FUJ00156530
FUJ00156530
From: Jenkins Gareth Gl[/o=Exchange/ou=AdminGroup1/cn=Recipients/cn=Gareth.Jenkins]
Sent: Wed 14/03/2012 11:33:00 AM (UTC)
To: Thomas Pennyf,_
Subject: I RE: RM v Bramwell
Penny,
Thanks for this.
I think we need to do the following:
1. Get POL to sort out commercials so that I can spend time on this
2. Geta proper electronic version of the report. By this I mean a Word Document with any associated Excel
spreadsheets (what you sent me was just a scanned image of the hard copy)
3. Once I get those I can go through the report in detail making any suitable comments. An initial detailed
comment on the document will probably take around a day (but potentially longer if we don’t get it
electronically!) It may also be useful if I carry out a similar analysis on the logs you have extracted which may
take another couple of days. If we’re then talking about meetings with Counsel and court appearances, I
suggest you get cover for at least 10 days to start with (but of course we only charge what we spend!)
I suspect that points 1 & 2 could take a while, so it really depends on when POL can do that before I start spending any
time on this and also whether it can be done by 5/4/12. My time is fairly tight at present, but I expect this will take
priority once we get all the info required.
Regards
Gareth
Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Business Applications Architect
Post Office Account
ea Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
From: Thomas Penny
Sent: 14 March 2012 10:55
To: Jenkins Gareth GI
Subject: FW: RM v Bramwell
Gareth
Please see mailstring.
Kind regards
Penny
From: Graham Brander
Sent: 14 March 2012 10:33
FUJ00156530
FUJ00156530
To: Thomas Penny
Cc: Jane M Owen; Post Office Security; Andrew Bolc
Subject: FW: RM v Bramwell
Hi Penny
Please would you look at the e-mail below from our solicitors in the Bishops Hull case and pass onto Gareth. Counsel
would like Gareth to advise on what from the defence expert report faxed to you last week that he is able to rebut if
anything.
I have asked for an electronic copy of the expert report but it is down to the defence as to whether they are prepared to
supply this, as they are only required to serve a hard copy.
The court has stipulated that any response from us to the Defence expert report needs to be served by 5" April. Would
you please ask Gareth if he would be able to meet this timescale?
Thanks.
Regards
Graham Brander
Security Manager
Security Operations
Post Office Ltd
Confidential Information: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
Ifyou are not the intended recipient, please contact me by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
From: Andrew Bolc
Sent: 13 March 2012 17:00
To: Graham Brander
Subject: FW: RM v Bramwell
Graham,
Please see Emma's email for your information.
Could you see if Fujitsu can work with these rather
vague instructions, otherwise i think the only way
forward is for you to meet with Sue as soon as possible
FUJ00156530
FUJ00156530
to help her understand the system and iron out the specifics
that need to be addressed.
It would seem easiest if you could contact Sue's clerk
directly to arrange a convienient date.
Thanks Andrew
From: Emma Haley
Sent: 13 March 2012 1
To: Andrew Bolc
Subject: RM v Bramwell
Dear Andrew
RM v Bramwell
Counsel would, bluntly, like Fujitsu to pour as much cold water as possible on the defence report. If
the expert is saying we cannot disagree with anything at all, then we are potentially in some
difficulty. I have asked Counsel to provide a specific list of questions, but really the essence is: how
much, if anything, can we rebut? And can we explain the accounting system to a jury in a way they
will find easy to understand?
A conference is, of course, going to be essential. I mentioned to counsel Mr Brander's suggestion of
“barrister training" in Cardiff. That might be ideal. rohahly..easiast for.investiaator to liaise directly
with counsel's clerk, Grant Bidwell, email: I Hy
Regards
Emma Haley
Solicitor
Stone King
BATH * CAMBRIDGE * LONDON * MELKSHAM
GRO
Web: www.stoneking.co.uk
hv Please consider the environment - is it necessary to print this email?
size=2 width="100%" ali
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for Andrew.Bolc
If you are not Andrew.Bol
Emm limmediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by
mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Stone King LLP does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this
message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. We do not accept service by email.
Stone King LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number 0C315280. Its registered office is at 13 Queen Square
Bath BA1 2HJ. It is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. The partners are the members of the limited liability partnership. A full list of
FUJ00156530
FUJ00156530
all partners is available at all offices.
Siero nana Royal Mail Group Limited registered in England and
Wales registered number 4138203 registered office 3rd Floor, 100 Victoria Embankment, London, EC4Y OHQ 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.