badgerx16

In a Mafia hitman / SS camp guard sort of way. "I was only following orders"'.

Posted above; "....but, as the head of the CPS he would have been more than aware of the cases". "Postmasters were hounded by the Crown Prosecution Service during Sir Keir Starmer's time in charge"', what do you think the Daily Mail is trying to imply with this statement ? Daily Telegraph - "Starmer faces questions over why he failed to intervene in Post Office scandal". Nigel Farage : "“The DPP has the right to intervene in any prosecution. Where was Starmer?” I don't see the same issue being raised in relation to the other 3 DPPs who were in post during the prosecution period, 1999-2015.

The CPS prosecuted 3 cases whilst Kier Starker was DPP, and they would almost certainly not have required his input or approval. ( For context, the CPS prosecuted over 400 thousand cases last year, so there is no possible way any DPP could be aware of more than a fraction of these ).

In preparation for a second term and his vengeance against those that stole the last election, starting with Mike Pence and Brad Raffensberger .

John 11:35

And still they went to Court and testified that there were no known problems !

1)Terence Austin doesn't look Japanese to me 😉 2) A lot of mentions of ICL rather than FUJITSU. 😉

Maiden

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-67921974 "An IT expert has criticised the Post Office for ignoring his report which found "concerning discrepancies" in its software more than 20 years ago. Jason Coyne, who worked for Preston-based Best Practice Plc at the time, was instructed to examine the computer system called Horizon in 2003. He said he notified the Post Office the data was "unreliable" but he was ignored, sacked, and then discredited."....... "An IT expert has criticised the Post Office for ignoring his report which found "concerning discrepancies" in its software more than 20 years ago. Jason Coyne, who worked for Preston-based Best Practice Plc at the time, was instructed to examine the computer system called Horizon in 2003. He said he notified the Post Office the data was "unreliable" but he was ignored, sacked, and then discredited." ---------------------------- I love the way that the reporting is constantly referring to FUJITSU as a Japanese company, as if the account managers, system architects, analysts, programmers, testers, and installation engineers were not British, working for the Brirish based subsidiary that was formerly ICL, and working out of ICL's old premises. Whilst technically, on the surface this might be true, it does seem to give an unnecessarily xenophobic tinge to the affair.

At the time this was going on only 2 groups of people knew what was really happening, FUJITSU and the Post Office, and both lied to hide the truth. Anybody else peripheral to the prosecutions at the time would have been basing their judgement on their trust of these 2 ( lying ) organisations to be providing honest accounts and evidence. The CPS would have been provided the evidence for the prosecutions they undertook by the PO, who swore that it was true and accurate. On what grounds would the CPS have felt the need to query to any greater extent what they were told ?

Plasmid

Relatively minor fraud cases, I doubt it.

Being accountable and being "'involved"' are not the same thing.

Do you think the DPP is personally involved in, or even aware of, every case his Department handles ?

How does Good King Wenceslas like his pizza ? Deep pan, crisp and even.

In the HoC this evening one MP raised the interesting conspiracy theory that the PO might have used the Horizon prosecutions to expedite a program of closing sub-postoffices as a cost cutting measure. ( Under Paula Vennels the PO went from being a loss making concern to profitability ).

mitosis

Maybe restrict your wife's access to Social Media ?

FUJITSU will have issued a guarantee that there are no remote access routes. No sir. none whatsoever.

Absolutely this.

The. PO were told by FUJITSU there were no issues; FUJITSU lied, the PO were too lazy/incompetent to challenge this. In the case I experienced it was a major upgrade to a database system that exhibited problems immediately after implementation. ICL were trying to convince my boss that an expensive hardware upgrade was required to overcome the issue, I proved their database indexes were incorrectly defined.

Oh indeed, but getting to the point where acceptance was signed off could, in my experience, be tortuous. Trying to convince their software developers and support engineers of the faults in what had been delivered was often a struggle - in fact at one point I told my boss that he either trusted me in a dispute over a server system's configuration with ICL, or I would resign. ( He backed me, they ultimately admitted I was right ).

They also have a track record of releasing poorly designed and tested large IT software suites. ( From somebody who knows ).