Post Office scandal: former CEO admits evidence was false
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 05. 2024
- Former Post Office boss Paula Vennells has begun giving evidence at the Horizon inquiry.
The ex-CEO broke down in tears four times during her testimony.
Almost a thousand subpostmasters were wrongly prosecuted and many believe Ms Vennells was at the heart of an orchestrated cover-up.
But much of her defence today focused around shifting blame, and in her words, being too trusting.
(Subscribe: bit.ly/C4_News_Subscribe)
-------
Get more news at our site - www.channel4.com/news/
Follow us:
Facebook - / channel4news
Twitter - / channel4news
TikTok - / c4news
Instagram - / channel4news
She's crying because she was caught. Horrible woman.
exactly, she was even laughing it off.
🐊 😭
Truly the definition of "Crocodile Tears"
Yes, the tears are for herself. Not because of what she’s done to others.
Spot on crocodile tears
Prison, sue her to return all the money to her victims and the taxpayer
There won't be enough for the victims. More likely the taxpayer will have to pay some of the compensation.
All the money plus interest at the rate of inflation
@@RosePostedThis fine better than these monsters keeping their stolen money for their bonuses "for performance"
she should be in jail
There is a very strong chance that will happen.
This is just the humiliation to give her something to think about while she is in jail.
If she doesn’t go to jail the UK will go on strike.
Society can’t take creatures like this endorsed with freedom.
How can she say she didn’t know when she was in charge. She’s either lying or massively incompetent.
Both are an option. Aka *Weaponised Incompetence*
Weaponized incompetence is a form of passive-aggressive behavior where an individual deliberately performs tasks poorly or pretends to be incapable of completing certain tasks. This manipulation tactic is often used to avoid responsibility, forcing others to take over and perform the task instead.
Either way she’s off to prison.
She was definitely in charge, she was both arrogant in her actions and corrupted by the power and the position that she felt she had at the time.
She was not incompetent in anyway, that is what all powerful people want you to think and believe after they are caught as a way to instill some level of doubt about their guilt and their deliberate actions.. "I do not recall" or "I don't remember writing that" or "It was not my remit to deal with or know about such things" etc.
She's lying.
She did know
She should be kept in custody pending trial along with the other Post Office staff involved.
It's so weird how rich criminals get to go back to their lovely homes - when they're literally a bigger flight risk.
Nobody will go to gaol they never do?
Maybe she suddenly realised that she was either evil or incompetent?
Fake tears, She needs to go behind bars
The tears were real enough. She knows what a catastrophe she was complicit in, and it's caught up with her. It must be genuinely upsetting.
Those tears are her realizing she committed perjury and is likely going to prison for it, not for anything that happened to people not named Paula Vennells
@@nickoforesta5788 Where did she commit perjury?
@@ftumschkNarcissists cry when caught, realising how bad they look to others. She even had to stop herself making more excuses.
@@RosePostedThis I don't know that she is a narcissist. She may be, but without submitting her to a psychological examination and/or tests, I wouldn't like to say... and I speak as one with some degree of experience in the field of psychology.
She's been taking lessons from Matt Hancock.
Did he cry.
Lesson in robotics?
@@DSQueenieyes or pretended to cry on tv. Total scum bag
And Boris and keir starmer
@@mikeyacson9542
Of essentially our money.
Self-centered, raving narcissist who didn't care about anyone. She was never going to admit any guilt and couldn't possibly be wrong at the time or now. She is lying now to save her own skin, and that crying was thrown in to make out she cared.
You seem pretty sure of your ‘opinion’
Yeah, awful woman. No conscience. Narcissistic psychopath.
@@GibsonFender So you didn't watch any of the inquiry.
@@GibsonFender
I’m pretty damn sure you have opinions.
She got caught end off, nothing is ever going to happen to her, unlike those who ended there life, those imprisoned.
She needs her pension removed her golden hand shake returned.
Then jailed
she is just annoyed that she was caught out. Not that she feels sorry for the post masters
She needs to go to jail. How dare she cry when people have died and she didn't give a toss!
She’s putting on act here trying to pretend empathy. Fake ignorance. Real con.
EVIL, EVIL woman, who is only shedding tears now she is being held accountable.
Those tears are for herself, not for her victims, the innocent people she persecuted and prosecuted.
Crocodile tears. She knew exactly what was happening, she just didn't care.
She is caught out time after time not telling the truth. Disgusting behaviour with Mr Griffiths. She must be arrested immediately. The public must see justice
I have watched hours of this woman body swerving the truth today. She absolutely refuses to take responsibility. I believe her to be a nasty person at the helm of a nasty corporation. I found her sniveling sickening.
couldn't agree with you more...
she is still lying, which is actually desperate & sad.
And a member of the clergy to boot. Scandal after scandal in the political and corporate world coming out now, and in recent years. The ruling classes really are abhorrent towards the general public.
This is true evil.
Continuing to lie, when she completely knows the pain and suffering she caused hundreds of innocent people, who were bankrupted, and lost their whole livelihoods, by her cruel, and evil actions.
Thousands were affected, when you include the family members.
Claiming to act out of compassion, she is an evil liar.
She was so sorry that when she found out they were at fault she decided to double down,spend a million pound to cover it up and share the money they stole from postmasters to pay herself and shareholders in dividends.The audacity of her crocodile tears.
Emotions are odd things. Sobbing now, funny how a couple of years ago she was laughing all the way to the bank.
Why is she smiling when talking about a man's suicide
They don't need another special law, they just need to send them to prison, for perverting the course of justice, 4 - 7 years are the guidlines for the harm and seriousness. This will then really prevent it happening again!
When this becomes obvious to these white collar criminals they will all blame each other rather than taking responsibility.
Either she should be charged for incompetence or for lying and misleading the public.
Incompetence or lying and misleading? What about slander, obstruction, obfuscation etc.. People's lives were deliberately destroyed in order to have public, financial and legal scapegoats. If you want justice, don't diminish this to a misbehaviour or incompetence - neither of which is illegal. Those texts were pretty clear.
@@niyanajima3517 lying, obstruction, obfiscation etc are all covered by "Misconduct in public office", which is the correct name for the offence.
"The offence requires that: a public officer acting as such; wilfully neglects to perform his or her duty and/or wilfully misconducts him or herself; to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder; without reasonable excuse or justification."
Incompetence isn't a crime.... but perverting the course of justice is.
@@martinlord5969 incompetence comes under "negligence" legislation.
Negligence (legal definition)
Any act or omission which falls short of the standard to be expected of the "reasonable person". For a claim in negligence to succeed, it is necessary to establish that a duty of care was owed by the defendant to the claimant, that the duty was breached, that the claimant's loss was caused by the breach of duty and that the loss fell within the scope of the defendant's duty and was a foreseeable consequence of the breach of duty.
This is not a criminal law, but a civil tort.
Disgusting. She needs to have her assets seized and spend a lengthy time in prison
Horrible horrible woman should be facing some serious jail time. She won't though as the establishment will prevent it. If it was any of us ordinary plebs it would never have went this far, we'd already be doing the time. This country is rotten to the very core.
Reminds me of the Hillsboriough disaster the police were responsible but the establishment protected corrupt top cops.
Paula Vennells should serve time for what she did to those postmasters sending in her personal goon squad.
Fujitsu are equally culpable in this disgusting episode.
The barrister was magnificent.
He brought out beautifully this foul woman's horrendous behaviour and disgusting attempts to avoid responsibility for it.
Those poor poor victims. They deserve a million pounds - at least - NOW - not in more months or years. The lack of real government urgency on this is almost as nauseating as she is.
They may not be tears, they may well be fears.
Whenever she had her back against the wall from a condemning question she starts crying and going on as if it mattered to her, utter tosh.
Watching the inquiry this morning/afternoon, I noticed that there was several times that Paula Vennells was contacted directly and had someone saying to her exactly what we'd all love to say to her now, that what they were doing was inhumane, inconceivable and wondering what god she prays to, and asking if she herself was ready to go to prison for her own criminality.
There is no ignoring that if Paula Vennells wasn't aware of absolutely anything, it was because she was looking the other way. She said herself, she made waves for being curious and inquisitive, and yet when those skill sets were most necessary, she asked nothing, said nothing, towed the company line and believed everything at face value.
I feel no sympathy for those tears or empathy for her at all. She deserves to feel awful for what she's done, how she can even live with herself is beyond my comprehension. This is what the true face of evil looks like.
Didn’t know the PO had an Investigation Team - unbelievable.
It's called "culpable ignorance".
@@philhart4849
Aka Weaponized incompetence.
It is a form of passive-aggressive behavior where an individual deliberately performs tasks poorly or pretends to be incapable of completing certain tasks. This manipulation tactic is often used to avoid responsibility, forcing others to take over and perform the task instead.
I’ve watched several of these clips of senior managers from the Post Office giving evidence, and they all say the same thing - I didn’t know; I didn’t read it; if I did read it, I still didn’t draw from it the most blatantly obvious conclusions; I trusted my own people too much; I used poor phraseology in my e-mails and allowed my staff to do the same. Why did the government put in charge of a failing a company a woman who herself claims didn’t know how part of it worked, and didn’t take the trouble to read things to find out ? She is either lying or grossly incompetent and, if it’s the latter, who authorised payment of her huge bonuses ? I wonder if she has ever sat at home in the evenings crying to herself about the abject misery she and her organisation has brought on hundreds of people. I very much doubt it - her tears are for public consumption, and she clearly thinks they will score her some brownie points with the Enquiry. Yet another total miscalculation on her part, judging by all the comments I have read on this and other video clips.
She's a Religious Preacher total hypocrite that's all you need to know about Vennells. She needs prison time.
The tears and lunge for the tissue box were a ploy to give time to address a difficult question, to come up with a response to blame someone else against the accusation. She is fighting to keep herself from a prison sentence at this stage.
Right to jail, Right away, No trial no nothing.
I'm certainly glad you're not running the country...
@@davidkavanagh189 she admitted to a crime.. thats an admission sono need for a trial really is there.
@@alastairwallace6153 There is no situation where you simply admit to a crime and then instantly go to jail. There is always and trial, and for good reason. You're just talking childish gibberish.
@@alastairwallace6153 I guess you were skiving off school on the day they taught "due process".
@@davidkavanagh189well it works in Japan. The evidence against her is overwhelming.
The ordained priest swore to tell the truth on the bible, then lied with a straight face to lawyers.
Religion is there for sinners. The Church of England has certainly got MORE than its share.
typical church hypocrite then
@@woodenseagull1899haven’t seen any mass murders or other heinous act of violence undertaken by anyone in the name of the CofE
@@woodenseagull1899 shall we discuss the Catholic Church? How about the Jehovas Witnesses?... The Brethren?..... Scientology?
Can't recall any major scandals or crimes by the C of E...
Perhaps you could give some examples to support your claims?
all priests are liars. by definition.
KC Beer took no prisoners, she looked stunned. Can't wait for tomorrow's evidence.
KC Beer knows exactly what he is doing.
Will be interesting to see how she acts today after the overnight news reports calling out her crocodile tears
@@Rachel_M_ She has two options. Either cooperate with KC Beer, or continue to obfuscate, deny and lie.
@@user-on3wh6wu9n be interesting to see which path she chooses today..
I'm waiting for KC Edward Henry too. He doesn't pull his punches either.
@@user-on3wh6wu9n I hope you didn't play the "I don't recall" drinking game today.... If you did, do you want me to call you an ambulance?
Prison! Prison! Prison!
If Postmasters weren't at fault, and were actually collecting for POL as normal - and then they paid again out of their own pocket for false shortfalls in the takings.....WHAT HAPPENED TO THE EXTRA MONEY?! POL got paid "TWICE"! Did they take it as extra profit and give credit and bonus to the executive team?! Did Holier-than-thou use her bonus money to buy a nice frock for her Church of England job interview?!
Crocodile tears.... dreadful woman
Wow who does she think she is questioning someone’s mental health. She clearly thought she was untouchable. She continues to blame everyone else .
It is the arrogance of thinking that the PO is right, it must be something in his private life that drove him to suicide. Appalling!!
It's too late for crocodile tears and vague apologies, there should be criminal prosecutions for what she and her colleagues had done and the lives that were ruined as a consequence
Let's hope the Police don't let us down - again!
"police just got free stamps with their own logo on them" :D
we not part of the us that get knighted for these sort of things
It will be the judges that will be the problem.!
Don't hold your breath
good luck with that, judiciary & po-lice are owned & operated by freemasonry
No point in having a CEO who is absolutely determined not to hear bad news. Imagine a ship's captain ignoring crew feed-back, failing to check on the crew's performance of their duties, disregarding all reports of system malfunctions and lying to the Admiralty.
She knows she is going to prison.
I hope!
Sadly, I doubt it... Fingers crossed though, hopefully this will ruin her.
When she is cornered, she does crocodile cries.
Cries only when she realises she's been completely caught out on lies - cries for herself.
Just another incredulous answer ,the post office knew that I didn’t know that ,what company was she CEO of then, she needs removed from from her position in the NHS as she is not a fit and proper person to hold such a post
Liar……
She should go to prison, nothing more to say
Wow.. what an evil creature.. 🤬
"Misconduct in public office contrary to section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977." Charge her (and other!) now!
She was in charge, she took all the wages and perks of the boss now she must take the responsibility and blame.
I urge everyone to go to this mornings evidence session, scroll to 1:26, and watch for 10 minutes.
Jason Beer explains the awful story of a postmaster who was hounded by this vile persons organisation, ans eventually took his own life as a result.
She shows not even a flicker of emotion.
It was not until 7 minutes later, when she starts talking about ANOTHER colleague who she knew who had taken their own life, that she turned on the waterworks - clearly using an old sad memory to help in her acting.
This woman should go to prison for the rest of her natural life, and her salary and bonuses throughout her employment should be forcibly taken back, and put toward the compensation for the postmasters affected.
Why isn't this women behind bars already never heard so much bs under oath
All the time she's had to prepare for this and she has nothing 'helpful' to say to the enquiry. That is, nothing that would help to clarify what happened, how and why. Instead her testimony makes it all appear to be a great mystery. And it's the responsibility of the enquiry to account for HER actions. Draw your own conclusions.
Throw her in jail ffs
She'll be in bits on her first day in prison.
I've been pushing for ten to twenty years in prison. After the last two days, I'm pushing for twenty to thirty years.
Just remember for all the tears and half apologies for what happened to the sub-posties in this inquiry that there were many many more tears shed by the victims and their families.
In private with their reputations shredded, their homes gone, their finances wrecked and no career prospects but minimum wage dead end jobs.
So not too much sympathy here …
Send this woman to prison
Lock her up!
"Ceo fakes tears"
Why is she talking…. She needs to go to jail!
How’s about not trying to provoke an emotional reaction to her tears
You yourselves have reported on how post office execs including her knew years ahead of time what was wrong
You even showed how she signed off on a post office with a glowing report only to send the postmaster (that she had recommended for the role) to court 2 weeks later
Not sure her “I didn’t know” story will work given the evidence and the fact it was her job role to know
She's a disgrace. Clearly lying
Crocodile tears !!!! You can tell when she's lying, her mouth is open !!
She and many in this scandal should be in prison
Send her too jail now please
As soon as she is faced by an indisputable truth of her lying ...tears. Reprehensible individual who deserves prison for those who took their own lives because of this corporate disaster.
Lock her up.
Vennels has a brass neck, she should think about the poor people she ridiculed and what they went through
Lies lies lies throughout p.v.
Why is it that the hyper-religious types are always the worst??
Religion is a good cover for them.
Who appointed her in the first place? She lacked the necessary competence and experience! Did they think a dog collar sufficed?
An awful lot of innocent people broke down long before Vennell’s appearance at this inquiry 😡
More of a fake down than a break down..
The Arch Bishop of Canterbury wanted this monster to be Bishop of London (even thought he had full knowledge of her bad behaviour.)
For a devout priest she sure does lie and manipulate a whole lot
"I am incredibly sorry that that happened to those people". She is being very careful to admit zero personal responsibility and she is shifting the blame onto the corporation. You can't put handcuffs on a corporation.
Yep pure evil it's all the post office this and the post office that I suppose the the post office grew legs and arms and ran off with the money did it
She was trying to cry to get sympathy but it is now clear that she is catatonic. You can tell that she tried but there was no real tears there which make her expression looking comical !
That isn't what catatonic means
Crocodile tears after all the pain other people went through, some lost their family members to this corruption scandal
PRISON....
Going forward the CEO must have ultimate criminal liability for the actions of anyone in the company that causes the company to break the law. Additionally the limited company is a legal entity and must finance any damages resulting from its or its executives or employees or sub contractors criminal actions. If no individuals within a company can be identified as jointly or severally responsible for the company's illegal actions then the CEO of the company must be equally liable for the result of the company's actions as if they had personally committed those illegal actions. The law requires a change.
Off to jail!! You can't hide behind your god any longer. Disgusting!
lair of liars, or maybe some mental ward for the deranged, she seems out of touch with reality.
Jail
“I was only in this leadership role to collect an obscene salary and bonuses. How can I be expected to take responsibility for the crimes committed by the organisation I was leading?”
Crocodile tears
She would have been better wearing a Mr blobby disguise and using his voice, it would have been more convincing.
Make them pay back all their bonuses for this period in time to pay back all the victims then all the assets they now own as a result of those bonuses paid out as they are proceeds of crime, the taxpayer should not foot the bill for malicious corporate behaviour.
Someone's pants are on fire..
Look at this Karen !!, Stripe her of her titles, put her in prison.
The times we live in! Why are our institutions FILLED with awful individuals of such LOW character? We need Change!
The Post Office had the Law changed to say that computer systems could never be wrong. This is why the challenges in Court always failed.
False
"The Post Office had the law changed" has enough flaws in it to qualify as a high-rise. Silly post.
@@DaveATKIN Based on what info? This was a quote from a Radio 4 broadcast.
@@DaveATKIN
“Computer says guilty” - an introduction to the evidential presumption that computers are operating correctly
30th September 2023
This is first in a series of posts on the Post Office Horizon prosecutions scandal
*
The Post Office prosecutions scandal is the United Kingdom’s greatest mass miscarriage of justice of our times.
The scandal, however, is also difficult to write about.
Partly this is because many of the personal and systemic failures in the scandal are so maddening that any attempt at objective explanation and detached commentary can quickly become a rant.
And it is partly because the matter is so complex that very few will have mastery of all the legal and other documents and evidence. For example, the key 2019 judgment of Mr Justice Fraser - a judgment which also happens to be one of the greatest forensic exercises undertaken by any modern judge - is over a thousand paragraphs long, even without its appendices.
Nonetheless, there have been some outstanding accounts and analyses of this sorry situation. In particular, the journalist Nick Wallis has produced a book which should be read widely on the mess. There is also now a statutory inquiry which is seeking to get to the bottom of what happened, and why it happened, and how it should not happen again.
The focus of many of the accounts and much of the commentary has, rightly, been on the numerous personal and systemic failures - especially those of the Post Office management and their lawyers, and those of the software provider Fujitsu.
Those personal and systemic failures are central to what happened: none of the miscarriages of justice would have occurred without decisions by individuals (and groups of individuals) which could and should have been made differently.
And some of those decisions are such that the individuals involved should themselves be prosecuted.
But this post - and the posts which will follow this, as part of a series - is on another failure which was part of the mix.
This is the failure of the law itself and of the procedures of the courts.
And if anything, this failure of the law itself and of the procedures of the courts makes the individual decision-makers more culpable - for they knew (or should have known) how harsh the applicable law and procedure would be on the defendants, but the defendants would be prosecuted anyway.
Nothing in an account and explanation of the applicable law and procedure should be taken to limit the culpability of the Post Office management and their lawyers, and of those at the software provider Fujitsu.
*
In this first post let us start with what lawyers called a “presumption”.
The classic statement of this presumption is as follows:
“In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the courts will presume that mechanical instruments were in order at the material time”.
Here “mechanical instruments” include computers.
So, in other words, computers are presumed to be operating correctly, unless there is evidence to the contrary.
As a “presumption” this does not mean that the court will take this view each and every time, regardless of circumstance.
It is instead a starting-point which can be rebutted.
It is what the court will take to be the state of affairs, unless it is satisfied by evidence that it is not the state of affairs.
*
There is nothing inherently wrong about a court using presumptions: indeed, without presumptions, the courts could not properly operate.
Presumptions keep almost all legal cases manageable. For example, a contract will be presumed not to be a fraudulent instrument, unless it is shown to be a fake; or a defendant may be presumed not to be insane, unless shown to be insane; and so on.
Presumptions tell us what will be taken to be the state of affairs - and which party has the onus of showing whether that state of affairs is not correct.
The problems with any presumption are in what it presumes, and in what is needed to rebut it.
If the presumption is unrealistic in and of itself, or if rebuttal is unrealistic, then the presumption converts from being something that assists the course of justice to something that causes miscarriages of justice.
*
The presumption that computers are presumed to be operating correctly, unless there is evidence to the contrary is what lawyers call “a presumption of evidence”.
This means that a court can be satisfied that a relevant fact can be established just by computer records, unless there is evidence that the computer is not working properly.
And so when the computer record shows, for instance, a financial shortfall by postmaster or postmistress, the court will accept that as evidence of an actual shortfall - unless the defendant can show that the computer was not operating correctly.
In short, when the computer record is the essence of a prosecution case: computer says guilty.
*
This evidential presumption has not always been part of English law.
In 1984 a law was passed which pointed this presumption in the opposite direction.
Section 69 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 provided:
This provision pointed the presumption in the other direction: it was for the prosecution to show that the computer was operating correctly, and not for the defendant to show that computer was not operating correctly.
This section 69 replaced the old common law position where, as stated above, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the courts will presume that mechanical instruments were in order at the material time.
Had section 69 still been part of the law when the Post Office brought its prosecutions of post-masters and post-mistresses then the course of those cases may well have been different.
Section 69, however, was repealed in 1999:
She is rather smarter than the majority who've been in front of JB, note that in order to show genuine tears and grief, she draws upon her memory of a friend who took their own life.
Am intrigued by Sir WYN question 5 minutes from the end “WHY’. The advice to the subcommittee and she cant answer ………🎉
No man would have cried like this. Despicable behaviour. What does this about feminism.
Conspiracy, pure and simple. They worked to give HORIZON/Post Office executives a stellar reputation.
The govt also knew exactly what was going on.
We needa law forcing british officials to be open and honest?!? 🤣🤣
'I was in charge, but I knew nothing'. Shocking tart.
Crocodile tears. Put her and the rest in jail for double the time they put people in jail.
Anyone will to bet that no one person from the Post Office will see the inside of a jail.
If she didn't know things, is she saying people were lying to her, and if so who? Did she not see the Second Sight report outlining problems with the Horizon System? Was she not part of the decision making that led to their sacking? If not what does she do for all that money she is paid. It's just not believable that she went so hard against sub-postmasters from a position of complete ignorance. Any reasonable person in such a situation, would surely want to know and hear the facts before wrecking people's lives over many years. What a vile self pitying person.