Live Mail Question: Paula Vennells was concerned about the cost of the Horizont Second Sight review

Paula Vennells admitted that the Post Office never discussed what the system problems even meant, even though she maintained that Horizon had none.

Investigating counsel Jason Beer KC asked: “Was there some understanding between you and the PO board as to what systemic issues meant?

Ms Vennells replied: “I don’t think there was ever any conversation.”

He continued: “Was there a common understanding between you and the post office team that was leading the work in terms of the system issues?”

Finally, he asked, “Was there ever any discussion about what systemic problems mean?”

She replied again, “I don’t remember, no.”

Paula Vennells denied that she had decided not to review past cases based on potential media outcomes.

The former Post Office chief executive told the Post Office inquiry on Thursday: “I absolutely disagree that I have decided not to review past cases based on media outcomes.”

The chairman of the Horizon IT inquiry had to intervene in the proceedings after the public gallery, made up mostly of sub-postmasters, groaned when Paula Vennells said she could not remember whether she had taken the “PR guy’s advice” not to revise 5-10. years of past prosecutions.

Responding to an email from Mr Davies in which he advised against looking at Horizon’s historical cases because they would end up on the front page, Ms Vennells said: “You are right to say that. I will marry your ox.”

Counsel for the inquiry Jason Beer KC asked: “You took the advice of the PR guy, didn’t you?”

Ms Vennells began her reply by saying “I don’t remember” before a loud groan erupted from the public gallery.

After chairman Sir Wyn Williams intervened, Ms Vennells continued: “As I tried to say earlier, at this stage we were working on a number of cases that had gone through a certain scheme and a scheme that was open to anyone who wanted. come forward

“I understand how it reads, but I don’t recall making any conscious decision not to go back and institute a review of all past criminal cases.”

Paula Vennells said she stayed in touch with former communications director Mark Davies after she left the post.

Inquest counsel Jason Beer KC asked: “Have you exchanged messages with him about media statements you might make and media lines you might take in announcing this investigation, for example?”

Ms Vennells replied: “I believe there are texts in the inquiry that show that.”

Mr Beer continued: “Even though you’ve moved on, he still advised you until 2020, what will your media representation be?”

Ms Vennells said: “I kept in touch with Mark Davies for reasons that were very personal to him and I think he offered me that advice at the time.”

Former Post Office boss Paula Vennells claimed she had no idea the subpostmaster’s conviction was dangerous in 2013, despite a “concerning” email from chief campaigner Alan Bates.

Mr Bates told Ms Vennells he was “surprised” she did not offer him a meeting “in light of what has been discovered so far” – referring to the work of independent forensic accountants Second Sight.

The 65-year-old ordained priest said the Post Office wanted “assurance” that the Horizon system could be relied on, but denied trying to persuade Second Sight to reach a conclusion favorable to the company.

Paula Vennells admitted that former communications director Mark Davies’ view in 2013 that the Post Office should not review historical cases involving Horizon IT from “five to 10 years ago” because it would be “on the front page” was “grossly incorrect perspective”.

Referring to a July 2013 email from Mr Davies, solicitor Jason Beer KC asked the former chief executive: “Here it says ‘you can’t, you’ll be on the front page’.” That’s a grossly incorrect perspective, isn’t it?”

Mrs. Vennells said, “Yes, it is.”

Mr. Beer continued, “Do you know why he ripped everyone else off the chain and answered directly to you?”

Mrs. Vennells said, “No, I haven’t.”

Paula Vennells insisted she was “not trying to shut anything down” when it came to Second Sight’s review of Horizon.

A post office inquiry was shown a number of emails relating to the number of cases that independent forensic experts were expected to deal with.

Inquest counsel Jason Beer KC asked: “Was it your view that the inquest should end after two or three cases?

Ms Vennells replied: “I wasn’t trying to close anything, it’s really important that I say that.”

Paula Vennells admitted the “lost decade” suffered by sub-postmasters and sub-postmasters before miscarriages of justice were uncovered could have been avoided.

In a July 6, 2013 email submitted to the inquiry, the former postmaster general questions whether there should be a review of all criminal prosecutions for false accounting.

Investigating counsel Jason Beer KC asked: “Do you agree that your emerging idea of ​​a review of all false accounting prosecutions, if carried out, could have prevented a lost decade until miscarriages of justice were uncovered?

After a long pause, Mrs. Vennells replied, “Maybe it did, maybe it did.”

Paula Vennells denied knowledge of a bar conference where lawyers discussed commissioning an independent report into the Horizon Post Office system as the “highest risk response”.

According to a “summary of a conference” at Maitland Chambers in June 2012, which notes the participation of former Post Office general secretary Susan Crichton, it was said that the expert report’s conclusions would not solve the problem and the post office would be “damned if they do and damned if they don’t”.

Former post office director general Ms Vennells told the Horizon IT Inquiry she was not told about the meeting.

The inquiry heard notes from the meeting: “The proposal to commission an independent expert to produce a report on the Horizon system is the most risky response to this problem.

Ms Vennells said she had not been told.

Former postmaster general Paula Vennells said the company wanted to be sure the Horizon IT system could be relied on, but denied it wanted to influence the work of independent forensic accounts.

Second Sight was commissioned to independently review cases involving Horizon in 2012.

Asked whether the post office had “overlooked that conclusion” after reading the line in their interim report that there were “no systemic failures” in the system, Ms Vennells said: “In their interim report they came to that conclusion.

“There’s no way I’d want to convince Second Sight of something they weren’t prepared to say, and I don’t believe Second Sight would ever agree.

“If that’s the conclusion they came to in their interim report, that was their conclusion.”

Mr. Beer asked: “Isn’t that what the post office wanted them to do, and isn’t that evidence of such management?”

Ms Vennells replied: “The Post Office certainly wanted reassurance that the Horizon system could be relied upon – that was the aim all along. At no stage did I feel that anyone at the post office was able to influence Second Sight’s conclusions.

“I would be very surprised if that was the case here.”