Mr Bates v The Post Office

[Herman 9,818]

7 minutes ago, Foxy2600 said:

I wasn’t? I couldn’t believe your beloved BBC would lead with a headline like that - but anyways… you apparently understand me or my persona whereas I make no comments about other people on this 3rd rate Football chat room 

3rd rate?? This is the best rated, pink coloured, Norwich City forum on t'internet.

[sonyc 5,541]

10 minutes ago, Foxy2600 said:

I wasn’t? I couldn’t believe your beloved BBC would lead with a headline like that - but anyways… you apparently understand me or my persona whereas I make no comments about other people on this 3rd rate Football chat room 

Don't bother to post then if that's your take?

Just an idea.

[Foxy2600 305]

26 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Is "anyways" a new word? 

Yup, like gaslighting, nuanced, metrosexual, polymath, ghost job, workfluencer, greenwashing, black washing, rainbowashing, whitewashing… the future!

 

[Foxy2600 305]

31 minutes ago, Herman said:

3rd rate?? This is the best rated, pink coloured, Norwich City forum on t'internet.

True but your kinda communicating with an entity removed from WOTB!

[Foxy2600 305]

32 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Don't bother to post then if that's your take?

Just an idea.

Why does anyone post? It’s mostly sarcasm, comedic value and hypocrisy - surely no one takes this seriously do they? I mean, the 20 minute smart phone light up last night… it wasn’t serious was it?? 

[Well b back 3,262]

5 hours ago, Foxy2600 said:

Seems Bliar and his right hand man Mandy knew all about the problems with Horizon. But the then Trade and Industry Secretary went ahead anyway...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67941495

Not quite sure what that has to do with the problems ? Surely the problems were that instead of putting the problems right, they went into the systems and changed them, the denied it. They then blamed the subpostmasters and mistresses and said they had stolen the money. Doesn’t every computer system have problems ?, but over time the problems are corrected by the owners getting feedback and altering the system accordingly. You would never expect somebody in a trial to be blamed for the system not working.

So I am not sure what I am missing ?

[Foxy2600 305]

Sir Ed (for what?) Davy….

[Foxy2600 305]

48 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Not quite sure what that has to do with the problems ? Surely the problems were that instead of putting the problems right, they went into the systems and changed them, the denied it. They then blamed the subpostmasters and mistresses and said they had stolen the money. Doesn’t every computer system have problems ?, but over time the problems are corrected by the owners getting feedback and altering the system accordingly. You would never expect somebody in a trial to be blamed for the system not working.

So I am not sure what I am missing ?

The role of consultants and so-called ‘help lines’

[Well b back 3,262]

2 hours ago, Foxy2600 said:

The role of consultants and so-called ‘help lines’

Still lost, that’s what I said and you have agreed, so I will ask again, what has setting up trials on a computer system that needed improving got to do with those consultants and help lines saying it did work some years later.

[horsefly 4,310]

On 10/01/2024 at 13:12, Rock The Boat said:

Starmer  - Oxford, Reeves - Oxford, Lammy- Harvard, Cooper - Oxford and Harvard, Mamood - Oxford, Healey- Cambridge, Milliband- Oxford, Kendal- Cambridge, Streeting- Cambridge, Philipson- Oxford. I could check more but from the top Labour posts only Angela Raynor could be described as a working class person. As you can see if you remove you blinkers Oxbridge dominates just as it does for the Tory cabinet.  My claim that the elite positions in this country are filled by people from the same pool is correct. Labour is no exception

Oxford and Cambridge is not the issue. It's the schools they went to before they got to university that distinguishes those who made it there through privilege and those who got there through hard work and genuine ability.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 11/01/2024 at 10:53, horsefly said:

The job of the CPS is to assess whether the evidence provided to them by authorised investigators (i.e. the police, post office etc) is sufficient to make a conviction in a court of law likely and in the public interest. Thus they rely fundamentally on the integrity of the evidence that they don't themselves procure. Judges and juries throughout the land convicted sub-postmasters based on the evidence provided by the Post Office in its private prosecutions. On what grounds would the CPS have judged that a conviction for fraud was unlikely in the 11 cases it prosecuted given the evidence (now known to be fabricated) the Post Office investigators provided? 

BTW The idea that the DPP sees sight of every one of the hundreds of thousands of prosecutions the CPS considers across the country is so absurd it really ought not need stating.

It is beyond credibility that the CPS would not know that there were over 700 convictions processed through the courts even if the majority were prosecuted by the Post Office. It needed just one person in authority to alert to the obvious statistical anomaly, and Starmer as head of the CPS could have and should have been that person. The idea that Starmer didn't know what was happening on his watch is either absurd or the man is inept.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 13/01/2024 at 20:41, Well b back said:

 

So I am not sure what I am missing ?

That ain't a surprise, Welly.

[Herman 9,818]

9 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

It is beyond credibility that the CPS would not know that there were over 700 convictions processed through the courts even if the majority were prosecuted by the Post Office. It needed just one person in authority to alert to the obvious statistical anomaly, and Starmer as head of the CPS could have and should have been that person. The idea that Starmer didn't know what was happening on his watch is either absurd or the man is inept.

If the majority were prosecuted through the PO then the CPS wouldn't have been involved at all. Even the ones handled by the CPS would have been spread out over years and in multiple areas so wouldn't have looked to be an anomaly.

Sorry, but this is a poor attempt at a smear, even for you. There have been numerous Attorneys General, Post Office ministers, DPPs in the time of this debacle, so to pick on only two, who happen to be Opposition leaders, is rather desperate.

[canarydan23 4,060]

35 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

It is beyond credibility that the CPS would not know that there were over 700 convictions processed through the courts even if the majority were prosecuted by the Post Office. It needed just one person in authority to alert to the obvious statistical anomaly, and Starmer as head of the CPS could have and should have been that person. The idea that Starmer didn't know what was happening on his watch is either absurd or the man is inept.

You've tried it so many times, but have you ever actually managed to squeeze a square peg through a round hole?

[Herman 9,818]

9 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

It is beyond credibility that the CPS would not know that there were over 700 convictions processed through the courts even if the majority were prosecuted by the Post Office. It needed just one person in authority to alert to the obvious statistical anomaly, and Starmer as head of the CPS could have and should have been that person. The idea that Starmer didn't know what was happening on his watch is either absurd or the man is inept.

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 hours ago, Herman said:

 

Come on @Rock The Boat, make it make sense.

My posting history will attest to the fact that I am anything but a Keir Starmer apologist, I find the bloke a proper snake and as dishonest as any Tory (bar maybe Boris), but to desperately try and pin this one on him is an amusing spectacle to watch, even against your back catalogue.

[dylanisabaddog 4,969]

34 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Come on @Rock The Boat, make it make sense.

My posting history will attest to the fact that I am anything but a Keir Starmer apologist, I find the bloke a proper snake and as dishonest as any Tory (bar maybe Boris), but to desperately try and pin this one on him is an amusing spectacle to watch, even against your back catalogue.

I don't agree with you about Starmer but you are absolutely spot on. No Government should be expected to micro manage the Post Office and it's extremely doubtful any of this hit Starmer's CPS desk.

I'm not particularly anti Tory but I am very much against this particular version. The method used by RTB is deflection politics and we're going to be seeing a lot of it in the next few months. It's all they have left. They'll be muttering about Savile soon. 

Edited January 15 by dylanisabaddog

[Ken Hairy 3,779]

Don't normally post in Off Topic, but had to on this topic. I watched the 1st episode when I got home from work this afternoon and ended up binging the whole 4 episodes. 

I too have been left angry, I had a rough idea of the story but it just defies belief this actually happened.

I see that Julia Vennell has returned her CBE after the petition for her to do so, but her, van Den Bergen and the senior management at Fujitsu at the time should all be in jail, and hopefully that time will come. The fact that Vennell is also a priest just makes her whole deception even worse, these people are just sub human scum with blood on their hands.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 15/01/2024 at 09:59, dylanisabaddog said:

I don't agree with you about Starmer but you are absolutely spot on. No Government should be expected to micro manage the Post Office and it's extremely doubtful any of this hit Starmer's CPS desk.

I'm not particularly anti Tory but I am very much against this particular version. The method used by RTB is deflection politics and we're going to be seeing a lot of it in the next few months. It's all they have left. They'll be muttering about Savile soon. 

I'm not deflecting at all. Where I'm coming from is that they ALL knew that something was amiss, and they ALL did nothing about it. They knew something was wrong long before the whistleblower confirmed in 2015 what everyone suspected and even though the CPS handled only a proportion of the prosecutions and even though Starmer may not have seen individual cases, it is beyond belief that so many prosecutions would have gone through the courts system without someone spotting the huge statistical uptick in similar cases. As head of CPS, Starmer would receive a regular report on the number of prosecutions by category for each month, quarter, year etc. 

I know you guys need to keep Starmer's reputation clean until you can get him safely over the finishing line of the next GE but to say everybody is guilty except for the incoming PM is just plain daft. None of them deserve your vote.

[dylanisabaddog 4,969]

6 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

I'm not deflecting at all. Where I'm coming from is that they ALL knew that something was amiss, and they ALL did nothing about it. They knew something was wrong long before the whistleblower confirmed in 2015 what everyone suspected and even though the CPS handled only a proportion of the prosecutions and even though Starmer may not have seen individual cases, it is beyond belief that so many prosecutions would have gone through the courts system without someone spotting the huge statistical uptick in similar cases. As head of CPS, Starmer would receive a regular report on the number of prosecutions by category for each month, quarter, year etc. 

I know you guys need to keep Starmer's reputation clean until you can get him safely over the finishing line of the next GE but to say everybody is guilty except for the incoming PM is just plain daft. None of them deserve your vote.

To say none of them did anything is incorrect. Lord Arbuthnot did a huge amount as an MP and member of the House of Lords as did other MPs including Kwasi Kwarteng. 

In case you were unaware, in the vast majority of cases. the Post Office has the power to prosecute without reference to the CPS. That surely has to change but it's a bit late now. 

Your accusations against the CPS are absolute nonsense. Even the Daily Mail realises that. Our criminal courts have way over 1m cases to consider every year. The CPS handles a live case load of around 150,000 at any one time and considers way more than the 1m that reach the courts.

Post Office cases averaged around 30 a year and most of those pleaded guilty to avoid a prison sentence. The number who pleaded not guilty in court was around 1 a year. Over a 15 year period the number of cases that were referred to the CPS is variously reported as between 3 and 27. But for some bizarre reason you think that the head of the CPS must have known about that tiny number of cases. Really? 

It's somewhat ironic that on another thread you have questioned my suggestion that the Conservative Party will continue to make unpleasant and incorrect allegations against Starmer. But here we are. Whatever you do, don't let the truth get in the way of a General Election. We can't have that, can we? 

Edited January 17 by dylanisabaddog

[horsefly 4,310]

On 14/01/2024 at 21:07, Rock The Boat said:

It is beyond credibility that the CPS would not know that there were over 700 convictions processed through the courts even if the majority were prosecuted by the Post Office. It needed just one person in authority to alert to the obvious statistical anomaly, and Starmer as head of the CPS could have and should have been that person. The idea that Starmer didn't know what was happening on his watch is either absurd or the man is inept.

Perhaps you would be wise to familiarise yourself with the  officially defined role of the CPS with regard to private prosecutions. For example: "The private prosecutor is not under a duty to inform the CPS that a private prosecution has commenced." 

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 17/01/2024 at 15:05, horsefly said:

Perhaps you would be wise to familiarise yourself with the  officially defined role of the CPS with regard to private prosecutions. For example: "The private prosecutor is not under a duty to inform the CPS that a private prosecution has commenced." 

If we are to believe your narrative that Starmer knew nothing, then it is admitting that the next Prime Minister was blissfully unaware of the largest national scandal in living memory passing by right under his nose. He better up his game when he gets the top job or the country is in trouble

[dylanisabaddog 4,969]

5 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

If we are to believe your narrative that Starmer knew nothing, then it is admitting that the next Prime Minister was blissfully unaware of the largest national scandal in living memory passing by right under his nose. He better up his game when he gets the top job or the country is in trouble

You really are starting to look a little bit silly. Read the 2 posts above yours again. @horseflyand I have explained in the simplest language why Starmer wasn't responsible. Even the Daily Mail has dropped this ridiculous accusation.

As for upping his game or the country will be in trouble, I have to admit to having burst out laughing. He will be following May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak,probably the 4 most incompetent people ever to lead this country. I'm struggling to see how things could possibly be any worse! 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,574]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

You really are starting to look a little bit silly. Read the 2 posts above yours again. @horseflyand I have explained in the simplest language why Starmer wasn't responsible. Even the Daily Mail has dropped this ridiculous accusation.

As for upping his game or the country will be in trouble, I have to admit to having burst out laughing. He will be following May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak,probably the 4 most incompetent people ever to lead this country. I'm struggling to see how things could possibly be any worse! 

With the possible exception of Truss, banding the words 'most incompetent' about makes you look a bit silly yourself.

Getting a piece of paper from Hitler and declaring 'peace in our time' is incompetence, getting the country to the point of having to have a bailout from the IMF as in the 70s is incompetence, taking the country to war on false pretences in a way that permanently destroys the credibility of the UN  and going on to lie and cover up in a way that permanently damages trust in British politics on a matter so serious is reckless incompetence that way outstrips anything Sunak, Johnson, or May did.

Edited January 19 by littleyellowbirdie

[dylanisabaddog 4,969]

3 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

With the possible exception of Truss, banding the words 'most incompetent' about makes you look a bit silly yourself.

Getting a piece of paper from Hitler and declaring 'peace in our time' is incompetence, getting the country to the point of having to have a bailout from the IMF as in the 70s is incompetence, taking the country to war on false pretences in a way that permanently destroys the credibility of the UN is reckless incompetence that way outstrips anything Sunak, Johnson, or May did.

Probably an argument for a different thread but the sheer incompetence of Johnson is there for all to see. May nearly lost an election to Corbyn for God's sake. And Sunak borrowed an enormous amount of money at floating rates because he didn't think interest rates would rise. Goodness knows what that has cost us. 

You're obviously right that historically we have had to deal with some idiots and idiotic decisions but this is 4 people in a row over a 6 year period. It's made worse by the fact that there are some perfectly competent people in the Conservative Party who could have done a good job. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,574]

6 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Probably an argument for a different thread but the sheer incompetence of Johnson is there for all to see. May nearly lost an election to Corbyn for God's sake. And Sunak borrowed an enormous amount of money at floating rates because he didn't think interest rates would rise. Goodness knows what that has cost us. 

You're obviously right that historically we have had to deal with some idiots and idiotic decisions but this is 4 people in a row over a 6 year period. It's made worse by the fact that there are some perfectly competent people in the Conservative Party who could have done a good job. 

May's electoral incompetence is an interesting one I hadn't considered and I have to concede it certainly looked incredibly incompetent. Part of me still questions whether it wasn't a concerted effort at electoral suicide in a desperate bid to abort leaving the EU in a way that left the Conservative party to live to fight another day, but simply couldn't overcome the Corbyn effect.

[dylanisabaddog 4,969]

17 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

May's electoral incompetence is an interesting one I hadn't considered and I have to concede it certainly looked incredibly incompetent. Part of me still questions whether it wasn't a concerted effort at electoral suicide in a desperate bid to abort leaving the EU in a way that left the Conservative party to live to fight another day, but simply couldn't overcome the Corbyn effect.

Allegedly her last internal review at the Bank of England said she was extremely good at detail but a bit of a plodder. It also said she wasn't suitable for a management position. She won the race to be Conservative leader by saying nothing and simply sitting back and watching the others stab each other in the back. To be so poor as to allow Corbyn to get within about 10 seats of you is mind boggling. 

[Herman 9,818]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

With the possible exception of Truss, banding the words 'most incompetent' about makes you look a bit silly yourself.

Getting a piece of paper from Hitler and declaring 'peace in our time' is incompetence, getting the country to the point of having to have a bailout from the IMF as in the 70s is incompetence, taking the country to war on false pretences in a way that permanently destroys the credibility of the UN  and going on to lie and cover up in a way that permanently damages trust in British politics on a matter so serious is reckless incompetence that way outstrips anything Sunak, Johnson, or May did.

Although it looked bad and has been used against him all these years this wasn't incompetence. It was a way of slowing things down a bit and buying time for us to get ready for the inevitable war. He knew what he was doing but it wasn't done well.

[horsefly 4,310]

9 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

If we are to believe your narrative that Starmer knew nothing, then it is admitting that the next Prime Minister was blissfully unaware of the largest national scandal in living memory passing by right under his nose. He better up his game when he gets the top job or the country is in trouble

Oh dear! "The largest national scandal" that people like you have only just become aware of since a TV drama a few weeks ago. Starmer was DPP from 2008 to 2013. The auditors Second Sight produced their report highlighting their concerns about the (private) Post Office prosecutions in 2014. Would you like me to do the maths for you?

[horsefly 4,310]

6 months ago Labour MP Darren Jones made the very clear case that Post Office officials were guilty of breaching the very same theft act that was falsely used to prosecute innocent sub-postmasters. Very much worth watching: