FUJ00152290 - Mr Lee Castleton Case Study: Email from Anne Chambers to Peter Sewell re. P.O v Castleton: Transaction Logs.

Evidence on official site

FUJ00152290
FUJ00152290

From: Chambers Anne
O[/O=EXCHANGE/OU=ADMINGROUP1/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=ANNE.CHAMBERS]

Sent: Mon 07/08/2006 4:35:16 PM (UTC)

To: Sewell Peter (FELO1)§.

Ce: Jenkins Gareth Gif

Subject: I RE: P.O -v- Castleton: Transaction logs

Peter,

Don't think I have seen a copy of the letter so could you send it to me.

Since SSC resources are very stretched towards the end of August, from our point of view the sooner I can get started on
this the better.

Anne

oo Original Message-----

From: Jenkins Gareth GI

Sent: 07 August 2006 17:22

To: Sewell Peter (FELO1)

Cc: Chambers Anne O

Subject: RE: P.O -v- Castleton: Transaction logs

Peter,
Yes, I think I've seen the letter on an earlier email.

I spoke with Anne this morning and we've agreed that once the CP is approved, that she will carry out the initial analysis
(based on transactions that we get from Penny) and then we will review them together and I'll front up any report we
present to POL.

As I mentioned to Brian, my main problem is in having my priorities set between this work and my other work on Horizon
and HNG-X.

Regards
Gareth

Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Applications Architect
Post Office Account

FUJITSU
Lovelace Road, Bracknell, Berkshi
Tel:
Mobile:
email:
Web:

Fujitsu Services Limited, Registered in England no 96056, Registered Office 22 Baker Street, London, W1U 3BW.
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be

privileged. Fujitsu Services does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is
virus-free.

From: Sewell Peter (FELO1)
FUJ00152290
FUJ00152290

Sent: 07 August 2006 16:44
To: Jenkins Gareth GI
Subject: FW: P.O -v- Castleton: Transaction logs

Gareth

Looks like the POL want to proceed no matter whatever the costs.

Mr Dilley is asking for analysis of Mr Castleton’s solicitors comments in the attached letter in addition to the analysis of
the Transaction Logs. Is this something you was aware of.

Pete

Security Project Manager

Post Office Account

FUJITSU SERVICES

Sackville House, Brook Close, Lewes, East Sussex, BN7 2FZ
Tel:
Mobile
Fax
E-Mail
Web http://uk. fujitsu.com

Fujitsu Services Registered in England no 96056, Registered Office 22 Baker Street, London W1U 3BW

This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu
Services does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended ot that it is virus free.

4 Original Message-----
From: Stephen Dilley [mailto;
Sent: 07 August 2006 16:20
To: Pinder Brian
Cc: Peter.Sewell@
Subject: RE: P.O -v-

mandy. talbot@'_
ransaction logs

Dear Brian,

The P.O have considered the costs involved and have now authorised you to proceed with this task.

Please can I see the draft report before it is finalised and let me know if I can assist by supplying any further information
to you. What we'd like at the end is a reasoned analysis explaining whether the comments in Mr Castleton's solicitors
letter (attached) are wrong or right and if so, why. We may well have to produce it to the Court and rely on it, so it also
needs to make sense to a judge who might not be IT literate and who doesn't know anything about Horizon.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards.

Stephen Dilley

Solicitor
_for and on behalf of Bond Pearce LLP

uly
To: Pinder Brian
Cc: Peter.Sewell@

FUJ00152290
FUJ00152290

Subject: P.O -v- Castleton: Transaction logs
Importance: High

Brian

Stephen Dilley (representing the Post Office) is asking if it is possible that someone undertakes an analysis of the figures
recorded on the transaction logs supplied by Fujitsu against the figures on the completed cash account for CAP 42
(08/01/04 - 14/01/04). It appears that the solicitor's for Castleton are saying that they've compared the transaction logs
with the cash accounts for week 42 themselves (just for an initial

analysis) and that they don't match. They conclude that Horizon is therefore only recording half the transaction. I've
attached below the letter dated 25th July from Castleton's solicitors which outlines details of the anomalies.

(See attached file: eCopy scanned document.pdf)

Given this is a 'test' case and that the integrity of the Horizon system is being challenged, my own opinion is that this
exercise should be completed by an ‘expert’ from Fujitsu. However it will obviously be extremely time consuming as all
the figures recorded will need to be methodically and carefully analysed. It is also important that we complete the
analysis and respond formally to the points raised as soon as possible, therefore my first question is :

1/\s this an exercise that Fujitsu could undertake, possibly by Gareth perhaps, who would presumably have a thorough
understanding of the figures recorded on both the transaction logs and the figures on an office cash account ?

2/ If the answer is yes, how soon could this exercise be performed and a formal response prepared ?

3/ Will there be a cost involved and if so how much ?

I would appreciate an early response

Regards

Graham

Casework Manager
Post Office Ltd Investigation Team

PO BOX 1, CROYDON, CR9 1WN

This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named recipient,
you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication.
If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system.

The information in this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged and protected by law.
The intended recipient only is authorised to access this e-mail and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify the sender as soon as possible and delete any copies. Unauthorised use, dissemination, distribution,
publication or copying of this communication is prohibited.

Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked by us with virus detection software before transmission. You
should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. Bond Pearce LLP accepts no liability for any loss
or damage which may be caused by software viruses.

Bond Pearce LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership registered in England and Wales number 0C311430.
Registered Office: 3 Temple Quay, Temple Back East, Bristol, BS1 6DZ.

A list of Members is available from our registered office. Any reference to a Partner in relation to Bond Pearce LLP
means a Member of Bond Pearce LLP. Bond Pearce LLP is regulated by the Law Society.