b. Categories of persons affected
Persons who died by suicide or attempted suicide or suffered significant ill health
3.7. The Inquiry was made aware quite early on in its work that there may have been a causal connection between Horizon and a number of persons who had taken their own lives. This was always, and remains, an extremely sensitive issue for surviving family members. For that reason, with one exception (Mr Martin Griffiths), the circumstances surrounding the deaths of postmasters or others who had taken their own lives were not explored in any detail in the evidence hearings in any Phase of the Inquiry. However, I have no doubt that it is appropriate to begin this section with a short account of the evidence and information gathered by the Inquiry.
3.8. Following a formal request from the Inquiry dated 18 March 2025, the Post Office named six former postmasters whom, it is claimed by their families, took their own lives as a consequence of Horizon showing an illusory shortfall in branch accounts.[17] This information was known to the Post Office largely because of data it holds under the schemes for financial redress which are the subject of Section 4 of this volume but also from reports in the media.
3.9. The names of those persons were not made public in evidence given to the Inquiry with two exceptions, namely Mr Michael Mann and Mr Martin Griffiths. The circumstances surrounding Mr Griffiths’ death and the aftermath are considered in a Case Illustration in paragraphs 3.46 to 3.52 below.
3.10. Following a further formal request from the Inquiry on 27 March 2025, the Post Office specified a further seven persons who, according to their families, had taken their own lives as a consequence of Horizon showing an illusory shortfall in branch accounts.[18] These persons were not postmasters but the information was known to the Post Office in relation to six of the deceased persons because of claims made for financial redress and in relation to one of the deceased persons by virtue of reports in the media.
3.11. I have also received evidence from at least 59 persons who contemplated suicide at various points in time and who attributed this to their experiences with Horizon and/or the Post Office. This was a common experience across both those who were and were not prosecuted. Ten of the persons who contemplated suicide attempted to take their lives, some on more than one occasion. One postmaster said:
“The impact on me of the treatment the Post Office subjected me to has been immeasurable. The mental stress was so great for me that I had a mental breakdown and turned to alcohol as I sunk further into depression. I attempted suicide on several occasions and was admitted to a mental health institution twice.”
3.12. I have also received evidence from 19 persons who said they abused alcohol and attributed this to their experiences with Horizon and/or the Post Office. A number of persons said they could not sleep at night without drinking first. One postmistress said she “went to rehab for eight months as the Post Office had turned her to drink to cope with the losses.” I should stress that whilst I cannot make a definitive finding that there is a causal connection between the deaths of all 13 persons and Horizon, I do not rule it out as a real possibility.[19] It is also possible that more than 13 persons, as indicated by the Post Office in response to the Inquiry’s requests in March 2025, died by suicide but that some deaths have not been reported to the Post Office or the Inquiry.[20] The evidence from persons who have contemplated or attempted suicide may provide some insight into the experiences of those who are sadly not able to provide evidence to the Inquiry today.
Persons who were prosecuted
3.13. I do not think it is easy to exaggerate the trauma which persons are likely to suffer when they are the subject of criminal investigation, prosecution, conviction and sentence. That is especially so when the persons involved have had no previous experience of these processes. I am sure that the vast majority of persons investigated and prosecuted by the Post Office will have had no such experience. Without exception, in all probability, they will have had no experience of being convicted of offences which render them liable to sentences of imprisonment. In modern times, almost invariably, many months, at best, elapses between the instigation of a criminal investigation and the conclusion of any prosecution consequent upon it. As it happens, the evidence given to this Inquiry has disclosed that in many instances this process has taken years. It is not difficult to imagine the stress and worry which would have consumed many an accused person during such a period of time.
3.14. During the course of the evidence adduced in Phase 1 and since, I heard a number of accounts from many different people of the distress sometimes caused to suspected persons by the conduct of Post Office employees during the course of initial investigations and, in particular, in interviews under caution. To a degree such evidence was contested in evidence by the investigators who gave evidence before me and the issue of whether those conducting investigations behaved improperly or unlawfully was under the spotlight in Phase 4 of the Inquiry. At this stage, I simply make some observations about interviews under caution which are amply justified by my own experience as a barrister and judge and with which, I am satisfied, any lawyer with any criminal law experience, any investigator and/or any police officer would concur. Any interview under caution, even one which is conducted in the most scrupulously fair manner, is very likely to be a deeply unpleasant experience for the person under investigation. Persons who are being interviewed are in that unhappy position because they are suspected of having committed a crime. The interviewer is bound to ask probing and difficult questions – quite legitimately. A hardened criminal might cope with such an interview with a degree of equanimity; a person for whom this process is new, will probably find it extremely difficult to cope. That is all the more likely if the accused person is not represented by an experienced solicitor who can intervene if the interviewer is behaving inappropriately, or if the accused is in fact not guilty of the alleged crime. Nearly all the persons interviewed under caution by Post Office investigators will have been in wholly unfamiliar territory and they will have found the experience to be troubling at best and harrowing at worst.
3.15. Once a decision to charge a person has been made, the accused will, ordinarily, require legal advice about the strength of the case brought by the prosecutor and whether the charge should be admitted or denied. Such advice can be difficult to deliver for the lawyer and extremely difficult to receive for the accused person. An accused’s legal advisor is duty-bound to advise the accused upon the strength of the case presented by the prosecution and on the sentence which is likely to be imposed if the accused is convicted of the charges brought by the prosecutor. Crucially, the lawyer will need to advise on a range of potential sentencing options and, of particular importance in the context with which I am dealing, explain that a plea to a lesser offence may have the effect of reducing, very substantially, the likelihood of an immediate custodial sentence.
3.16. From the evidence I have heard, it seems very likely that many of those prosecuted were charged with offences of theft and false accounting. I have little doubt that many accused persons were advised by their lawyers to plead guilty to the offence of false accounting when charged with that offence. Setting aside, at this stage, the propriety of charging the offences of theft and false accounting as alternatives, I have no doubt that most barristers skilled in the practice of criminal law would have advised their clients that a conviction for stealing from a Post Office would, almost inevitably, carry a more severe sentence than a conviction for false accounting. They would also have advised that a conviction for theft would probably carry with it a sentence of imprisonment to be served immediately whereas a plea to false accounting which was accepted by the prosecutor would probably mean either a suspended sentence of imprisonment or a community sentence. Discussions about these issues would inevitably result in very significant stress and worry for an accused who had never before had to consider such life-changing consequences. In essence, an accused would have known that they were engaged in a decision which might involve the difference between retaining their liberty and losing it. Those who decided to plead guilty, I heard, may have done so in the hope, or even the expectation that they would avoid an immediate sentence of imprisonment. Until sentence was passed, however, there would always be nagging doubts as to their fate.
3.17. I need not dwell on the suffering of those who were sentenced to immediate terms of imprisonment. Self-evidently, such persons will have suffered greatly. They will have lost their liberty for a specified period of time and they will also have lived for at least part of their sentences under circumstances which, at best, were very restrictive and, at worst, very restrictive and deeply unpleasant.[21] On occasions, life may have seemed close to unbearable.
3.18. Those who were convicted but did not have to serve an immediate sentence of imprisonment would have suffered all the traumatic events described above, save for imprisonment itself. Instead of immediate sentences of imprisonment, they would often have received suspended sentences and such sentences were usually imposed in addition to a community or financial penalty. A community sentence would often involve unpaid work for the community which might be carried out very publicly.
3.19. Following conviction and sentence there would be many adverse impacts to endure quite apart from the punishment imposed by the Court.
3.20. First, there might be further legal proceedings brought by the Post Office. As a prosecutor it could institute confiscation proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 which might end with the convicted person being ordered to pay large sums of money or face time in prison in default of payment. In many instances, the Post Office initiated such proceedings. Alternatively, the Post Office might bring civil proceedings in which it claimed that the convicted person should pay to the Post Office a sum equal to the shortfalls alleged. Once judgment was obtained in these proceedings a failure to pay might result in bankruptcy proceedings.
3.21. Second, there would probably be much adverse publicity attendant upon conviction, sentence and any subsequent proceedings. Further, in the immediate aftermath of conviction/sentence, many of those who had not lost their liberty were subject to hostile and abusive behaviour from members of the public in the locality. For those sent to prison, such hostile and abusive behaviour probably followed release. The shame and embarrassment which was felt by the convicted, combined with local hostility, meant that many became isolated and some felt forced to move.
3.22. Third, many of those Core Participants who had been convicted and who gave evidence wrote or spoke of the psychiatric and psychological problems which dogged them throughout the Post Office’s audit and investigation process, the criminal process and thereafter. I have already described the various stages at which those who were accused and convicted would have suffered acutely from stress and worry. For many it likely became worse, with some being given clinical diagnoses and subsequently prescribed treatment. A significant number of those who were prosecuted and convicted say that they contemplated self-harm. A number say that they subjected themselves to physical harm. While I did not receive medical evidence about the individuals who have claimed to have suffered psychiatric or psychological harm (about which I make no complaint), I find it easy to accept, in general terms, that such harm was a very likely consequence of investigation, prosecution, conviction and sentence.
3.23. Fourth, inevitably, there were bound to have been long term impacts of a financial kind which I deal with discretely below.
3.24. Much publicity has surrounded the number of people who were prosecuted and convicted of offences in which data from Horizon played at least a part. Nonetheless, on the evidence available to me I find it difficult to be precise about the actual number. However, it seems to me to be likely that approximately 1,000 persons were prosecuted and convicted throughout the United Kingdom during the period with which the Inquiry is concerned based on Horizon evidence.
3.25. It might be thought that very few people who were prosecuted by the Post Office (or by the Prosecuting Authority in Northern Ireland and Scotland) relying upon data from Horizon were acquitted. That would not be correct. I have received evidence which suggests that there were somewhere between 50 and 60 people who were prosecuted, but who were not convicted. It is at least possible that there may have been more.[22] Many of those persons would have been acquitted upon the direction of the presiding judge, but some were acquitted after a trial. However, the fact that persons who were prosecuted were not convicted did not prevent them from suffering many of the adverse impacts which I have already described. Of course, they did not suffer conviction and sentence. They did, however, suffer all the stresses and worries associated with the processes of an investigation and prosecution.
Often, they were the subject of very significant adverse publicity and censure in their community prior to their acquittal. Furthermore, upon acquittal, the attendant publicity was usually far less prominent than that which would usually arise following a conviction. Many of those acquitted still found themselves ostracised in their local community, especially if the branch which they operated or worked at closed either temporarily or permanently. Notwithstanding that they were ultimately acquitted, some persons who were prosecuted contemplated self-harm although that was a much smaller number than those who contemplated self-harm after being convicted. Inevitably, there were adverse financial consequences.
Persons who were suspended and/or terminated or who resigned
Postmasters
3.26. During the period with which the Inquiry is concerned, thousands of postmasters were suspended on account of apparent shortfalls in their branches. I cannot say how many such persons there were, but it is safe to assume that they numbered considerably more than the number of postmasters who were made the subject of criminal proceedings. A very significant number of those who were suspended had their contracts terminated thereafter. That was certainly, and inevitably, the course which was followed in respect of all those postmasters who were prosecuted. However, as the evidence demonstrated, suspension and termination occurred on many occasions even though no criminal proceedings followed. I am also aware of several postmasters who, having experienced persistent shortfalls, made payments to the Post Office but, thereafter, resigned due to the increased financial pressure which such payments caused.
3.27. For those who were suspended but, ultimately reinstated, the usual course was for them to accept liability for the shortfalls for which the Post Office claimed had occurred at their branch. No doubt, on occasions, shortfalls did occur by reason of error on the part of a postmaster or the staff at the branch. However, in very many instances, as the Post Office and Fujitsu now openly acknowledge, the shortfalls for which postmasters were held liable were illusory. Put bluntly, in very many cases liability was imposed upon postmasters for losses which simply did not exist.
3.28. At best, for these postmasters, the payments made to the Post Office for losses which did not exist imposed a strain on the financial viability of postmasters’ businesses; in some instances, however, it led to a chain of events which resulted in postmasters losing their businesses whether by termination of their contract or resignation.
3.29. When suspension was followed by the termination of a postmaster’s contract, many of the adverse impacts already described for those who were prosecuted came into play. Many postmasters suffered heightened distress and worry over their loss of business and/ or income, and/or the impact upon their family. If their branches closed (as sometimes occurred), they became the object of local hostility and adverse local publicity. For members of the public, perhaps not surprisingly, the very fact of a postmaster having a contract terminated carried with it an implication that they had acted wrongfully and/or dishonestly.
Employees and family members
3.30. I am aware from the evidence that a number of persons who worked with Horizon over time were employees of the Post Office – most usually working at Crown Offices under contracts of employment. If such employees were suspected of wrongdoing on the basis of Horizon data, they would be subject to a disciplinary process under the terms of their contract of employment which could lead to suspension or dismissal. This disciplinary process was not subject to detailed scrutiny at the Inquiry but no doubt, employees who were suspended or dismissed on the basis of data from Horizon would probably suffer financial hardship and reputational damage. I am also aware that on occasions the Post Office prosecuted their own employees – see the Case Illustration of Ms Tracey Felstead, below.
3.31. Sometimes, persons were employed to work in Post Office branches by the postmasters themselves. When Horizon shortfalls manifested themselves, they might be suspected of wrongdoing and be the subject of disciplinary processes instigated by the postmaster. Those processes could lead to suspension and dismissal. I heard of cases in which the Post Office insisted that such employees should be suspended - often when it was also suspending the postmaster whose branch was under investigation. Upon suspension or termination of employment such employees would very likely suffer financial loss and reputational damage.
3.32. Finally, I should mention the family members of postmasters. They often worked at branches in an informal arrangement with the postmaster. If shortfalls occurred, they might have also been suspected of wrongdoing by Post Office investigators or even by the postmasters. The suspension or termination of the postmaster by the Post Office could easily result, in effect, in suspension, termination, reputational damage and, in some instances, direct financial loss to the family member concerned.
Persons who suffered adverse financial consequences
3.33. For those who were convicted of theft, confiscation proceedings would often ensue. As I have said, in those proceedings the Post Office would seek an order that the convicted person should pay a specified sum to the Post Office and, in default, serve a sentence of imprisonment. Such orders were made in a number of cases and in some the convicted person would be ordered to pay substantial sums of money. Some individuals were also ordered by the Court to pay the Post Office compensation and/or contribute to their legal costs.
3.34. Those convicted of false accounting did not, as a matter of course, face confiscation proceedings. That said, some did, and in a number of instances, postmasters were ordered to pay substantial sums or face terms of imprisonment.
3.35. In a number of cases, it was obvious that a convicted postmaster did not have the means to pay the sums apparently owed to the Post Office. Many of those were declared bankrupt as a consequence of bankruptcy proceedings brought against them by the Post Office or by other creditors. A smaller number took the option of an Insolvency Voluntary Arrangement (“IVA”).
3.36. This is not the occasion for a full description of the potential consequences of bankruptcy or an IVA. It suffices that I say that for many the bankruptcy has been long lasting and complicated (and, therefore, extremely stressful) and is still having an impact many years after a bankruptcy order was first made. Furthermore, as I will explain when dealing with the schemes for financial redress below, bankruptcy has proved to be a complicating factor in a number of the claims brought by claimants.
3.37. In a number of instances, postmasters have lost their homes, businesses and/or investments, many times sold at an undervalue. That was often the case if they were subject to confiscation orders or declared bankrupt, but it was often the price that they paid to avoid bankruptcy or very substantial financial distress. Some remortgaged properties to raise funds to cover their Horizon related debt.
3.38. Many postmasters told me that they had taken on branches, often combined with small shops, with a view to their business seeing them through to retirement. Convictions for dishonesty, of course, impacted very substantially on these plans and the convicted person’s ability to find gainful employment. I heard evidence from many convicted Core Participants who had struggled to find employment following conviction. Some also referred to having lost qualifications and accreditations following their convictions which made returning to former or other gainful employment difficult. As such, any employment they may have found may have been beneath their skills and qualification, less well paid and/or less stimulating. They were less likely to enjoy benefits that they had hoped would be long-lasting. In fact, rather than enjoy a retirement free of worry, I heard evidence of postmasters dipping into pension funds and/or living on the state pension following their retirement.
3.39. Beyond this, I am also aware of various other types of financial loss experienced by postmasters as a result of the Horizon related shortfalls. Some spoke of having to use inherited money (either their own or money inherited by family members) or borrow money from family and/or friends to pay back the shortfalls. Others mentioned having debts with HMRC for unpaid VAT or being unable to obtain insurance or having insurance premiums increased following conviction. For some, in acts of desperation relating to their financial struggles, it meant selling objects of sentimental value such as family heirlooms and jewellery.
Impacts on those who have made claims for financial redress
3.40. The Inquiry has heard from a number of postmasters who continue to describe the negative impacts stemming from the compensation process. In some cases this has been referred to in submissions by their legal representatives. Postmasters have described significant delays in receiving compensation, frustration from a lack of information throughout the process, and settling for less than they believe amounts to full and fair financial redress. Some elderly postmasters have expressed concerns that they will have limited time to obtain any benefit from the redress they may eventually receive. I also recognise that for some postmasters the application process may compound the harm for which they seek redress – e.g. by exacerbating mental health problems. The observations I make here, of course, must be read in the detailed context which is provided in Sections 4 and 6 which follow.
Impacts on the immediate family
3.41. In the written and oral evidence of those who were prosecuted or otherwise affected adversely by Horizon, there are genuinely moving accounts of the impact this had upon their immediate family. Wives, husbands, children and parents endured very significant suffering in the form of distress, worry and disruption (to home life, in employment and in education). In a number of cases, relationships with spouses and partners broke down and ended in divorce or separation. Many individuals also spoke of the adverse impact visited upon their children. On many occasions immediate family members were forced to endure vitriolic abuse from persons within their local or cultural community.
3.42. In the most egregious cases, family members themselves, suffered psychiatric illnesses or psychological problems and very significant financial losses. Some family members provided their own witness statements to the Inquiry which described the catalogue of misfortunes which befell them and their postmaster relations. In some cases, family members (usually spouses) were subject to investigation. Elderly parents provided financial support from their savings to their children in an attempt to relieve them from the financial strain of debts allegedly due to the Post Office. Some of those convicted spoke of their immense regret that parents had not lived to see their convictions being quashed.
3.43. I should record explicitly that some of the family members who provided witness statements and who gave oral evidence were the spouses of postmasters who had died. A small number of wrongly convicted postmasters died before their convictions were quashed on appeal. I pay tribute to the fortitude and determination of their spouses and other near relatives for striving (sometimes over many years) to ensure that the wrongful convictions of their loved ones were quashed.
3.44. A number of postmasters (some of whom being Core Participants) have died since the commencement of the Inquiry. Of that number there has been a significant percentage who died without having received the full and fair financial redress to which they were entitled. Without exception, the surviving spouse or a near relative of a Core Participant who has died has taken on the status of Core Participant and has closely engaged with the work of the Inquiry. My heartfelt thanks are due to them for their participation.
3.45. In summary, for a number of close family members of very many postmasters, their suffering has been acute.
Footnotes