer, we all knew the system was a POS, hardware was years out of date and barely functioned P2-233mmx. yes I felt as dirty as the equipment that was never maintained correctly, we did an electrical safety testing project for P.O on the cheap and I lost count on how many desktops I blew up when checking them and postmasters always looked worried when we recovered them, as if they knew shortfalls a risk !