Post Office Inquiry live: Paula Vennells had concerns over cost of ...

Paula Vennells agreed that the “right and honest” thing to do in response to a letter from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) asking for information about the Horizon system would be to tell them of concerns about the reliability of leading Horizon engineer Gareth Jenkins’ evidence.

The Horizon IT Inquiry heard a letter from the CCRC, sent to the then-Post Office chief executive in July 2013, said: “For obvious reasons, we have read the recent media coverage concerning the Post Office Horizon computer system with interest.”

The letter asked for information directly from Post Office, “especially accurate information as to number of criminal convictions that might be impacted by the issue and what action is proposed, or being taken, in that respect”.

Jason Beer KC asked: “The right and honest thing for the Post Office to have done would be to have let the CCRC know, and know promptly, over its concerns about the truthfulness and reliability of the evidence that Gareth Jenkins had given to court wouldn’t it?”

Ms Vennells said: “Yes it would.

Mr Beer went on: “That didn’t happen for years and years did it?”

“I understand that to be the case now,” Ms Vennells replied.

The former Post Office chief was quizzed at on her first day of testimony at the inquiry into the Horizon IT scandal about an email she sent after his suicide attempt suggesting she had heard about “previous mental health and family issues”.

Archie Mitchell reports:

Paula Vennells said she was not told that leading Horizon engineer Gareth Jenkins was an unsafe witness.

Ms Vennells was informed that there was a problem with some of the expert evidence, given by Mr Jenkins, about bugs on which the Post Office had relied on in prosecutions, including the conviction of Seema Misra, the inquiry heard.

When questioned on whether she asked who this witness was, she said: “I think I was told that it was someone who worked for Fujitsu who was very competent on the system.”

She told the inquiry she did not ask how many cases he gave evidence in.

Questioned on whether she asked what the Post Office was doing as a result of its concern that Mr Jenkins failed to mention in cases knowledge of bugs, Ms Vennells said: “I was told that we were going back looking at or that Cartwright King were going back and looking at cases.

“I understood because that was the obligation that one had to do was that any case that he had given evidence in needed to be given this evidence around these two bugs even if it didn’t affect those cases.”

She denied being told he was an unsafe witness.

Counsel to the inquiry Jason Beer KC asked Paula Vennells: “Did you ever connect the long running criticism with Horizon’s integrity that had been forced upon the Post Office by subpostmasters for years and years with being informed that there was a problem with the expert evidence on which the Post Office had relied about bugs?”

Ms Vennells said: “I don’t think I made that connection because it was very specific.”

She said she was told the two bugs were related to Horizon Online before adding: “And the bugs had been fixed and the postmasters had not lost any money as a result of that.

“There is even documentation that refers to them as a red herring.”

The former chief executive added that the fact that former Post Office general counsel Susan Crichton was going through a review into the flagged issue “seemed to be reassuring rather than concerning”.

In the first of three days of evidence, Ms Vennells insisted she did not know until 2012 that the Post Office conducted its own private criminal investigations, despite joining the organisation in 2007. Ms Vennells began her evidence to the Horizon IT Inquiry in central London on Wednesday by apologising to subpostmasters and their families.

She told the inquiry: “It was an accepted reality, it was a status quo that I joined and accepted”, adding: “I shouldn’t have done”. The former Post Office boss also claimed she was “too trusting” of the information she had been given while chief executive.

Barney Davis reports:

Paula Vennells has said the Post Office team felt “frustrated” due to the perceived “unfairness” that their input had not been adequately taken into account by Second Sight in its review of Horizon.

Speaking at the inquiry into the Post Office, counsel Jason Beer KC asked: “Was there a suggestion in what you’d been told that second sight had been biased in their approach?”

The former Post Office CEO responded: “No, certainly not at this stage - my very clear recollection, to describe it more colloquially, the team thought it was unfair because the Post Office hadn’t had the opportunity to contribute yet. Whether that was true or not, I didn’t check that with second sight - but what I was told was that the work was so far behind that Second Sight had yet to take account of the Post Office’s input.”

Mr Beer asked: “Was the sense of unfairness conveyed to you?”

Ms Vennells replied: “Frustration, I think.”

Paula Vennells has admitted the Post Office never discussed what systemic issues even meant, despite peddling the view that Horizon did not have any.

Inquiry counsel Jason Beer KC asked: “Was there a shred of understanding between you and the PO board as to what systemic issues meant?”

Ms Vennells replied: “I don’t think a conversation ever happened.”

He went on: “Was there a shared understanding between you and the Post Office team leading the work as to sSecond Sight over what systemic issues meant?”

She responded: “No.”

He asked finally: “Was there ever any discussion as to what systemic issues meant?”

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

Paula Vennells has denied making a decision to not review past cases based on the potential media outcomes.

The former Post Office CEO told the Post Office inquiry on Thursday: “I absolutely don’t accept that I took a decision to not review past cases based on the media outcome.”

The chairman of the Horizon IT inquiry has had to intervene in proceedings after the public gallery, mainly made up of subpostmasters, groaned when Paula Vennells said she did not remember if she took the “advice of the PR guy” not to review 5-10 years’ worth of past prosecutions.

Responding to an email from Mr Davies in which he advised not to look at historical Horizon cases because it would end up on the front page, Ms Vennells said: “You are right to call this out. I will take your steer.”

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

Ms Vennells began her answer by saying “I don’t remember”, before loud groans came from the public gallery.

After chairman Sir Wyn Williams intervened, Ms Vennells continued: “As I tried to say before, what we were working to at this stage was numbers of cases going through a scheme, and a scheme that was going to be opened up to anybody who wanted to come forward.

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

Paula Vennells said she remained in contact with former director of communications Mark Davies after she left the Post Office.

Counsel to the inquiry Jason Beer KC asked: “Did you exchange messages with him about media statements that you might make and the media lines that you might take in the announcement of this inquiry, for example?”

Ms Vennells replied: “I believe the inquiry has texts that show that.”

Mr Beer continued: “Even though you’d moved on, he was still advising you into 2020 as to the lines to take in your media statements?”

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