CCRC
Criminal « Cases « Reviews Commission
PROTECT
Ms Paula Vennells a eeegeanenenanna —
Chief Executive OST OFFICE LTD
Post Office Ltd y '
148 Old Si t ‘our ref:
London IS JUL 2088 Ourref
EC1V 9HQ H
12 July 2013
AEF EXECUTIVE'S OFFICE
Dear Ms Vennells
Horizon computer system
The Criminal Cases Review Commission is an independent public body that was set up
in March 1997 by the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. Our purpose is to review possible
miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts of England, Wales and Northern Ireland
and refer appropriate cases to the appeal courts,
For obvious reasons, we have read the recent media coverage concerning the Post
Office Horizon computer system with interest. Clearly, it would be very useful for us to
have more information directly from the Post Office, especially accurate information as
to number of criminal convictions that might be impacted by the issue and what action
is proposed, or being taken, in that respect.
We see that the Attorney General was called upon on Tuesday to set up an enquiry
and we are in contact with his office about that.
In essence, the Commission's role in this is likely to relate to anyone who is convicted
of a criminal offence (in England, Wales or Northern Ireland), where evidence from the
Horizon computer system is relevant, where (i) they have already tried to appeal
against that conviction or (ii) they were convicted at Magistrates’ Court following a
guilty plea.
I look forward to receiving your reply.
POL00040190
POL00040190
POL00040190
POL00040190
oO am)
148 Old Street
LONDON
EC1V 9HQ
For the attention of Mrs S Berlin
Criminal Case Review Commission
5 St Philip's Place
Birmingham
B3 2PW
Date 24" July 2013
Dear Mrs Berlin
Horizon Computer System
I refer to your letter of 12 July 2013 which was addressed to Paula Vennells, Chief Executive of Post Office
Limited. I am responding on her behalf.
This letter briefly explains the background to the matters raised in your letter and the steps currently being
taken by Post Office Limited (POL). I anticipate being able to provide you with a more detailed response by
the end of this week.
At the centre of POL's business is an !T system known as Horizon. This system is used by over 11,000
subpostmasters to conduct transactions with members of the public on behalf of POL. As you will be
aware, POL has commissioned an independent firm of forensic accounts (called Second Sight) to
investigate and report on the integrity of the Horizon system. The aim of this report is to highlight any
issues in Horizon and its surrounding support infrastructure.
This month Second Sight released an interim report that highlighted a number of issues that required
further investigation but also reached the interim conclusion that there were no systemic problems with
Horizon.
We are now looking at Second Sight's findings in detail and are also investigating whether those findings
have an impact on any historic or on-going prosecutions. I hope to be able to send you a more
comprehensive response on these matters by the end of this week.
Yours sincerely
GRO I
Susaiy Crichton
General Counsel
www. postoffice.co.uk
Lonion EF1Y 9HO,
[TO BE TYPED ON POST OFFICE LIMITED HEADED PAPER]
For the attention of Mrs S Berlin
Criminal Case Review Commission
5 St Philip's Place
Birmingham
B3 2PW
26" July 2013
Dear Mrs Berlin
Horizon Computer System
I refer to my letter of 24 July 2013 in which I indicated that I hoped to be in a position to
provide you with a more detailed response by today. Whilst I am not yet in a position to notify
you of all the details you requested in your letter dated 12 July I do set out below our
proposed course of action in this matter.
POL accepts that a number of criminal convictions may be impacted by the matters
highlighted in the Second Sight Interim report and it has taken early and determined steps to
identify those cases where such an impact may fall.
To that end POL has decided to instruct Brian Altman QC, former First Treasury Counsel with
substantial prosecuting experience whose remit it is intended should be, in broad terms, to
review and advise POL on its strategy and process for reviewing past/current prosecutions
given the findings of the Second Sight interim report. Moreover, we intend asking counsel to
report to the Post Office Board in due course with his findings.
POL has also instructed an external firm of criminal specialist solicitors to identify every
criminal case prosecuted by POL and the Royal Mail Group (prior to their separation on 1
April 2012), and in any event in the last three years, so as to determine the safety of the
convictions. Once such a case is identified, counsel will also be asked to review the case fully
so as to determine the proper approach to be taken
We hope that the content of this letter and the kind of processes and review we intend
initiating allays your concerns and those of the Attorney General. We take the view that it is
incumbent upon POL as a major public institution to take every reasonable step to ensure
that those whose convictions may be regarded as unsafe are given justice.
Yours sincerely
Susan Crichton
General Counsel
POL00040190
POL00040190
POL00040190
POL00040190
CCRC
Criminal e Cases e Review e Commission
PROTECT
Susan Crichton
General Counsel
Post Office
148 Old Street Your ref:
London Our ref:
EC1V 9HQ
30 July 2013
Dear Ms Crichton I
Horizon Computer System
Many thanks for your letter of 26 July. We are, of course, very pleased to hear
of the review that the Post Office is now undertaking. If anything arises where i
you think we may be able to assist, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Are you liaising with the CPS in respect of any prosecutions taken by the CPS,
which might possibly be affected by the issues with the Horizon system? It
would be very useful for us to know who your liaison point is in the CPS in that
respect.
At present, we have very limited information (only what is in the media) about
what the problem is. On the basis of that we have not identified any cases (past
or present) in our system that might be affected by any issue with the Horizon
system. That could change though once we know more about the issue. In the
circumstances, it would appear to make sense for us to wait until Mr Altman QC
has reached some initial conclusions before we ask you for further details.
‘Director of Casework Operations
e:inf
The independent public body which investigates possibl
POL00040190
POL00040190
[TO GO ON POST OFFICE HEADED PAPER]
[date]
Mrs Berlin
[ADDRESS]
Dear Mrs Berlin
SUBJECT
I write in relation to the above matter and further to our exchange of correspondence back in July,
culminating in your letter to me dated 30 July 2013.
I am now in a position to confirm that Brian Altman QC has completed his review of POL's strategy and
process for reviewing past/current prosecutions given the findings of the Second Sight interim report to
which I referred in my letter to you dated 26 July 2013 and am now in a position to give you an update.
As you would expect, Mr Altman's review has been thorough, leading to a detailed report, and I am
pleased to confirm that overall, his view is that the review (being carried out on behalf of POL by an
external firm of criminal specialist solicitors) is fundamentally sound, and he has not detected any
systemic or fundamental flaws in the review process, or in the evidence arising from it. He has however
highlighted that because the review is a continuing process, and POL has a continuing duty of
disclosure, both POL and the external firm of solicitors with vast experience of managing and prosecuting
these cases, must be prepared to keep under review, and reconsider, past case reviews and disclosure
decisions.
To give you'some detail, the process involves reviewing all cases (both Crown Court and Magistrates’
Court) going back to 1 January 2010 (this being the earliest date on which Horizon Online was migrated
into all post office branches and is a start date which Mr Altman QC considers to be logical, proportionate
and practicable in light of the known circumstances). Essentially the scheme involves POL's solicitors
identifying every case within the above mentioned review period in which the primary or main evidence
against the defendant was or is based on Horizon data, and includes also those cases involving
suggested problems with Horizon training or support. This is done by a rigorous sift review process.
Once a potentially affected case is identified, senior in-house prosecutors at the external firm of solicitors
carry out a full case review to determine the essential question "Had POL been possessed of the
material contained within the Second Sight interim report during the currency of any particular
prosecution should/would POL have been required to disclose some or all of that material to the
defence?” In cases in which convictions have been obtained, this also means considering material for
disclosure, which might cast doubt on the safety of the conviction.
To date POL's external solicitors have carried out a sift of [X] case files, second sifted [Y] cases, fully
reviewed [Z] cases (in which disclosure was advised in [AA] cases), and has discontinued [BB] cases.
The process is not yet complete and I understand that there are [CC] cases yet to fully review.
Since the publication of the Second Sight interim report on 8 July 2013, and despite POL's on-going
review, POL has not received any application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
4A 27628557_2 1
POL00040190
POL00040190
I appreciate that the above is a short precis of a very extensive procedure and should you have any
further questions/require any further clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours Sincerely
Susan Crichton
For and on behalf of
the Post Office Limited
4a 27628557 _2 2