![Paula Vennells leaving the Horizon IT inquiry at Aldwych House after her second day giving evidence](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379058341_17164846513090_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqA7N2CxnJWnYI3tCbVBgu9T0aesusvN1TE7a0ddd_esI.jpeg?imwidth=680)
Post Office PR warned Paula Vennells opening old cases would be ‘front page news’
![Paula Vennells leaving the Horizon IT inquiry at Aldwych House after her second day giving evidence](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379058341_17164846513090_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqA7N2CxnJWnYI3tCbVBgu9T0aesusvN1TE7a0ddd_esI.jpeg?imwidth=680)
The Post Office’s PR chief warned Paula Vennells that investigating old Horizon cases would make “front page news”, the inquiry heard.
On her second day of giving evidence to the Post Office inquiry, the former chief executive admitted the business could have avoided a “lost decade” before wrongful convictions were uncovered if more cases had been reviewed.
More than 900 sub-postmasters were wrongfully prosecuted as a result of the Horizon scandal, which saw shortfalls incorrectly recorded on their branch accounts.
On Thursday, the inquiry was shown a July 2013 email where Ms Vennells asked colleagues for opinions on why forensic accountants Second Sight could not review all cases of false accounting “eg over the last five to ten years”.
The firm had been appointed by MPs and the Post Office the year before to investigate multiple assertions that Horizon was generating spurious branch shortfalls and that sub-postmasters were being forced to pay the shortfalls and prosecuted. Accountants wanted to expand their review across the previous decade.
But the inquiry was shown a response from Mark Davies, the Post Office’s then-director of communications, warning that a decision to review older cases could lead to the “story” becoming “front page news”.
In her response Ms Vennells said: “You are right to call this out. And I will take your steer. [sic] no issue.”
When asked about the exchange, Ms Vennells said she “absolutely” did not accept that she took a decision to not review past cases “based on a media outcome”. She added: “I didn’t take any decision on that, I wouldn’t have been able to do so.”
However, she insisted she could not remember if she took the “advice of the PR guy” not to review five to ten years of past prosecutions, prompting groans - and an intervention from the chairman Sir Wyn Williams - in the packed hearing room.
Counsel to the Horizon inquiry Jason Beer KC asked: “Do you agree your nascent idea here of a review of all prosecutions of false accounting, if it had been carried into effect, may have avoided a lost decade until miscarriages of justice were discovered?”
Ms Vennells admitted that “it may well have done”, but insisted that she did not try to close down a review into the Horizon software.
The former chief executive, who will face questions from lawyers representing sub-postmasters on Friday, was also asked about a board meeting later that month (July 2013) in which the Post Office’s most senior lawyer was made to sit outside.
Ms Vennells told the inquiry how Post Office chair Alice Perkins “stood down” Susan Crichton, the general counsel, so the board could have a “full and frank discussion” on a paper she had written on Second Sight’s report in late July.
![Paula Vennells becomes tearful after telling the inquiry she had to step back from her role as chief executive from January 2019 due to 'a family situation'](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379051677_17164793101990_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqzTW4Ql1t-1Xt3_aTCx9yp1FGGjcI28awSNtOPAVs6pc.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Addressing Ms Vennells, Mr Beer said: “She was made to wait outside on a chair?”
“Yes,” Ms Vennells responded.
“Sitting there like a naughty schoolgirl?,” Mr Beer asked.
“It must, she must have felt terrible,” responded Ms Vennells.
“Tensions” between Paula Vennells and the former Post Office chair relating to the Horizon investigation were documented by solicitors in 2013.
Notes written in July that year by Simon Richardson, then of law firm Bond Dickinson, which advised the Post Office during the Horizon investigation, read: “There was generally an overall defensive air and the board are also feeling bruised.
“There are tensions between people and that includes Alice Perkins (the chair), Paula Vennells (CEO) and SC [Susan Crichton].”
Ms Vennells said she remembered the board feeling “frustrated” over the progress of the Second Sight investigation, its cost and the perception that the Post Office’s input had not been taken into account.
When asked if there was tension between her and Ms Perkins, Ms Vennells said: “I don’t recall that she had been critical.
“I mean Alice was a very straightforward chair and I generally took feedback pretty well and again, forgive me for repeating the phrase, but there is documentation on that as well.”
‘More loyal to her profession’
Ms Vennells was then questioned on her own personal notes from September 2019 in which she said the legal chief was “possibly more loyal to her professional conduct requirements and put her integrity as a lawyer above the interests of the business”.
The former chief executive described this sentence as “clumsy” and said: “I wrote this completely wrongly”, adding that she was “trying to say” Ms Crichton had two responsibilities: her role as the lead lawyer of the business as well as “a major project that she was leading” with the independent review.
Later, Ms Vennells – who cried three times while giving evidence on Wednesday – was shown an email from August 2013 which she had sent to Ms Crichton about a mediation scheme the organisation had been running.
“When we discussed this, the hope of mediation was to avoid or minimise compensation,” Ms Vennells wrote.
![Paula Vennells leaves inquiry after second day of giving evidence](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379070587_17164941678810_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpVlberWd9EgFPZtcLiMQf0Rf_Wk3V23H2268P_XkPxc.jpeg?imwidth=350)
When asked if it was hoped that mediation would enable the Post Office to avoid paying out or minimise compensation, Ms Vennells said: “Possibly, yes.”
The inquiry also heard of how Ms Vennells kept in touch with Mr Davies in 2020 – months after both had left the Post Office in the 2019.
When asked if she exchanged messages with him about media lines “she might take” in the announcement of the inquiry, Ms Vennells said: “I believe the inquiry has texts that show that.”
She added that she had kept in touch with her former PR chief for reasons which were “personal to him”, adding: “ I think he offered that advice at the time.”
Later, the inquiry was shown an email from 2011 – responding to colleagues discussing a negative Private Eye article – in which she said it was a “goal” of hers that “all press even local press” should be “scoured for negative comment and refuted”.
When asked about the “goal”, Ms Vennells said she was protecting the reputation of Post Office branches rather than the company itself.
Ms Vennells will finish giving evidence to the inquiry on Friday.
That’s all for today
Thank you for following The Telegraph’s live coverage which saw Paula Vennells, the former Post Office chief executive, questioned for a second day by counsel to the inquiry.
Here is a summary of today’s events:
- Vennells acknowledged Horizon bugs could have been discovered far sooner
- Post Office counsel said contacting Seema Misra about review ‘a red rag to a bull’
- Alan Bates’ belief that prosecutions were wrong was not ‘news’ to Vennells
- The Post Office’s ex-PR chief advised Vennells to avoid reviewing historical cases that could make front page news
- Vennells agreed that the steer was a ‘grossly improper perspective’
- She admitted the Post Office could have avoided ‘lost decade’ if all cases were reviewed in 2013
- Solicitors documented ‘tensions’ between Vennnells and the former Post Office chair, Alice Perkins
- The inquiry heard Susan Crichton, the former Post Office general counsel, was made to sit outside board meeting ‘like a naughty schoolgirl’
- Vennells told colleagues it was a ‘goal of hers’ to scour the press and refute negative comments
The inquiry will resume tomorrow, with Paula Vennells returning to the stand for a third day.
General election will not interfere with inquiry timetable
The upcoming general election will not interfere with the timetable of the Post Office Inquiry, chair Sir Wyn Williams has said.
On Wednesday Rishi Sunak called a snap election with voters going to the polls on July 4.
As the second day of questioning Paula Vennells at the inquiry ended, the chairman said: “You may have heard there is going to be a general election.
“My view currently is that that will not interfere with the timetable of the inquiry, save for the day of the election and the day after.”
Sir Wyn added: “I have decided we will not sit on July the fourth or July the fifth, and as far as humanly possible to continue as if the election is not occurring.”
Vennells said she was ‘very proud and pleased’ board decided to recuse Alan Bates trial judge
Paula Vennells told Mark Davies she felt “very proud and pleased” once the board decided to recuse the judge overseeing the Alan Bates High Court trial.
A text shown to the inquiry showed Ms Vennells telling her comms chief Mark Davies she “felt the same about the board. Very proud and pleased. Difficult but completely the right decision.”
When asked about why she was “proud” of the board decision to recuse the judge, Ms Vennells said: “I knew the colleagues around the board table.
“This was about the people around that table, not anything more than that.”
Vennells becomes tearful describing ‘family situation’ which caused her to step down as Post Office chief
Paula Vennells has become tearful after telling the inquiry she had to step back from her role as chief executive from January 2019 due to “a family situation”.
She told the inquiry: “I was involved sort of in and out of the business as we were going through hospital visits and then stepped back much more from March.”
![Paula Vennells becomes tearful after telling the inquiry she had to step back from her role as chief executive due to 'a family situation'](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379051677_17164791273500_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqzTW4Ql1t-1Xt3_aTCx9yp1FGGjcI28awSNtOPAVs6pc.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Vennells told colleagues it was ‘goal of hers’ to scour press and refute negative comments
Paula Vennells told colleagues how it was a “goal of hers” to scour all press and refute negative comments.
Responding to emails which were dealing with a negative article in Private Eye, Ms Vennells wrote: “It’s a goal of mine that all press even local press (perhaps esp [sic] local press) , should be scoured for negative comment and refuted.”
When asked about the “goal”, Ms Vennells said she was protecting the reputation of post office branches rather than the company itself.
She added: “The reputation of Post Office Ltd had no weight at all.
“It was irrelevant, it was the reputation of the post offices, your local post office and that’s what I’m trying to say here.”
![The email in which Paula Vennells told colleagues how it was a "goal of hers" to scour all press and refute negative comments](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379051121_17164788048950_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqlyOSvw5rfHgx0pjGlPht0JfOR3q2sL8X2i0mxJx2qJo.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Vennells admits she should not have advised executives to use less emotive language
Paula Vennells admitted she should not have advised Post Office executives on using less emotive language related to problems with Horizon, the inquiry heard.
Ms Vennells was asked about an email in which she said: “My computer literate husband has sent the following reply to the question ‘what is non-emotive word for computer bugs, glitches and defects’, answer: exception or anomaly.”
Counsel to the inquiry Jason Beer KC said: “Did you consider the terms ‘computer bug, glitches or defect’ to be emotive?
Ms Vennells replied: “I’m not sure why I used ‘non-emotive’, I think what I was trying to do here was to avoid misinterpretation.”
She added: “I should have said bugs, I should not have sent the email.”
Vennells discussed making ‘token payments’ alongside an apology to subpostmasters, inquiry hears
Ms Vennells discussed making “token payments” alongside an apology to subpostmasters, the inquiry heard.
Asked if it was always her intention to make small tokenistic payments to Post Office employees, the former chief executive said: “That word wasn’t meant in the negative sense that could be assumed.
“My understanding was that the mediation scheme was a conversation around resolution of issues. At the time the scheme was put in place, this was the advice I was given.”
She added: “We could not possibly have paid out token payment for the cases that we now know about.”
It was ‘clumsy’ to suggest former Post Office lawyer was not loyal to business, says Vennells
Paula Vennells has said she was “clumsy” to write that the Post Office’s former top lawyer was “possibly more loyal to her professional conduct requirements and integrity” than the business.
The inquiry was shown notes of a dramatic meeting between Ms Vennells and Susan Crichton which took place in a Costa cafe in early September 2013.
Ms Vennells’ notes described how during the meeting Ms Crichton had become angry and shouted at her - yet the lawyer previously told the inquiry she herself could not recall the meeting.
Reflecting on the meeting in her notes, Ms Vennells wrote: “My reflection…is that Susan was possibly more loyal to her professional conduct requirements and put her integrity as a lawyer above the interests of the business.”
When asked about this, Ms Vennells said: “I wrote this completely wrongly”, adding that she was “trying to say” Ms Crichton had two responsibilities, - her role as the lead lawyer of the business as well as “a major project that she was leading” with the independent review.
She added: “It’s clumsy, it’s clumsy, Mr Beer.”
Vennells attempted to use “mediation as a means of avoiding compensating” subpostmasters, inquiry hears
Paula Vennells attempted to use “mediation as a means of avoiding compensating” wrongly prosecuted subpostmasters, the inquiry heard.
Ms Vennells was challenged over a conversation with Susan Crichton, former general counsel to the Post Office, in which she suggested “mediation could be a very helpful way of resolving the misunderstandings and issues that the Post Office and subpostmasters were facing”.
She denied this was a method of avoiding paying subpostmasters and said: “It wasn’t done to avoid or minimise compensation. My understanding was that mediation would be a conversation and if it was appropriate compensation would be paid.”
Vennells does not ‘recall’ top lawyer telling her there would be ‘many successful claims’ against Post Office
Paula Vennells has said she cannot “recall” a top lawyer telling her in late July 2013 that there would be “many successful claims” against the Post Office arising from wrongful prosecutions.
Susan Crichton, who was the Post Office’s general counsel at the time, said she warned the chief executive of the claims ahead of a board meeting where Second Sights’ report would be discussed.
Jason Beer, lead counsel to the inquiry, asked: “Susan Crichton has told us, in the inquiry, that she spoke to you before the meeting to say that in her view, there would be many successful claims against the Post Office arising from past wrongful prosecutions. Did she tell you that?”
Ms Vennells replied: “I don’t recall that at all. My recollection was what was in her paper, which is that the lawyers had found, though it would be about five per cent of the cases they’d looked that.”
She later added: “Mr Beer, I would not cover anything up in this process.”
![Paula Vennells, pictured, was questioned on correspondence with Susan Crichton, the former general counsel to the Post Office](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379011765_17164738412080_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqZ_JcPYgesQnahAq0MEErmUtFcEGo2u39IGeve0n32Zs.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Top Post Office lawyer made to sit outside board meeting ‘like a naughty schoolgirl’, inquiry hears
A top Post Office lawyer was made to sit outside a board meeting “like a naughty schoolgirl” while a paper she had written was discussed, the inquiry heard.
Ms Vennells told the inquiry how Post Office chair Alice Perkins “stood down” Susan Crichton, the general counsel, so the board could have a “full and frank discussion” on a paper she had written on Second Sight’s report in late July.
Ms Vennells then told the inquiry she tried to answer questions on the paper from board members in the lawyer’s place.
Jason Beer KC, lead counsel, addressed Ms Vennells, saying: “She was made to wait outside on a chair?”
“Yes,” Ms Vennells responded.
Mr Beer: “Sitting there like a naughty schoolgirl?”
Ms Vennells: “It must - she must have felt terrible.”
Covertly recorded meeting suggests Ms Vennells was not interested in discovering miscarriages of justice, inquiry hears
A transcript of a covertly recorded meeting has been read out to the inquiry which appears to suggest that Second Sight were told Ms Vennells was not interested in them discovering miscarriages of justice, but they should be looking for “systemic issues” with Horizon.
Susan Crichton, the lead counsel to the Post Office, says during the conference call with her colleagues: “Paula (Vennells) agrees that the original scope of the investigation did not go as far as looking at whether it was the miscarriage of justice point...”
She added: “So that’s not what she’s looking for… she’s looking for the systematic or systemic weakness in the Horizon but not, as I said, to go on to that next point around whether or not it’s caused a miscarriage of justice or a suspension of a subpostmaster, because I think that’s, once you have found it, then it’s up for us to look for and see what impact it might be if that happened.”
Post Office ‘mantra’ on effectiveness of Horizon was ‘overused’, admitted Vennells
Mr Beer highlighted a press statement issued by the Post Office on July 7 2013 which defended the effectiveness of Horizon.
It read: “The Post Office is committed to supporting its people and improving the way we do so.
“The interim review makes clear that the Horizon computer system and its supporting processes function effectively across our network.
“As the review notes, it is used by around 68,000 people in more than 11,500 branches, successfully processing more than six million transactions every day. The review underlines our cause for confidence in the overall system.”
Mr Beer said the Post Office used the number of users, branches, and transactions that relied on the system as a “mantra” by the Post Office to defend “allegations against Horizon for many years”.
Ms Vennells replied: “It was a truth and it was an explanation that was overused and I fully accept that now.”
Vennells admitted informing watchdog of unreliability of evidence would have been “right and honest”
Ms Vennells admitted it would have been the “right and honest” thing to inform a criminal watchdog about the unreliability of evidence provided by a senior Fujitsu engineer.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates miscarriages of justice, sent a letter on July 12 2013.
Asked if she agreed that the “right and honest” thing would have been to let the CCRC know about the Post Office’s concerns about Gareth Jenkins, Ms Vennells responded: “What I did with this letter was to ask Susan to reply as the legal expert in the organisation, I don’t believe that I would have given her direction as to how we should reply to it.”
Ms Vennells admitted it would have been “honest” to promptly let the CCRC know of the unreliability and “truthfulness” of Gareth Jenkin’s evidence to court.
She conceded that this did not happen until “years and years” later.
Solicitors documented ‘tensions’ between Vennnells and former Post Office chair
“Tensions” between Paula Vennells and the former Post Office chair relating to the Horizon investigation were documented by solicitors in 2013.
Notes written in July 2013 by Simon Richardson, then of law firm Bond Dickinson, which advised the Post Office during the Horizon investigation, read: “There was generally an overall defensive air and the board are also feeling bruised.
“There are tensions between people and that includes Alice Perkins (the Chair), Paula Vennells (CEO) and SC [Susan Crichton].”
Ms Vennells said she remembered the Board feeling “frustrated” over the progress of the Second Sight investigation, its cost and the perception that the Post Office’s input had not been taken into account.
When asked if there was tension between her and Ms Perkins, Ms Vennells said: “I don’t recall that she had been critical.
“I mean Alice was a very straightforward chair and I generally took feedback pretty well and again, forgive me for repeating the phrase, but there is documentation on that as well.”
She added “I’m sure she gave me some fairly straightforward feedback about why this had taken so long, why it was over budget [and] why the report contained things that the Post Office felt were inaccurate.”
Inquiry lead counsel describes letter from review commission as ‘very unwelcome development’
![Lead counsel to the inquiry, Jason Beer KC](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379018656_17164657424740_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bqa10l_kz_QMaqvRigytlqcQPt836dHZM3lhKucQ105pk.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Ms Vennells is shown a letter addressed to her from The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).
The CCRC is responsible for investigating alleged miscarriages of justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The letter headlined: ‘Horizon computer system’ reads: “For obvious reasons we have read the recent media coverage concerning Post Office Horizon computer systems with interest.
“Clearly it would be very useful for us to have more information directly from the Post Office, especially accurate information as to a number of criminal convictions that might be impacted by the issue and what action is proposed, or being taken, in that respect.”
It continues: “In essence, the Commission’s role in this is likely to relate to anyone who is convicted of a criminal offence, where evidence from the Horizon computer system is relevant where (i) they have already tried to appeal against that conviction or (ii) they were convicted at Magistrate’s Court following a guilty plea.”
Mr Beer comments: “This must have been a very unwelcome development”.
Vennells did not connect criticism of Horizon to problems with the expert evidence
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”.
Vennells says she was not told leading Horizon engineer was unsafe witness
![Ms Vennells told the inquiry she did not ask how many cases Mr Jenkins gave evidence in](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379018346_17164651859050_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqgorLzNIuWKFjctv8STCiZrWr3yf8eqYZr5MBJu88qYk.jpeg?imwidth=350)
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.
Ex-PR chief advised Vennells on inquiry months after both had left Post Office
Paula Vennells ex-PR chief was still advising her on “media lines” to take regarding the inquiry months after they had both left the Post Office.
Ms Vennells confirmed Mark Davies was “trusted” by all the team and that she remained in contact with him after she left the Post Office.
When asked if she exchanged messages with him about media lines “she might take” in the announcement of the inquiry, Ms Vennells said: “I believe the inquiry has texts that show that.”
Addressing Ms Vennells, Jason Beer KC continued: “Even though you’ve moved on, he was still advising you into 2020 as the lines to take in your media statements?”
She responded: “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.”
Post Office may have avoided ‘lost decade’ if all cases reviewed in 2013, agrees Vennells
Paula Vennells agreed that had the Post Office decided in 2013 to review all prosecutions of false accounting, it “may well have” avoided a “lost decade” until miscarriages of justice involving subpostmasters were discovered.
In an email dated July that year, Ms Vennells asked for thoughts on why all cases of false accounting “eg over the last 5-10 years” would not be reviewed.
Counsel to the Horizon inquiry Jason Beer KC asked: “Do you agree your nascent idea here of a review of all prosecutions of false accounting, if it had been carried into effect, may have avoided a lost decade until miscarriages of justice were discovered?”
Ms Vennells paused for a short moment before responding: “It may well have done. It may well have done.”
Mr Beer asked: “Do you think the failure to carry into effect the idea that you posit here was a missed opportunity?”
Ms Vennells said: “At the time I and the board and everybody else involved in... what took place after this particular point felt that that was completely the right way to do this. We were concentrating on individual cases.”
PR steer to avoid front page news was ‘grossly improper perspective’
Paula Vennells has conceded that the view of former director of communications Mark Davies in 2013 that the Post Office should not review historical cases involving the Horizon IT system from “five to 10 years” ago because it would be “on the front page” was a “grossly improper perspective”.
Referring to an email from Mr Davies from July 2013, Jason Beer KC, counsel to the inquiry, asked the former chief executive: “This says ‘you can’t do that, you’ll be on the front page’. That’s a grossly improper perspective isn’t it?”
Ms Vennells said: “Yes it is.”
Mr Beer continued: “Do you know why he cut everyone else out of the chain and replied directly to you?”
Ms Vennells said: “No, I don’t.”
![Former comms director Mark Davies emailed Vennells in 2013 recommending the Post Office should not review historical cases involving Horizon because it would be 'front page news'](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379023496_17164673195640_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Linking larger shortfalls to criminality was ‘naive assumption’ by Vennells
Ms Vennells explains why she thought that larger shortfalls recorded by Horizon made her think it was more likely criminality had taken place.
She told the inquiry: “At the time my naive assumption was that if somebody was false accounting on a regular basis over a long period of time and accumulated a large amount, false accounted, that might give an intention of something that was perhaps more planned.”
Vennells cannot remember why only cases from last 18 months reviewed
Ms Vennells says she cannot remember why the Post Office restricted its review of cases from subpostmasters to only the last 12 and 18 months.
She is shown a document at the inquiry where she asked why they would not review all cases.
Jason Beer KC says she was effectively asking “if we’re doing this properly, and fairly, why wouldn’t we look back on all cases of false accounting.”
Ms Vennells says “Yes”.
Mr Beer asks “Was that done?”
“No,” she replies.
Vennells denies knowing lawyers branded independent report ‘highest risk response’
Ms Vennells denied knowing about a conference at a barristers’ chambers in which lawyers discussed commissioning an independent report on the Horizon system as the “highest risk response”.
According to a “summary of conference” at Maitland Chambers in June 2012, which records former Post Office general counsel Susan Crichton in attendance, it was said the findings of an expert report would not resolve the problem and the Post Office will be “damned if they do and damned if they don’t”.
Ms Vennells said she was not told about the meeting.
The inquiry heard notes from the meeting read: “The proposal to instruct an independent expert to prepare a report on the Horizon system is the highest risk response to the issue.”
Ms Vennells said this was not communicated to her.
Vennells: ‘Very tricky’ to say how review of individual cases identifies systemic problems
Ms Vennells was unable to say how a review of three MP cases could identify “systemic problems” in Horizon software.
The inquiry was shown a briefing document preparing Ms Vennells for a meeting with James Arbuthnot, then a Tory MP.
It proposed suggesting the Second Sight investigation, which had been ongoing for a year, would instead focus on “two to three” MP cases.
Mr Beer asked: “How would an individual case indicate systemic problems?”
Ms Vennells said: “I don’t know if I can answer that question. It could…it’s very tricky.”
Vennells would be ‘very surprised’ if Post Office tried to influence investigation
Paula Vennellls has said she would be “very surprised” if the Post Office was trying to influence Second Sight’s conclusions.
She told the inquiry: “The Post Office certainly wanted the reassurance that the Horizon system could be relied upon. That has been the objective all the way through this.”
She added: “At no stage did I get the sense that anybody in the Post Office was going to be able to influence Second Sight over what conclusions they came to.
“I would be very surprised if that was the case.”
Vennells says Bates’ belief prosecutions were wrong was not ‘news’ to her
Paula Vennells indicated she was not concerned about Alan Bates suggesting many prosecutions of subpostmasters should not have taken place, because his beliefs were not “new news” to her.
The inquiry was shown an email sent by Mr Bates to Ms Vennells in 2013, which asked her to meet in person. The email was sent while the Second Sight investigation was still taking place and referred to what the accountants had uncovered at that time, according to Mr Bates.
He wrote: “I have little doubt that it is now feasible to show that many of the prosecutions pressed home should never have taken place.” He added that this was a view shared by Kay Linnell, another forensic accountant.
When asked whether she was concerned by the email, Ms Vennells said: “I was concerned to get the email from Alan, certainly. The point he’s making about the prosecutions was the point that the JFSA [Justice For Subpostmaster Alliance] had made for, I now know, for a number of years, but that wasn’t new news to me at this stage.”
![Alan Bates' email to Ms Vennells in 2013, in which he expressed surprise that they had not met to discuss his suggestions that many prosecutions of subpostmasters 'should never have taken place'](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000379023498_17164686261680_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bq5Z_wojLPeSKa_OTjGqwL_77WzeaA7a-8TP_vkbby3vk.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Vennells denies sharing concerns about contacting Seema Misra
The inquiry heard Alwen Lyons, former company secretary, emailed Ms Vennells in June 2012 expressing Ms Crichton’s concerns about including Ms Misra’s case in the independent review.
Ms Lyons wrote: “The issue that came to light with the list of MP cases was that they included the Mishra (Misra), you will remember the case and the publicity, she went to prison and had her baby whilst in there.
“The husband got publicity through radio and press.
“Susan’s anxiety, and she raised this at the meeting with Alice before you joined, was whether now contacting her to tell her we review the case would be a red rag to a bull.”
Asked if she shared Ms Crichton’s concerns that even contacting Ms Misra “would be a red rag to a bull”, Ms Vennells told the inquiry: “No.”
Post Office counsel said contacting Seema Misra about review ‘a red rag to a bull’
Ms Vennells is asked about the process by which cases were selected for review.
There was some debate in the Post Office about whether to include ones that had led to criminal prosecution, and specifically that of Seema Misra, who gave birth in prison after being convicted.
Mr Beer KC asks Ms Vennells if she thought Mrs Misra’s case should be included.
Ms Vennells replies: “I wasn’t even involved in the conversation about that, my view was that all the cases that had come forward through Lord Arbuthnot and thereafter from other MPs we were going to review all of the cases.”
Susan Crichton, the then general counsel to the Post Office, is shown in an email saying that she felt even contacting Misra to say there would be a review would be “a red rag to a bull”.
![Former subpostmistress Seema Misra, who gave birth in prison after being convicted, outside outside the Post Office inquiry at Aldwych House on Wednesday](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000378823701_17164691310810_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpVlberWd9EgFPZtcLiMQf0Rf_Wk3V23H2268P_XkPxc.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Vennells acknowledges bugs could have been discovered far sooner
Paula Vennells has acknowledged that had Second Sight been allowed to investigate criminal cases and the IT system itself - then bugs may have been discovered far sooner.
The inquiry was shown a pitch document showing what the forensic accountants planned to probe - including “cases that have led to prosecutions/court-appointed restitution”.
Second Sight also wanted to “study and selectively test” the Horizon system.
Addressing Ms Vennells, Mr Beer asked if these actions “may” have possibly led to bugs and miscarraiges being discovered earlier.
“I think that is a possiblity,” said Ms Vennells.
Vennells denies deliberately opting for ‘much narrower’ investigation
Ms Vennells denied the suggestion that Second Sight was deliberately chosen because its investigation would be “much narrower in scope”.
She said: “I would say that was absolutely not the case, I have no recollection of that at all.”
Second Sight chosen for investigation as Deloitte ‘too corporate’
Paula Vennells has told the inquiry she chose a “review” of past Horizon cases over a “forensic investigation into the Horizon system” by Deloitte because she felt the major accountancy firm would be “too corporate”.
The former chief executive was asked about emails and documents which date back to 2012. when a forensic review by Deloitte was being considered as an alternative to forensic accountants Second Sight.
Ms Vennells said: “Looking at the documents, they’re clearly very different,” she said.
She added: “My own recollection is that I felt very strongly that we needed an organisation who would be able to work well with subpostmasters.
“I was concerned that any one of the big four, Deloitte being one of them, may have come across too corporate and wouldn’t necessarily have had the understanding of running a retail business.”
Vennells takes to the stand
Paula Vennells has taken to the stand to resume giving evidence.
Jason Beer KC tells her he will begin by asking about the Second Sight investigations and the complaint and mediation scheme.
“I’d like first to look at the process by which Second Sight were chosen and Deloitte were not, to conduct an investigation,” Mr Beer says.
In 2012, Second Sight was appointed by Members of Parliament to investigate multiple assertions that Horizon was generating spurious branch shortfalls and that subpostmasters were being forced to pay the shortfalls and prosecuted.
Hearing room filling up ahead of Vennells appearance
The hearing room at Aldwych House is filling up in preparation for Paula Vennells’ second day of evidence.
Lead counsel to the inquiry Jason Beer KC will ask his remaining questions before lawyers representing other subpostmasters grill the former Post Office chief executive tomorrow.
Vennells arrives at inquiry for second day of questioning
![Paula Vennells arriving at Aldwych House for her second day of evidence at the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry](/https/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2024/05/23/TELEMMGLPICT000378983124_17164546638250_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpVlberWd9EgFPZtcLiMQf0Rf_Wk3V23H2268P_XkPxc.jpeg?imwidth=350)
Paula Vennells, the former Post Office chief executive, has been seen arriving at Aldwych House with five police officers in tow for her second day of evidence at the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry.
Ms Vennells broke down in tears while giving evidence at the inquiry on Wednesday.
The inquiry heard how she had received a text message stating “I think you knew” from a former Royal Mail boss.
Dame Moya Greene had appeared to accuse Ms Vennells of knowing about Horizon errors – which resulted in more than 900 wrongful prosecutions of subpostmasters over a 16-year period – following a select committee appearance by Nick Read, Ms Vennells’s successor.