ECCOnoob Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) 3 hours ago, Organgrinder said: Not so. If someone bought a tool or a vehicle which malfunctioned and killed members of the public, who would be to blame. The person or company who bought the tool in good faith or the company who made or supplied the tool claiming it was the correct tool for the job. If I buy a gas boiler which explodes and kills a person, it's not my fault for buying that boiler. It's the fault of the either the company who supplied it or the company who fitted it. You cannot expect someone who buys something which is claimed to be perfect for the job, to be the one at fault if things go wrong. They can be if they fail to do regular checking of the product they bought. They can be if other users of the product raised concerns to the purchaser but just got ignored repeatedly. They can be if the purchaser of that product, which now knowingly had a fault, doesn't take any actions to check, investigate and instead blindly brings criminal proceedings against the other users of it. Your fixation on solely Fujitsu is misguided. Yes, they provided a system which turned out to have defects. However, it was the post office who failed to undertake any proper checking and auditing of the system. It was the post office who ignored the concerns raised by the users, it was the post office who kept deploying the system despite the concerns raised by the users, it was the post office who brought unsound criminal convictions by blindly accepting what the system was telling them despite concerns raised by the users. The product alone is only a tiny element of all this. If a rental property had a gas boiler it would be assumed to be 'perfect for the job', but it doesn't mean a landlord has no responsibilities for checking and maintaining it and dealing with any faults that subsequently arise does it? No technologies are completely infallible. Most people accept that. We are talking about a multi-million pound government procurement piece of IT infrastructure that was deployed nationally to hundreds if not thousands of users. You are deluded if you think there is not some onus on the purchaser, i.e. the post office and/or their auditors and/or their accountants and/or their lawyers and/or the government department to also take responsibility for some checks and balances, particularly when there was a clear pattern emerging of things going wrong. Like I said. This is a multi-party institutional failure. Edited January 9 by ECCOnoob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 2 hours ago, Anna B said: The 'justice' system is not about fairness or justice, it is about the law. These are two very different things. I was told this by a solicitor. Sounds to me like a bit of a desperate excuse making after they lost a case. Perhaps they should have used the law better to represent their client. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 Former Post Office boss Paula Vennells to return CBE amid Horizon scandal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRESLEY Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 12 hours ago, Organgrinder said: Because it was their computer & software system which kept ( appearing to be ) losing the money. Had all the figures been correct, nobody would ever have been accused of theft, sacked, made homeless or been convicted of a criminal offence. The post office would have operated as it has for many many years and none of this scandalous chaos would ever have happened at all. When it did happen, the faults on other parties came into play. These being the post office itself, the government minister at the time and those who followed and never got to grips with the problem. None of this would have been brought into play at all if Fujitsu's Horizon had worked correctly and they had provided the service they were paid for. They further compounded this by lying and committing perjury in court and the post office compounded their faults also by lying and telling each postmaster that they were the only ones. A general cover up job then by all three parties, Fujitsu, the post office and the government and only now do we start seeing real progress. Had Fujitsu's Horizon worked correctly, none of this nightmare would ever have happened so they should be responsible for every penny of the total cost. Had Fujitsu's program worked correctly there would have been NO INSTITIONAL FAILURES ACROSS MULYIPLE PARTIES. I couldn't agree more, a spot on post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 3 hours ago, Axe said: My point is there will be some postmasters who are guilty. Because of the scandal they could take advantage and get compensation they do not deserve. You are always telling us that people are innocent until proven guilty. That means proven guilty by proper means, not by lies, deceit and perjury, backed up by a faulty Computer program which caused all the problems in the first place. Every one of those people need to be declared innocent as soon as possible and compensation paid to them by Fujitsu who caused the whole damned mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 7 minutes ago, Organgrinder said: You are always telling us that people are innocent until proven guilty. That means proven guilty by proper means, not by lies, deceit and perjury, backed up by a faulty Computer program which caused all the problems in the first place. Every one of those people need to be declared innocent as soon as possible and compensation paid to them by Fujitsu who caused the whole damned mess. They have been found guilty or admitted guilt. Not every postmaster prosecuted can be a victim of a miscarriage of justice. If everyone of those people are declared innocent then a number will surely be wrongly declared innocent. I have no doubt those featured in the TV drama are all innocent but I doubt very much all those coming forward now are innocent. There is a bandwagon jumping scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRESLEY Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 15 minutes ago, Axe said: They have been found guilty or admitted guilt. Not every postmaster prosecuted can be a victim of a miscarriage of justice. If everyone of those people are declared innocent then a number will surely be wrongly declared innocent. I have no doubt those featured in the TV drama are all innocent but I doubt very much all those coming forward now are innocent. There is a bandwagon jumping scenario. They should have been a Royal or a member of the Tory Party then they would be innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Axe said: They have been found guilty or admitted guilt. Not every postmaster prosecuted can be a victim of a miscarriage of justice. If everyone of those people are declared innocent then a number will surely be wrongly declared innocent. I have no doubt those featured in the TV drama are all innocent but I doubt very much all those coming forward now are innocent. There is a bandwagon jumping scenario. It's commonplace for innocent people to admit guilt to get a reduced sentence, knowing they faced almost certain imprisonment. You have no idea how many victims there were and what you doubt is not a strong enough proof of their guilt. I have already told you that those found guilty were pronounced guilty by a series of lies and false evidence. There can be no guilt where the slightest doubt exists. Glad to see that the honour is being handed back and I hope she's going to jail in their place soon, as she let others be jailed, knowing it was on false evidence. Edited January 9 by Organgrinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 22 minutes ago, Axe said: They have been found guilty or admitted guilt. Not every postmaster prosecuted can be a victim of a miscarriage of justice. If everyone of those people are declared innocent then a number will surely be wrongly declared innocent. I have no doubt those featured in the TV drama are all innocent but I doubt very much all those coming forward now are innocent. There is a bandwagon jumping scenario. If people were found guilty because of evidence from a faulty computer system then their convictions were unsafe because the evidence cannot be relied on. For the others, faced with a Post Office that said 'admit guilt and pay us several thousand of pounds or we will bankrupt you/ruin your life/see that you go to prison', many chose to admit guilt and pay up rather than fight for justice. Don't forget, the Post Office knew their computer system was faulty and they chose to prosecute these people despite knowing that they would have never succeeded in court if computer system's faults were known. When people did challenge and asked that their expert witness be allowed to examine the computer system the Post Office withdrew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francypants Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 1 hour ago, altus said: Former Post Office boss Paula Vennells to return CBE amid Horizon scandal Good ! but .......... returning her CBE is not the same as being stripped of the award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now