WBON0000582 - Email chain from Victoria Brooks to Andrew Parsons, cc’d Amy Prime, Helen Creech re Post Office prosecutions.

Evidence on official site

WBONO0000582
WBON0000582

From: Victoria Brooks.
To: Andrew Parsons

Ce: Amy Prime( Helen Creech {0 GRO.
Subject: Re: Post Office prosecutions [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:30:03 +0100
Importance: Normal
Inline-Images: imagec849cc.PNG; imagee03bd0.PNG; image159842.PNG; image3495ba.PNG;
image755ea4.PNG; image05c2bb.PNG; image001.png; image002.png; image003.png

Thanks Andy

I was just about to email Helen to say I needed to think more about the content once the structure was sorted
as I haven’t had the opportunity to compare the statement to the list of issues yet. I think to make the
statement make sense to the extent she is covering investigations which is definitely on the list of issues she
needs to mention that POL prosecutes people and that this is done privately. (If that’s correct, why I wanted
to check) That’s one of the ultimate reasons for having the security team. The email below links to a
comment in the statement asking for a sentence on this.

There is currently some content in the statement about prosecuting which I think will need to go but I was
planning a cull once the structure was sorted. In my view I think this is one of the statement we may not
serve at all, but it needs the content before we can make that decision.

Is it ok to add a sentence on this point for now?

I'll be able to review the content again either later today or tomorrow.

Victoria Brooks
Managing Associate
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP

Proud sponsors of the Grand Appeal 2018. Find out more here

Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts

WOMBLE womblebonddickinson.com
BOND
DICKINSON . Ain)

Sent from my iPhone

On 2 Aug 2018, at 08:48, Andrew Parsons 4" wrote:

Hmmm...

I don't think we want to go near prosecutions. It's a can of worms. Why do we need to mention it?

WBD_000452.000001
WBONO0000582
WBON0000582

Also its effectively an undeniable fact that POL prosecutes people and a matter of public record. I don't think we
need evidence on this to prove this point.

Happy to be corrected on this.

A

Andrew Parsons
Partner
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP.

‘Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts

womblebonddickinson.com

<i > a a
imagec849cc.PNG: <imagee03bd0.PNG> <image159842,.PNG>

From: Victoria Brooks

Sent: 01 August 2018 19:36

To: Andrew Parsons; Amy Prime

Cc: Helen Creech

Subject: Post Office prosecutions [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]

Andy / Amy

I'd like to add some wording to Helen Dickinson's statement around Post Office bringing its own prosecutions i.e. that
they can do this and a brief explanation.

Can you think of a document which explains this which we could provide to Helen C? I'm pretty sure Second Sight
covered it but wouldn't want to take info from there...!

Thanks

Victoria

Victoria Brooks
Managing Associate
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP.

WBD_000452.000002
Proud sponsors of the Grand Appeal 2018.

Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts

<image001.png>

WOMBLE
BOND
DICKINSON

WOMBLE
BOND
DICKINSON

Find out more here

womblebonddickinson.com

<image002.png> <image003.png>

WBONO0000582
WBON0000582

WBD_000452.000003