POL00424122
POL00424122
POST OFFICE LTD
v
KIM ELIZABETH WYLIE
INITIAL ADVICE
Prosecution case
Ll. At the end of June 2010 Ms Wylie received a letter informing her that
Winlaton Post Office would be migrating to Horizon Online (HOL). On the 9"
July 2010 she reported a £33,142.96 shortage in trading period 4. She could
not explain how the shortage had occurred. The HOL Advisor, Brian Cordery
reported concerns that he had been presented with money twice whilst
conducting a cash check prior to migration. On 10 September 2010 an audit
was carried out at Winlaton Sub Post Office Branch,
{by Mr. Ged Dresser and Bryan
Marshall, Post Office Field Support Advisors, which revealed a deficit in the
accounts of £5434.93.
2. In interview Mr. Prince said that:
i) She could not explain the shortages as she hadn’t done anything
incorrectly. She could not explain the £33,142.96 shortage in Period 4
ii) She was aware that the cash would be checked after she received the
letter about migration to HOL. She confirmed that the cash shortage of
£33,142.96 was reported after the receipt of this letter.
iii) She denied reintroducing cash to Mr Cordery.
iv) She is the only person with keys to the shop and office.
v) She denied theft and false accounting and cast doubt on the integrity of
the Horizon system blaming it for the error.
Defence Case
3.
The most obvious route for the defence in this case is to suggest that the
Horizon system is flawed or possibly that another member of staff stole the
money
Statements
4.
We will need a full statement from:
e Brian Cordery.
e Ged Dresser and Bryan Marshall detailing the audit on the 10'° September
2010. This should explain in layman’s terms where the losses came from and
how the cash figures are arrived at. A brief summary should be included as to
how these monies should be dealt with in the normal course of business. The y
should formally exhibit any paperwork filled out by Ms Wylie including the
cash and stock declarations.
e Robert Daily and Robert Brown dealing with the visit to Winlaton Post Office
on the 12" October 2010 and in the case of Robert Daily dealing with
interview of Ms Wylie and the difficulties of getting her to interview.
e We will need to prove the integrity of the Horizon system as there appears to
be apocryphal evidence on the internet that it is causing big losses to Post
Masters.
Discussion
5. This case could be properly charged as two charges of theft, one to cover the
cash discrepancy of £33,142.96 in period 4 and the other to cover the
discrepancy of £5434.93 uncovered in the September audit. The Courts
generally do not like Theft and False Accounting charges to be charged in
tandem for the same course of conduct. _R v Eden 55 Cr. App.R. 193 CA
(Archbold 21-238)
POL00424122
POL00424122
POL00424122
POL00424122
6. Tattach draft charges.
28/10/2011
POST OFFICE LTD
v
KIM ELIZABETH WYLIE
CHARGES
Charge 1: Theft - Theft Act 1968
KIM ELIZABETH WYLIE, between (Date needs to be chosen to cover
period of offending) and the 10" of July 2010, stole £33,142.96 belonging to
Post Office Limited contrary to Section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968.
Charge 1: Theft - Theft Act 1968
KIM ELIZABETH WYLIE, between 10' of July 2010and the 10' of
September 2010, stole £5434.93 belonging to Post Office Limited contrary to
Section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968.
POL00424122
POL00424122
POL00424122
POL00424122