The Fall Guy?

[drmorgans]

At last a paper trail: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnd69r7rz11o

Someone's in for an uncomfortable time when he is questioned at the enquiry?

 

[bookbinder]

Mr. Jenkins certainly doesn't appear to have an impeccable background.

[ToraToraTora]

he's no IT expert. He may be moonlighting as one but no real expert would ever say things like that. I've worked in IT all my life and I've said many times on here what any proper IT dept would have done. He looks like the sort of mealy mouthed IT fashion follower that we used to rip up for Aris paper back in the day.

[New Judge]

"The fall guy" suggests that Mr Jenkins is somehow taking the blame for these wrongful convictions when he was innocent of any wrongdoing.

Going purely on the BBC report, that seems far from the truth. Expert witnesses have unique responsibilities in the trial process. They do not provide evidence of fact. Instead they provide opinion based on their expertise. They have a duty to the court to give objective and unbiased evidence in their field and that duty overrides any loyalty they may feel they have to the party who called them. 

Mr Jenkins is on record as stating “This is another example of postmasters trying to get away with ‘Horizon has taken my money'." Although this was not said in court, it demonstrates that Mr Jenkins held a prejudicial view of the defendants in these cases, held opinions that were outside his competence and demonstrate that he was far from unbiased. He also had information about the deficiencies in tthe Horizon system which he should have disclosed to the court, but failed to do so.

I understand the police are now investigating him on suspicion of perjury. 

[youngmafbog]

Either way, should be plenty of jail time for him.

Just hope he is followed by Vennells et al.

[drmorgans]

 

Should I change the title to "hubris"?

 

[Peter Pedant]

Someone's in for an uncomfortable time when he is questioned at the enquiry?

he GJ Gareth Jenkins has a week later on, in a few months.

The problem with Been fluffies, and fluffy and thweet  as they are - they dont really understand what is going on. We sat thro the whole lot ( four hours - catheters and popcorn) - and their sound bite - "Trying it on" was not at the forefront

It was Hugh Flemington ( all the high ups this week) who was head of Legal

Main point - as usual - he was head but not head - he was often in a different building. He was nt file owner so he didnt instruct or brief. Someone else did. Who  - - dont know. Lots

2.RM split into POL ( post office, where the SPMs are ) and Royal Mail. 

3.The split ws 2013 - and yup cracks in Horizon appeared in 2010 ( before Hugh) and really went on fire after 2013 ( noot Hugh again)

and so.... he didnt question Horizon as he cdnt add AND others said it was robust ( one gareth jenkins actually)

AND he was always in another office ( admin, Crim/civil, not crim AND not civil, admin again - sabbatical even !! )

emails he wrote ( 'Your name is in the by-line' .oops yes but I have no recollection....) - meetings he attended ( so long ago) other meetings he attended ( yes I did but I have no memory)

The usual gamut of denials and excuses were wheeled out.

Hadnt heard of Misra, and then HAD heard of her in order to discuss her ( your name is there).

HAD latterly heard of non disclosure - but as head of legal it was NOT his duty to do anthing about it. So he didnt.

see above

excuse me - he was in charge but wasnt in charge? yup

 

 

[drmorgans]

 

Seems to have been a lot of that. Sinecures, I mean.

 

[Peter Pedant]

I understand the police are now investigating him on suspicion of perjury. 

he has been given a warning on perhury but is STILL appearing in a month or two

Things we have found out;

13 July 2013 - seems to be the date no one can deny POL knew all about it.

SS spilt the beans - Gareth it is now not denied told them there was remote access and it was used, having sworn that it wasnt in Misra and Castleton. oops

2010 the poo hits the fan, but so far EVERYONE including someone who wrote it -deny any memory

2004 The first report - denied. kinda difficult that one, since there are emails.  'noise' ignored.

Castleton who is well and truly screwed (£ 300k bankrupt) sues and says brightly "Oh it is the callender square but what did it". BUT Anne chambers is there and says " no I know all about that and it clearly wasnt". Judge believes AC. (Fuji)

AC ( Fuji) muses that it isnt callender square but may be another as yet undiscovered bug. It is. - in which case Castleton shouldnt have lost. - and that starts all the ya-ya of "to what extent do we have to tell past cases that there is new evidence that that wd have swayed the case"

keep stum and dont tell mum

and the rest is history

[tomus42]

//he's no IT expert. He may be moonlighting as one but no real expert would ever say things like that. I've worked in IT all my life and I've said many times on here what any proper IT dept would have done.//

If the people involved have no integrity or honesty, they'll behave the way he did whether he's an expert or not.