Reply With QuoteIf I've heard "As I recall" and "To the best of my recollection" from Susan Crichton once today, I've heard it a dozen or more. Cautious doesn't quite cover it.
I've not really been paying too much attention to it this morning.........but the alternative 'wording' email piqued my interest a lot. With every witness that stands we can see more and more evidence of the corporate cover up.
If I've heard "As I recall" and "To the best of my recollection" from Susan Crichton once today, I've heard it a dozen or more. Cautious doesn't quite cover it.
Yes, and as she was clearly 'hung out to dry' by Vannells at a board meeting she was supposed to have attended but wasn't called, (due to her being hung out to dry in that meeting), it makes no sense that she doesn't come clean about what was going on and who knew what/when! Maybe now that is out in the open she'll be more forthright this afternoon?Originally Posted by PickleB
Best Regards - Peter
I'd hate to be with you when you're on your own.
Skewered by the inquiry lawyers several times, including on the matter of Orwellian language, not mitigating or excusing her responsibility, but clearly thrown under the bus by Vennells and Perkins (one-down from a dame, Mrs Jack Straw, Will Remain-Failure Straw's mum). Vennells and Perkins took a real pasting this afters so their personal appearances should be worth checking in on. Seem a thoroughly nasty pair, their notes to file were revealing.
Last edited by BillyCasper; 23rd April 2024 at 20:12.
It seems the lawyer has thrown Venells straight under the bus
There's a big hole being dug for Venells. Tomorrow we see her buddy Angela up, that should be interesting.
What did you take as highlights? I’m gonna have to watch. I assume he knew, did nothing in his two years (as instructed by Venells?). So he says I guess. It’s hotting up.
Had it on in the background whilst working, but what a day!
I feel that I am missing something. Why did POL only employ lawyers with experience in civil law? So far at this has been the case for at least two of those called to give evidence, albeit that they were using outside legal firms (chambers?) to lead the prosecutions.
I think before separation the criminal lawyers were in RM Group. After separation POL had at least Singh and Wilson in criminal roles. Whether they were competent or not is another matter. Singh’s reputation took another battering today. He appeared in an earlier hearing and is an absolute buffoon.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
A slight aside, but this is very illuminating. A worker's experience of Royal Mail decline since privatisation:
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-falling-apart
I think it was becoming clear to all that it was a mess, but crikey!
So clever my foot fell off.
That's a grim read. They are struggling to recruit posties up here. Many try it but a hell of a lot fail. The turnover is supposed to be high.
A package arrived in a jiffy bag two days ago. The package had been opened and the sharpening strop removed. A rare event indeed thankfully.
Yesterday's episode was very interesting and paved the way for PV's episode next week, (if she turns up). Hopefully today will be even more interesting and add to it.
Best Regards - Peter
I'd hate to be with you when you're on your own.
Sorry, that's alright then, lying cow, if she doesn't get prosecuted!!
Half a day in and she looks like she’s had enough. I felt he demonstrated she was complicit in the remote access cover up from what I saw. She obvs can’t recall much. Conveniently. Except a party line on wording which didn’t seem to exist apart from in her head.
She’s coming across as the most unaccomplished liar so far!
Best Regards - Peter
I'd hate to be with you when you're on your own.
To my mind, AvdB spent the latter part of this morning attempting to refute Counsel's suggestion that he may have perjured herself before the High Court. She seemed to say that she didn't because she didn't fully understand, realise the import of, take cognisance of, etc emails she received flagging up bugs with the Horizon system before she admits to knowing about them.
Unfortunately, the proof of perjury requires the prosecution to show that the defendant:
- wilfully making a material statement which is false; and
- knew that it is false or did not believie it to be true.
...and that state of mind may be difficult to demonstrate.
Does anyone know, please, what standard of proof is required in proceedings for perjury...ie is it 'beyond reasonable doubt' or 'balance of probabilty'? Given that the offence is criminal, I suspect that it is the former.
It would be nice if the Inquiry would supply her with a box of paper tissues and she chose to blow her nose rather than sniffing her way through her evidence.
Last edited by PickleB; 25th April 2024 at 14:29.
You can't be in the job and then claim no responsibility for your actions, incompetence is no excuse
Agreed...but liability (if eventually demonstrated) is not evidence of perjury.
Her body language was extremely defensive. Continually fiddling with her hands and crossing arms.
There's a lot of these people trying to obfuscate, twist out of their responsibilities and have bad memory lapses.
Indeed, but based on the people interviewed in the Horizon enquiry it pays well. When I was young I was told 'Cream Rises To The Top', I think a better expression would be 'Scum Floats' in these cases. Genuinely, how do these people get such jobs?
Best Regards - Peter
I'd hate to be with you when you're on your own.
Just wait until the later part of Friday afternoon when the SPM’s barristers get their chance.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
A lot of them have worked for the Post Office for years - products of the system and process/attitude in the organisation.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Indeed, that is often the best part and definitely worth the wait. The gloves really come off.
I was always taught that in large organisations people rise to their level of incompetence
Have they learned nothing from the BBC? Just claim 'mental health' and head off into the sunset with a fat pension.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
You realise you’re saying this to Peter, don’t you?
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
You realise you’re saying this to Peter, don’t you?
It’s a matter of principle
Last edited by Griswold; 25th April 2024 at 22:58.
Best Regards - Peter
I'd hate to be with you when you're on your own.
ICYMI (I had):
- Post Office lawyer was warned of 'wrongful' convictions decade ago
- Post Office executive warned of wrongful conviction six years before innocent man was cleared
...the PO executive in the second of those being AvdB. Both are from ITV's coverage...link.
The higher up the tree they climb, the more you can see their arses.
"Bite my shiny metal ass."
- Bender Bending Rodríguez
If only Fujitsu had snuck in to change Angela van den Bogerd’s evidence
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/8...e640cde2fd2587
The Peter Principle seems to apply to those at the top of POL. That is on top of them being loathsome individuals who’ve been caught out.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Well, AvdB was a cold cookie. Brazen. Deflected everything.
Next up (mainly) for me is Jarnail Singh at the end of next week. Then it's a bit of wait for the main event, PV.
I also see that Gareth Jenkins is slated for four days at the end of June. That's going to be heavy duty.
Why does it need to take so long?
Dunno but from observation if you are say a humble carer, just one example, and you mistakenly tick the wrong box on the application form, then the full weight of the authorities drops on you post haste from a great height. Weird.
It's almost as if when a person is perceived to commit a crime against the State, even if it be an honest mistake, that such is dealt with incredibly seriously and at pace YET when the State commits a heinous crime against the people...In this instance the State being represented ''at arms length'' by the PO and Fujitsu, then the wheels of justice will most assuredly grind at glacial pace, the State's Ministers distracted, appeased with obscuration from the ''arms length'' arm's myrmidons.
Last edited by Passenger; Today at 10:23.
Posting Permissions
