POL00022754
POL00022754
From: "Parsons, Andrew" <j conned
To: GRO >, Jane MacLeod
Patrick Bourke
Ce:
Subject: Report of Brian Altman QC - subject to litigation privilege [BD-4A.FID26859284]
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 12:55:36 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: Review_of_Post_Office_Ltd_Criminal_Prosecutions_-_Brian_Altman_QC_-_July....pdf
Inline-Images: image001 jpg; image002.jpg; image003 jpg
All
Please find attached Brian Altman's Report on the question of whether Post Office has brought charges without
sufficient evidence.
As a quick reminder of the background: Brian was instructed off the back of Jonathan Swift's recommendations. His
work was subsequently adopted as a work-stream within the Group Litigation. Brian was asked to review the
sufficiency of the evidence on which charges were brought in a sample set of 8 cases — those cases having been
selected as being high profile cases within the Group Litigation and / or CCRC cases.
In summary, Brian's conclusions are that:
n the seven cases reviewed, there was sufficient evidence to justify the charges in each case.
n the eighth case, there was insufficient documentation available in the files for a review to be undertaken.
The primary allegation (that Post Office operated a deliberate policy of charging theft when there was an insufficient
evidential basis to support that charge) is fundamentally misplaced; not only is there no evidence of such a policy,
there is positive evidence that each case was approached both by internal and external lawyers professionally and
with propriety, and, unquestionably, case-specifically.
The secondary allegation (that offences were indicted with an eye to the making of applications for confiscation and/or
compensation orders on conviction) is similarly misplaced as in the seven cases reviewed there was a proper legal
and evidential basis for bringing the charges, which included due consideration of the orders that might follow
conviction.
There is a minor criticism about the use of inconsistent language in the recording of charging decisions, and about
offering no evidence on a theft count, resulting in a judge formally entering a not guilty verdict, when the count ought
technically to have been left on the file.
Brian has also reviewed the relevant parts of our Letter of Response and confirmed that his Report is consistent with
the points made in that letter.
As this Report supports the approach being adopted in the Group Litigation, I do not believe that there are any
immediate follow-up actions required. However, if you have something in mind or have any questions, please do let me
know.
Kind regards
Andy
Andrew Parsons
Partner
POL-0019233
POL00022754
POL00022754
Mobile:
Follow Bond Dickinson:
www.bonddickinson.com
Please consider the environment! Do you need to print this email?
“Jas soon as possible and
Shibited a May be unlawful
‘The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged and protected by law. mark.underwood
to access this e-mail and any attachments. If you are not mark.underwood I lease notify andrew.parsonsé
delete any copies. Unauthorised use, dissemination, distribution, publication oF Copying of tits communication or attachments 18 pr%
Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked by us with virus detection software before transmission. Bond Dickinson LLP accepts no liability for any loss or
‘damage which may be caused by software viruses and you should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.
ial business of Bond Dickinson LLP, is neither
Content of this email which does not relate to the offi en nor endorsed by it
This email is sent by Bond Dickinson LLP which is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under number 0C317661. Our registered office is 4 More
London Riverside, London, SEI 2AU, where a list of members’ names is open to inspection. We use the term partner to refer to a member of the LLP, or an employee or
consultant who is of equivalent standing. Our VAT registration number is GB123393627.
Bond Dickinson LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
POL-0019233