POL00054430
POL00054430
Jarnail A Singh To: Mandy Talbot/eft
Sent by: Marilyn cc:
Benjamin ce: Jarnail A Singhie/
Wilson/ej
16/03/2010 12:25 Subject: Re: Fw: West Byfleet Trial - 1th march 2010 - Guildford Crown
Court
Hi Mandy,
!am happy to say that we succeeded in the legal argument in the above case and the Judgment was
given late on Friday afternoon.
Regards.
Jarnail A Singh
Senior Lawyer
Criminal Law Team
Mandy Talbot To: Jarnail A Singh/ef
11/03/2010 15:09 SR
Subject: Fw: West Byfleet Trial - 15th march 2010 - Guildford Crown Court
Jarnail
What is your opinion as to the likely outcome of the trial if the decision is taken by the judge to
withdraw the theft charge? I would imagine that those seeking to challenge Horizon will consider it to
be a victory.
Are we putting forward a detailed statement for the judges consideration explaining the costs of what
they ( the defence ) were seeking and their failure to narrow down their requirements or engage with
us?in support of our contention that the theft charge should be preserved?
Regards
Mandy Talbot
Dispute Resolution
Company Secretary's Office
Royal Mail Legal Services
100 Victoria Embankment
London
EC4Y 0HQ
‘on 11/03/2010 15:05 -----
John Longman To: Mandy Talbovef
ce
re) 19708/2090 11:38 Subject: Re: Fw: West Byfleet Trial - 15th march 2010 - Guildford Crown
Coun
Mandy
POL00054430
POL00054430
Jamnail Singh was present at the hearing so he will no doubt inform Rob of events.
In relation to the disclosure issue, the defence are suggesting that we have not reacted quickly
enough to providing them Fujitsu transaction log data and that it was not until February 2010 that an
expert from Fujitsu agreed to talk to the Defence expert. One of the sticking points in all of this was
that the defence indicated they needed five years of transaction log data , but this would would cost
the Post Officer over £15,000. We asked them to be more precise with what transactions specifically
they were looking for on Horizon and to consider a smaller period of say a couple of months.
Communications from this point on seems to have been misinterpreted by both sides.
As for the inference that may be drawn if the theft charge is "stayed" I would suggest that you speak
directly with Jarnail for his opinion. However, I am sure that the defence solicitor will obviously notify
the various publications of this and it may well encourage further challenges as to the integrity of
Horizon, something that my colleagues and I are experiencing in a number of other cases.
Regards,
Jon Longrnan
Security Advisor,
Post Office Ltd, National Security Team
TS) OFFICE ADDRESS: Post Office Investigation Dept, Watford MLO, Ascot Road, Watford, WD18 BAA
@® LANDLINE PHONE: Spread the word...
@ = MOBILENO!” GRO Id EVINe@-
w sees
Confidential Information: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (5) and may contain
confidentia land privileged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited,
If you are not the intended recipient, plea se contact me by reply e-maitand destroy aif copies of the original message.
__ ?? Please consider the environment before printing this e-rnail
Mandy Talbot
Mandy Talbot To: John Longmanvei_.
ce:
11703/2010 11:02 Subject: Re: Fw: West Byfleet Trial - 15th march 2010 - Guildford Crown
Court}
John
Thank you for the update. I presume that Rob G Wilson and Jarnail Singh have also been notified.
Do you or they have an opinion on the inference which will be drawn if the charge of theft is in effect is
withdrawn because of the alleged failure in disclosure? The only information which the prosecution
barrister showed me was a copy of a magazine page which named a number of the usual suspects in
terms of postmasters with a grievance. I contacted the chairman's office, the business and iron
mountain to retrieve everything we had on these cases. As such I cannot understand how a claim of
failure to disclose can be sustained.
Regards
Mandy Talbot
Dispute Resolution
Company Secretary's Office
Royal Mail Legal Services
100 Victoria Embankment
POL00054430
POL00054430
STD Phonef }
John Longman
John Longman
4 09: cc:
re 1703/2010 09:22 Subject: Fw: West Byfleet Trial - 15th march 2010 - Guildford Crown Court
Mandy
Carole Cross has asked me to keep you informed in this case. Therefore please see e-mail below.
Regards,
Jon Longman
Security Advisor,
Post Office Ltd, National Security Team
TS) OFFICE ADDRESS: Post Office Investigation Dept, Watford MLO, Ascot Road, Watford, WD18 BAA
e LAND LINE PHONE: Spread the nel
MOBILE NO:i- fi fyine
Confidential Information: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (5) and may contain
confidentiatand privileged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited,
Mf you are not the intended recipient, plea se contact me by reply e-mailand destroy aff copies of the original message.
2? Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail __
John Longman To: Carole Cross/e/
11/03/2010 09:18 Bayfioldiek
; Winnlel.
Opebiyi/ey._ een
ce: Paul Southin/ef oR
Subject: Re: West Byfleet Trial - 15th march 2010 - Guildford Crown. Coun
Dear All
Following a lengthy hearing yesterday where the defence are claiming abuse of process (because
they say that not all disclosure has been provided to them) the judge has ruled that the trial will not go
ahead next week. He is going to reveiw the arguments made by the defence and will make a ruling on
Friday afternoon as to whether a new trial date will be set I will keep you all informed of
developments and if a new trial date is set I will request a definite list from the defence as to which
witnesses they require. If the defence are successful in their argument then no “theft” trial will be set
and the subpostmistress will be sentenced on false accounting charges to which she has already
pleaded guilty.
POL00054430
POL00054430
Regards,
Jon Longrnan
security Advisor,
Post Office Ltd, National Security Team
TED “OFFICE ADDRESS Post Ortice investigation Dept, Watford MLO, Ascot Road, Watford, WO18 BAA
a LAND LINE PHON rane the word.
(/CVINE
Confidential Information: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may contain
confidentiafand privileged information. Any unauthorised re view, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
if you are not the intended recipient, plea se contact me by reply e-mailand destroy all copies of the original message.
2? Please cansider the environrrent before printing thiserral