JARBO0000138
JARBO000138
From: Lord Arbuthnot!”
Subject: RE: Urgent re Posi
Date: 21 November 2018 at 10:21
To: j
Ce:
Dear Mr Hawkins
Mr Wallis has sent me a copy of the email he sent to you which is below. I have to
say that he makes a very strong point. I would worry that any decision not to reopen
these criminal cases, before the allegations have been examined in the cases that are
currently before the court, might be subject to judicial review — and certainly would be
if the current cases went against the Post Office.
Yours sincerely,
James Arbuthnot
From: The Rt Hon Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom
Senior Consultant, SC Strategy
This email is intended for the named addressee(s) only. If you receive it in error,
please notify the sender above and delete immediately. The unauthorised use of an
email or its contents may constitute a criminal offence and/or actionable civil wrong. It
is possible for e-mails to be intercepted or affected by viruses. Whilst we maintain
virus checks on inbound e-mails we accept no liability for viruses or other materials
introduced with this message. Data protection: if you send me personal data in
connection with my SC Strategy Ltd work, I have a duty to protect that data. Under
data protection legislation, you have rights in relation to your personal data. If you
would like more information, please ask me for a copy of my data protection privacy
notice.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Nick Wallis <{
Subject: Urgent re Postmasters under CCRC review
Date: 21 November 2018 at 0 55 GMT
To: HawkinsJ <_
Hi Justin
Hope all is well. I am just writing to let you know I have been detailing the ongoing
group litigation civil trial Bates and others v Post Office at the High Court here:
www.postofficetrial.com
I believe that evidence disclosed to the trial and particularly yesterday’s evidence
produced under cross-examination could have a massive bearing on the decsion by
the CCRC of whether or not to refer the cases former Postmasters it is dealing with to
the Court of Appeal.
Please could you ensure that the relevant person(s) at the CCRC does not make any
JARBO0000138
JARBO000138
agecision avout rererral until ney Nave seen tne anscripts OF tnis tal, wnicn I nave
been told will be released to me before the end of the month and should be available
to you on demand.
The claimtants QC has drive a coach and horses through the integrity of Horizon, the
training and support given to Subpostmasters by the Post Office, the near
impossibility of Subpostmasters being able to identify the source of problems with the
system, the likelihood that some Subposmasters were charged for losses caused by
Post Office mistakes and the pressure they were put under to repay supposed debts
before any investigation into their likely source had been conducted.
This all has significant implications for the Subpostmasters who made the wrong
decision (without any whiff of criminal intent), which then eventually led to their
prosecution and ruin.
I really really don't see how the CCRC can make an announcement on whether it is
minded to refer these Postmaster cases to the Court of Appeal without waiting to see
the transcripts in this trial and the forthcoming Horizon trial (part of the same group
litigation Bates v Post Office) in March next year.
Happy to talk this throug!
will be free on Friday -
if you like - I am in court today and tomorrow, but
From what I have heard - and I have been in court every day - several dozen
appalling miscarriages of justice may have taken place.
Thanks
Nick
On 3 Jun 2016, at 16:28, HawkinsJ
> wrote:
OK thanks Nick. Have a good weekend.
Justin Hawkins
Head of Communication
Criminal Cases Review Commission
From: Nick Wallis [-
Sent: 02 June 2016 21:13
To: Hawkins)
Subject: Re: CCRC Qs
Hi Justin
Let’s have a chat about this next week if that’s okay. I’ve managed to overbook myself
this week and don’t have a moment to think. Much quieter next week.
Hope all is well with you.
Cheers
Nick
On 2 Jun 2016, at 16:30, HawkinsJ < "GRO ~ > wrote:
JARBO0000138
JARBO000138
Hi Nick, I hope all is well.
I hope you don't mind my asking you a couple of questions about your work on
Horizon. We are trying to identify a couple of particular documents that were
mentioned in your Panorama about the system. We have access to a great
deal of material from the post office and quite possibly already have these, but
we are trying to identify them more accurately.
John Sweeney refers to a minute of a meeting between Post Office Limited
and Fujitsu before Seema Misra’s trial. The minute described a computer bug
which “made money disappear and could cause a loss of confidence in the
Horizon system”. Although John acknowledged that the bug did not affect Mrs
Misra’s branch, he suggested that it still undermined the integrity of the
Horizon system more generally. Can you tell us anything that will help us
identify the specific minute in question? Do you recall whether Panorama saw
it and, if so how they came by it, and if not, how they learned of its existence?
Also, 26 minutes into the programme John Sweeney refers to an (internal?)
Post Office Ltd document which suggests they were only charging with theft in
order to help recover money (i.e. ‘overcharging’). Can you tell us anything that
will help us find this document?
Any thoughts most welcome.
Regards
Justin.
Justin Hawkins
Head of Communication
Criminal Cases Review Commission
The Criminal Cases Review Commission
The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted with it is
confidential and is intended for the use of the person(s) or entity named above.
If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or any action taken in reliance on it is prohibited and
may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
return it immediately to the sender by replying to it and then delete the
message from your computer.
We may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via our network for the
purposes of ensuring compliance with policies and procedures.
Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments
are free from any virus we advise that in keeping with good computing practice
the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free.
www.nickwallis.com
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
JARBO0000138
JARBO000138
The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted with it is
confidential and is intended for the use of the person(s) or entity named above.
If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or any action taken in reliance on it is prohibited and
may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
return it immediately to the sender by replying to it and then delete the
message from your computer.
We may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via our network for the
purposes of ensuring compliance with policies and procedures.
Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments
are free from any virus we advise that in keeping with good computing practice
the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free.
Nick Wallis
@nickwallis
www.nickwallis.com
Nick Wallis
@nickwallis
www.nickwallis.com