211–220 of 276 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of private prosecutions here in Canada. Is it similar or does the postal office have specific powers that go even beyond that?
Anyone can bring a private prosecution in the UK and I don't believe the Post Office has any specific additional powers in this regard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look up how much power postal inspectors have in the US. They can arrest you if you commit crimes that fall within their jurisdiction.
The Postal Inspector in the USA is not a private entity, and they cannot prosecute you. There is not 'Postal Prosecutor' there is District Attorney and a Federal Prosecutor and they are either directly elected or appointed by elected officials.
The Wikipedia article on Paula Vennells tells me that the Post Office prosecuted 700 subpostmasters between 1999 and 2015 [0]. That works out to about one prosecution every 8 days. I do not know the baseline rate at which postmasters commit fraud or are prosecuted, but isn't one prosecution every 8 days an awfully high number? Shouldn't the Post Office have conducted some sort of internal investigation as soon as the…
> "In 2013, Vennells hired forensic accounting firm Second Sight, headed up by Ron Warmington, to investigate the Horizon software losses. Warmington discovered the system was flawed and faulty, but Vennells was unhappy with Warmington's report and terminated their contract." Inexcusable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So a company with money and a good lawyer could really just essentially have you thrown in jail? Seems really not good.
Yes, because often they are in control of all the evidence and/or can create evidence. In the 90s, I caught the technical head of a certain very large telecoms firm logging private IRC chats and then blackmailing the users, some of whom were gay and not out. When I made it clear I knew what was going on and that it needed to stop this person went on to fake logs of me hacking into said firm and sent them to the dean…
Is there any responsibility on the judge or jury to demand burden of evidence? As in the postmaster situation, if I were the judge or jury I first and foremost need to be convinced a crime occurred and money is missing. The fact a forensic accountant wasn’t required is still odd to me. I suppose they were glad to call guilty on circumstantial evidence or just took the financial statements at face value
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So a company with money and a good lawyer could really just essentially have you thrown in jail? Seems really not good.
Yes, because often they are in control of all the evidence and/or can create evidence. In the 90s, I caught the technical head of a certain very large telecoms firm logging private IRC chats and then blackmailing the users, some of whom were gay and not out. When I made it clear I knew what was going on and that it needed to stop this person went on to fake logs of me hacking into said firm and sent them to the dean…
Because it's not really over until there's justice, and the guilty person is punished.
I'm hoping that's what happened next!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it was Fujitsu staff acting as witnesses in trials.
If it was the Post Office editing Fujitsu's statements, who better than Fujitsu staff to confirm as a trial witness what was in the original pre-edited statements?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of private prosecutions here in Canada. Is it similar or does the postal office have specific powers that go even beyond that?
Anyone can bring a private prosecution in the UK and I don't believe the Post Office has any specific additional powers in this regard.
While the PO doesn't have specific legislative powers to bring private prosecutions, they did have a significant amount of institutional holdover from when is was a public body.
Specifically, a close working relationship with the police and other bodies with statutory powers that went far beyond any relationship a privately owned body should have. E.g. they were given direct access to the Police National Computer System.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because often they are in control of all the evidence and/or can create evidence. In the 90s, I caught the technical head of a certain very large telecoms firm logging private IRC chats and then blackmailing the users, some of whom were gay and not out. When I made it clear I knew what was going on and that it needed to stop this person went on to fake logs of me hacking into said firm and sent them to the dean…
Were you then able to prosecute him for this fraudulent conspiracy he manufactured? Is there any check and balance, like something seriously discouraging people from doing this nefariously? Is there any responsibility on the judge or jury to demand burden of evidence? As in the postmaster situation, if I were the judge or jury I first and foremost need to be convinced a crime occurred and money is missing. The fact a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Postal Inspector in the USA is not a private entity, and they cannot prosecute you. There is not 'Postal Prosecutor' there is District Attorney and a Federal Prosecutor and they are either directly elected or appointed by elected officials.
That's why I said 'they can arrest you', a fact which surprises a lot of people when they first discover it.
I've attempted to compile the HN threads on this. Can anybody find other significant ones? (It's interesting that there was one submission, with one comment, in 2012, and seemingly nothing for the next 7 years...) Fujitsu CEO Deposition – Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39059302 - Jan 2024 (1 comment) Fixing Horizon bugs would have been too costly, Post Office inquiry told - http…
It was the recent TV mini series that got this mass attention, which triggered the mass media covering it I believe.