POL00124350
POL00124350
148 Old Street
LONDON
—C1V 9HO
For the attention of Mrs S Berlin
Criminal Case Review Commission
5 St Philip's Place
Birmingham
B3 2PW
Date 5" June 2014
Dear Mrs Berlin
Horizon Computer System
I refer to your email dated 16 May 2014 and confirm that my predecessor, Susan Crichton left the
business at the end of October 2013. I apologise for the fact that you have not received an update on the
progress of the review undertaken by POL and hope to rectify that with the information set out below.
I confirm that Brian Altman QC 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 Susan Crichton
referred in her letter to you dated 26 July 2013.
As you would expect, Mr Altman's review was thorough, leading to a detailed report, and I am pleased to
confirm that overall, his view was that the review (carried out on behalf of POL by an external firm of
criminal specialist solicitors’) was fundamentally sound, and he did not detect any systemic or significant
flaws in the review process, or in the evidence arising from it. He did however highlight that because 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 remain prepared to keep under review, and reconsider, past
case reviews and disclosure decisions.
To give you some detail, the process involved 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 considered to be logical, proportionate
and practicable in light of the known circumstances). Essentially the scheme involved POL's solicitors
identifying every case within the above mentioned review period in which the primary or main evidence
against the defendant was based on Horizon data, and included also those cases involving suggested
problems with Horizon training or support. This was done by a rigorous sift review process. Once a
potentially affected case was identified, senior in-house prosecutors at the external firm of solicitors carried
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 had been obtained, this also meant considering material for disclosure, which might cast
doubt on the safety of the conviction.
www.postoffice.co.uk
Post Office Limited is registered i
Registered No. 2154540. Registered Office 148 Old Strect, London ECAV 9HO.
marks of Post Office Limited.
Post Office and tie Past Office togo
POL00124350
POLO00124350
The process involved POL's external solicitors carrying out a sift of 308 case files, a second sift of 229
cases, a full review of 53 cases (in which disclosure was advised in 26 cases), and the discontinuance of 4
cases.
I can confirm that since the publication of the Second Sight interim report on 8 July 2013, and despite
POL's thorough review, POL has, to date, not received any application for permission to appeal to the Court
of Appeal.
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
Chrisaujara —
For and on behalf of
Post Office Limited