The Post Office attempted to cover up evidence of postmasters’ innocence by smearing them, but ultimately failed. The BBC uncovered this deception, revealing that the Post Office had lied and threatened in an effort to suppress a whistleblower from the Horizon scandal.
The firm smeared postmasters in a failed bid to suppress evidence of their innocence, the BBC reveals.
The Post Office reportedly engaged in threatening and deceptive behavior towards the BBC in an unsuccessful attempt to suppress crucial evidence that ultimately helped exonerate postmasters involved in the Horizon scandal. Senior managers allegedly sought to tarnish the reputation of postmasters before the airing of a 2015 Panorama interview with a Fujitsu whistleblower, Richard Roll. Roll, a former insider, disclosed that accounts on the Horizon computer system could be covertly manipulated. The Post Office has chosen not to provide a statement amid the ongoing public inquiry. Richard Roll later played a pivotal role in a 2019 High Court case that determined glitches in the Post Office’s computer system could lead to errors, impacting postmasters who run local branches. Between 1999 and 2015, 700 sub-postmasters and postmistresses faced prosecution for offenses like theft and fraud, resulting in some serving prison sentences and others tragically taking their own lives.
Despite the false claims made by the Post Office, the program persisted, albeit with a delay in its broadcast by several weeks due to the misinformation. Documents presented in the ongoing public inquiry shed light on the celebration within Post Office senior management over this small victory. Paula Vennells, the then-chief executive, commended Mark Davies and his PR team for their “extensive work.”
This incident was just one among many instances of lobbying, misinformation, and outright falsehoods encountered by a handful of BBC journalists in their quest to unveil the truth behind the Post Office scandal. The saga began in 2011 when Nick Wallis, a BBC regional reporter, conducted an interview with Jo Hamilton (portrayed by Monica Dolan in the ITV drama “Mr Bates v The Post Office”). During the interview, Hamilton disclosed how the Horizon computer system seemingly caused money to disappear from the tills at her branch in Hampshire.
n 2014, Nick Wallis and producer Tim Robinson, investigating claims for the BBC’s Inside Out, explored allegations that Fujitsu staff could remotely manipulate Horizon accounts. Sub-postmaster Michael Rudkin, portrayed by Shaun Dooley, claimed to have witnessed such tampering during a visit to Fujitsu’s head office.
The Post Office initially denied any faults in Horizon, asserting there was no functionality for tampering. However, it later emerged that 18 months prior, a barrister had warned about potential unsafe prosecutions due to undisclosed system bugs.
Despite this, the Post Office continued to spread misinformation, with PR boss Mark Davies lobbying BBC management to halt negative coverage. Minutes from a Post Office meeting revealed efforts to maintain the cover-up.
Amidst this, Alan Bates, the central figure in the ITV drama, had a final card to play.
During a meeting at a tea room in a Shrewsbury garden center, he disclosed to Nick Wallis that he had received communication from a whistleblower at Fujitsu, shedding light on the truth behind Horizon and remote access.
The informant, Richard Roll, formerly employed by Fujitsu for the Post Office’s Horizon computer system in the early 2000s, was eager for Panorama to investigate the matter. Subsequently, Nick connected the whistleblower with the Panorama program team.
In the 2015 Panorama episode, Richard Roll shared on-camera with reporter John Sweeney how a Fujitsu team had remote access to branch accounts, enabling them to manipulate them without the sub-postmasters’ awareness. This revelation had the potential to challenge the convictions of over 700 sub-postmasters, as the Post Office’s legal stance rested on denying the possibility of remote access through Horizon.
Anticipating the impact of the story, the Post Office initiated an intensified misinformation campaign, gearing up for a robust defense against its revelation.
Journalists Matt Bardo and Tim Robinson from Panorama were granted an on-the-record briefing about the Horizon system at the Post Office HQ. In attendance were network manager Angela van den Bogerd, PR head Mark Davies, and senior manager Patrick Bourke. Ms. van den Bogerd asserted that no one from the Post Office or Fujitsu could manipulate sub-postmasters’ accounts without their knowledge, emphasizing that any changes would leave a trace.
During questioning, Matt Bardo sought confirmation that it had never been possible for anyone to interfere with transactions without the sub-postmasters’ awareness. Mr. Bourke affirmed, stating unequivocally that they couldn’t alter existing transaction data, ensuring 100% integrity preservation. However, this claim turned out to be untrue both at that time and throughout the system’s duration.
Subsequently, the Post Office had to acknowledge that Fujitsu staff could indeed access and modify accounts without the sub-postmasters being informed. In 2019, one of the Post Office’s lawyers suggested that Angela van den Bogerd and her colleagues might have denied remote access due to lack of awareness. However, documents obtained by Panorama in 2020 revealed that the Post Office had been aware of this possibility for years.
In 2011, Ernst and Young consultants issued a report to Post Office directors, alerting them to the fact that Fujitsu staff had “unrestricted access” to sub-postmasters’ accounts, posing a risk of unauthorized or erroneous transactions. This initial disclosure, made on the record, marked the beginning of the Post Office’s efforts to undermine the 2015 Panorama investigation.
Upon discovering the identities of the experts being interviewed by Panorama, Post Office lawyers and senior managers initiated a campaign of intimidation, sending threatening letters to deter them. One such target was Ian Henderson from the independent forensic accountants Second Sight, who had uncovered additional evidence of miscarriages of justice at the Post Office. He received a warning asserting that he lacked the legal expertise to comment on prosecutions, coupled with the threat of legal action if his statements were perceived to harm the Post Office’s reputation.
In an effort to shield the whistleblower from similar intimidating correspondence, the Panorama team refrained from disclosing Richard Roll’s name to the Post Office. Instead, they indicated that they had spoken to a Fujitsu insider and outlined the allegations being made.
Following the Post Office’s reaction, it became evident that the whistleblower’s evidence, central to the upcoming film, raised significant concerns. Mark Davies, the PR head, lodged complaints with increasingly higher-ranking BBC managers, prompting the use of public funds for hiring external lawyers to issue legal threats against Panorama.
The program’s team was inundated with extensive correspondence and reports from the Post Office and its legal representatives. However, none of the documentation acknowledged the possibility of remote access. During this period, Mr. Davies asserted that there was compelling evidence attributing the reported losses to user actions, including deliberate dishonest conduct.
Through persistent lobbying, the Post Office secured an additional meeting, an off-the-record briefing with the program’s then-editor. Such encounters are often met with skepticism by investigative journalists who perceive them as attempts to impede inquiries and hinder publication. This suspicion proved valid in this instance as the Post Office utilized the opportunity to tarnish the reputation of sub-postmasters slated to be featured in the program. The Post Office insinuated potential motives for pilfering from the tills.
In a specific case, the Post Office falsely claimed possession of documents incriminating a postmaster in theft. However, it stipulated that it would only share these documents with the program team if they agreed not to disclose them to anyone else. This condition would prevent Panorama from discussing the accusations even with the implicated postmaster.
Panorama declined to comply with these conditions. The team meticulously reviewed all available evidence, leading to a delay in the broadcast. Despite the efforts to discredit the sub-postmasters, no evidence undermining their accounts was found, and the film eventually aired in August 2015.
Airing a Panorama episode can often be a formidable challenge, especially when powerful entities engage in extensive legal and lobbying endeavors to safeguard their reputations. In this particular instance, the battle faced by the program team surpassed the typical hurdles, as it involved a government-owned institution as the adversary.
Despite the Post Office’s inability to prevent the broadcasting of Richard Roll’s story, it remained determined to mitigate its impact. Following the program’s airing, the Post Office swiftly issued a statement on its website, expressing its intention to file a complaint with the BBC regarding what it deemed “unsubstantiated allegations.”
Despite the gravity of Richard Roll’s claims, they failed to gain traction in the broader media landscape, and his revelations did not elicit the national outcry witnessed in response to ITV’s dramatization. Paula Vennells, the CEO of the Post Office, apprised the government body that oversees the institution, asserting that the program contained no new information and had minimal coverage in other media outlets. Strikingly absent from her report was any acknowledgment of the significant new information provided by the whistleblower.
Nevertheless, all hope was not lost.
The program had a profound impact on a crucial observer, marking a pivotal moment in the unfolding narrative.
Upon hearing Richard Roll’s testimony, attorney Patrick Green KC swiftly grasped the gravity of the situation. Taking charge of the postmasters’ legal case, Green presented compelling evidence suggesting that Horizon might be responsible for unforeseen discrepancies.
The whistleblower, featured on Panorama, took the stand in March 2019 during the High Court proceedings. His testimony played a pivotal role in discrediting the Post Office’s assertion that remote access to branch accounts was impossible.
Reflecting on the significance of the 2015 program, Mr. Green emphasized its vital role in their eventual triumph. He remarked, “I’m uncertain whether this legal battle would have unfolded the way it did without Panorama’s insightful program.”
The postmasters’ success in the High Court marked a turning point in the legal proceedings, ultimately leading to the reversal of convictions at the Court of Appeal.
Lawyers representing Mark Davies asserted to Panorama that their client consistently acted in good faith and based his statements on the information available to him at the time. They emphasized that Davies was committed to ensuring fair and accurate coverage of the matter as part of his job responsibilities.
In a remorseful statement, Paula Vennells expressed deep regret for the profound impact on sub-postmasters and their families, acknowledging the devastation caused by wrongful accusations and prosecutions resulting from issues with the Horizon system.
Despite this, the Post Office had sought to suppress crucial evidence for years. As early as 2015, the Post Office was aware of bugs and errors in the Horizon system, acknowledging the possibility of remote access and recognizing the unsoundness of some convictions. The evidence presented in Panorama’s 2015 documentary was available to the government as well.
It took multiple trials, over 90 overturned convictions, and a television drama for the long-overdue attention to be given to the Post Office scandal.
They stood firm in their pursuit of the truth and did not let the Post Office’s deceitful tactics deter them. This whole situation sheds light on the importance of transparency and holding powerful institutions accountable. It’s a clear reminder that the pursuit of truth sometimes comes with its fair share of challenges, but it’s always worth it in the end. Stay tuned as we uncover more about this riveting story and the impact it could have on the future of whistleblowing and corporate accountability. Until next time, stay curious and seek out the truth!
Read More: Post Office: Wrongly jailed postmaster praises TV drama
Leave a Comment