Ex-Post Office investigator Stephen Bradshaw At the post office inquiry today

Jedi boro

Jedi boro

Well-known member
What a nasty piece of work he is idbg he clearly playing the trump play book of denying everything despite the overwhelming evidence against him.

There was an Interesting angle raised today as well….. were bonuses offered to these Torquemada wannabes “investigators” linked to convictions or indeed confessions.
 
Jedi boro said:
What a nasty piece of work he is idbg he clearly playing the trump play book of denying everything despite the overwhelming evidence against him.

There was an Interesting angle raised today as well….. were bonuses offered to these Torquemada wannabes “investigators” linked to convictions or indeed confessions.
Click to expand...
Payment by results?

What could possibly go wrong?

(Anyone work for probation on here who would care to comment 😔)
 
Showed no genuine compassion to those whose lives had been ruined by his action. Reminded me of the accused on trial at Nuremburg, in his attitude.

Admitted he knew nothing about the computer software and was not interested in it. But still used it as the sole evidence to prosecute others.
 
This guy interrogated a lot of the postmasters etc. He should have been saying it wasn't right when the numbers starting climbing after the first 3 years, but prosecutions and punishments went on for 16 years? He must also have been saying "you are the only one", a number of times.

He wasn't at the top, but he was a king pin because he was at the coal face. The ones at the top should be prosecuted, of course.

The analogy with the Nazis : he would be a camp commander i.e didn't come up with the policy, but administered it and saw the results.
 
Centralscrutinizer said:
Need to look much higher up the organisation to find the real culprits.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. These prosecutions had to be made on a Point of law. Someone legally qualified has taken this decision and considering one of the interviews suggested they could find no evidence yet still prosecuted the lady. That person is the one who should be hung out to dry as well as anyone above who must have some say in this.
 
I've just been reading in The Guardian how Horizon System was used to convict Robin Garbutt for the murder of his wife. I'm not sure if Garbutt is jumping on the bandwagon to gain his freedom or if he is guilty of his wife's murder but the shortfalls were a big part of the evidence. It could also be that he did murder his wife due to the stress the shortfalls put him under.


The Guardian - Garbutt has always insisted a man wearing a balaclava and holding a gun made him hand over £16,000 cash, claiming they “had” his wife. He said he handed over the cash and then ran upstairs, to find Diana dead.

He was found guilty at trial in 2011 on the basis of circumstantial evidence, with the jury split 10-2, a majority verdict.

With no DNA evidence to link him to the murder or the metal bar used to kill Diana, Garbutt was convicted in part after the jury heard evidence from a Post Office investigator using data from the Horizon system. This purportedly showed he was stealing money from the Post Office and then killed his wife to cover up his theft.

The prosecution claimed Garbutt concealed his theft via a series of false declarations about the amount of money in the Post Office safe. The investigator told the jury the pattern of high overnight cash declarations was one “I have seen replicated across many Post Office Limited fraud cases in the past”.

www.theguardian.com

Post office owner says Horizon system was used to frame him for wife’s murder

Robin Garbutt hopes for fresh appeal against conviction that came after jury heard evidence using data from discredited IT system
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Cheesenbiscuits said:
Totally agree. These prosecutions had to be made on a Point of law. Someone legally qualified has taken this decision and considering one of the interviews suggested they could find no evidence yet still prosecuted the lady. That person is the one who should be hung out to dry as well as anyone above who must have some say in this.
Click to expand...
That would be lawyers acting for the Post Office, acting on the information provided by this senior investigator.
 
Cheesenbiscuits said:
Totally agree. These prosecutions had to be made on a Point of law. Someone legally qualified has taken this decision and considering one of the interviews suggested they could find no evidence yet still prosecuted the lady. That person is the one who should be hung out to dry as well as anyone above who must have some say in this.
Click to expand...
The judges who failed to throw the cases out are well trained in law. I do wonder if word will have gone around the benches as to what was going on?
 
I have heard in some of the cases the judges in their summing up said the Post Office workers were stealing from OAPs. Hence the prison sentences given out even when the accused were willing to pay shortfalls and has been in many cases. The judges in these instances obviously believed every word they were told by the Post Office and their lawyers, even when they were lying, which shows the depth of the problem. I am not saying every judge did but there were some. The prosecutions went on for around 15 years didn't they?
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
The judges who failed to throw the cases out are well trained in law. I do wonder if word will have gone around the benches as to what was going on?
Click to expand...
But didn’t the majority plead guilty to the lesser charge of false accounting as part of a plea bargain. As part of this they agreed not to blame horizon.
I don’t know how many actually pleaded not guilty and were then found guilty. They made an example of one of them on the show but maybe others.
 
Cheesenbiscuits said:
But didn’t the majority plead guilty to the lesser charge of false accounting as part of a plea bargain. As part of this they agreed not to blame horizon.
I don’t know how many actually pleaded not guilty and were then found guilty. They made an example of one of them on the show but maybe others.
Click to expand...
Steve Bradshaw gave them the choice of theft or false accounting and that the latter wouldn't be a custodial sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top