WBON0000133 - Email from Gavin Matthews to Andrew Parsons RE: PRIVATE - For discussion [BD-4A.FID20472253]

Evidence on official site

WBON0000133
WBON0000133

From: "Matthews, Gavin" ij GRO ]
To: "Parsons, Andrew"
Subject: FW: PRIVATE - For discusion [BD-4A.FID20472253]
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:09:09 +0000
Importance: Normal
Inline-Images: image001 jpg; image002.jpg; image003.jpg; image004.jpg; image005.png

FYI

From: Matthews, Gavin

Sent: 17 July 2013 16:09

To: ‘Susan Crichton’

Cc: Richardson, Simon

Subject: RE: PRIVATE - For discusion [BD-4A.FID20472253]

Susan
Thought I would give you my preliminary views on this pending our call:

1.POL needs to look at the response to the CRCC in the context of the overall strategic advice received from CK
(including their advice re GJ/FJ)

2. If POL suffers losses directly referable to GJ's failure to comply with his obligations as an expert witness, there are 3
potential entities against whom POL may have an action — GJ, FJ and CK

3. I am not sure who contracted with GJ/FJ to provide expert evidence in criminal cases — POL directly or CK. It could
be either but I would expect CK to have engaged GJ as expert on behalf of POL — That needs to be checked.

4. Given that CK are potentially liable to POL for any failure on the part of GJ/FJ, I do think it would be sensible to get a
criminal QC to oversee the strategic advice being given by CK — I'm not saying that CK have definitely done anything
wrong but they may have done and are trying to blame GJ/FJ so it is very important to check that their tactical
approach is now overseen by someone completely unbiased.

Do call when you get the chance.

Kind regards

Gavin

Gavin Matthews
Partner
for and on behalf of Bond Dickinson LLP

Follow Bond Dickinson:

Blin)

www.bonddickinson.com

WBD_000003.000001
WBON0000133
WBON0000133

From: Susan Crichton { GRO,
Sent: 17 July 2013 14:22

To: Matthews, Gavin

Subject: Re: PRIVATE - For discusion

Thanks

From: Matthews, Gavin [. GRO, i
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 01:11 PM

To: Susan Crichton

Cc: Richardson, Simon <
Subject: Re: PRIVATE - For discusion

Susan

Had just popped out for sandwich. Back in 20 mins and will call you then
Gavin

From: Susan Crichton { GRO j

Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 01:54 PM
To: Matthews, Gavin

Cc: Richardson, Simon

Subject: RE: PRIVATE - For discusion

Gavin - I have just tried to call you but vm intervened! so my ques was going to be do we need to look at the
response to the CRCC in the context of the advice we have just received from CK re GJ/F) that I have just sent to you
- I have some ques re that advice as well .. does the buck stop with GJ and FJ or not and is there any chance of
making a claim if we have costs directly referable to the failure to comply with obligations as an expert witness.
Should we get a criminal QC to overlook the work being done by CK?

Susan Crichton I HR & Corporate Services Director
* Floor, Central Wing, 148 Old Street, London, EC1V 9HQ

J

From: Matthews, Gavin j GRO, i
Sent: 16 July 2013 18:24

To: Susan Crichton

Ce: Richardson, Simon

Subject: PRIVATE - For discusion

Susan

I've just had a brief conversation with Simon before he disappeared into the tube so have caught up about Second
Sight.

Separately I received calls after sending the message below from both Rodric (from Portugal) and Hugh (from Ireland)
I won't recount the full details but Rodric suggested initially that instead of a criminal barrister POL may use DAC
Beachcroft. I said that was of course up to POL but I thought one more firm being involved in this matter might get
complicated and the advantage of a barrister was that they would be completely independent and have no pre
conceived ideas. Rodric thought that was sensible.

Hugh subsequently called me to say that he had spoken to DAC Beachcroft (Mary Lawrence) having spoken to you but
that I should continue to consider criminal silks who POL may want to use to oversee what Cartwright King are doing.

I am just a bit concerned that there may be too many law firms involved looking at things through different lenses. Of
course it is up to you whom POL instructs but you may just want to reflect on this overnight.

WBD_000003.000002
WBON0000133
WBON0000133

I have copied in Simon for when he emerges from the underground system!
Happy to discuss at any time

Kind regards

Gavin

Gavin Matthews
Partner
for and on b

half of Bond Dickinson LLP

Follow Bond Dickinson:

Blin)

www.bonddickinson.com

From: Matthews, Gavin

Sent: 16 July 2013 15:48

To: ‘Susan Crichton’; Parsons, Andrew

Ce: Richardson, Simon; Hugh Flemington; Rodric Williams; Jarnail A Singh
Subject: RE: For discusion [BD-4A.FID20472253]

Susan

I know that you are with Simon and Andy today so I have taken an initial look at this for you. I agree with you that I
would expect the advice to me more prescriptive ie you need to say this in response.

I do also have concerns from a civil point of view over a couple of statements in the draft response. In particular
where it states;

"He has done so both to POL and, in expert witness statements and oral evidence, to the court. In particular he has:
attested to the presence of defect detection and rectification systems; the robustness of the prosecution audit trail;
and stated that, in his expert opinion, Horizon accurately records and processes all information submitted into the
system. The Second Sight Interim report demonstrates that this was not the case."

I consider this to be unhelpful given that the SS report found there to be no systemic problems with Horizon.

It shows the need for all POL letters (criminal and civil) to contain a consistent message - so that the right hand and
the left hand know what they are each doing.

I am not a criminal lawyer but I would query whether the CCRC have the power to review a case where the SPM
entered a plea of guilty in the magistrates’ court.

I would be happy to suggest some criminal barristers to take a look at this for you
Perhaps you could discuss this with Simon and Andy today if you get the chance.

Kind regards

WBD_000003.000003
WBON0000133
WBON0000133

Gavin

Gavin Matthews
Partner
for and on behalf of Bond Dickinson LLP

Follow Bond Dickinson:

Blin)

www.bonddickinson.com

From: Susan Crichton;
Sent: 16 July 2013 13:58

To: Parsons, Andrew

Cc: Richardson, Simon; Matthews, Gavin; Hugh Flemington; Rodric Williams; Jarnail A Singh
Subject: For discusion

Andy - we received a letter from the CRCC yesterday which I have asked Cartwright King to review..their advice feels
odd to me as if given on a take it or leave it basis and I am not comfortable that's particularly useful in this context.

Could we discuss, I am happy to go to another firm that specialises in Criminal law or a barrister, somehow it feels

as if there is a conflict here which I am not sure I understand.

Thanks

Susan Crichton I HR & Corporate Services Director

This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have
received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views
or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.

POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.

Please consider the environment! Do you need to print this email?

WBD_000003.000004
WBON0000133
WBON0000133

The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential
access this e-mail and any attachments, If you are not susan.crichtor
copies. Unauthorised use, dissemination, distribution, publication or copy

only is authorised to
ossible and delete any

ivileged and protected by I
please notify gavin.matthews
f this communication or attachments is prohibited and may be unlawful

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.

Content of this email which does not relate to the official business of Bond Dickinson LLP, is neither given nor endorsed by it

This email is sent for and on behalf of Bond Dickinson LLP which is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under number 0C317661. Our registered
office is St Ann's Wharf, 112 Quayside, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NEI 3DX, wher
of the LLP, or an employee or consultant who is of equivalent standing. Our VAT registration number is GB123393627.

a list of members’ names is open to inspection, We use the term partner to refer to a member

Bond Dickinson LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have
received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views.
or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.

POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.

This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have
received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views
or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.

POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.

WBD_000003.000005