In full: Former senior Post Office lawyer gives evidence | Horizon inquiry

The Post Office’s former most senior in-house lawyer will face questions from legal representatives of sub-postmasters today.
Chris Aujard, the organisation’s former general counsel, previously told the inquiry that then-CEO Paula Vennells had dismissed recommendations to cease prosecutions against sub-postmasters in late 2013.
The legal professional also resigned as a director from several UK companies in the 48 hours before he gave evidence last Thursday, according to reports by freelance journalist Nick Wallis.
More than 800 sub-postmasters were wrongfully prosecuted between 1999 and 2015 due to faulty Fujitsu software reporting fictional shortfalls.
Former Cartwright King solicitor Martin Smith will also return to the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry to continue giving evidence.
#postoffice #inquiry #news
Subscribe to The Telegraph with our special offer: just £1 for 3 months. Start your free trial now:
www.telegraph.co.uk/customer/...
Get the latest headlines: www.telegraph.co.uk/
Telegraph.co.uk and / telegraphtv are websites of The Telegraph, the UK's best-selling quality daily newspaper providing news and analysis on UK and world events, business, sport, lifestyle and culture.

[@palemale2501]

Jarnail Sing was the PO's senior criminal lawyer but was really only a paper-shuffling conveyancing lawyer, and also worked part time in his own business. His first testimony was a hoot, a self inflated complete buffoon with no self awareness - cannot wait for his second visit tomorrow Friday YIPPEEE

[@chrislambert9435]

JS was/is a Psychopath

[@mikematthews6095]

Yes he likes Mr Magoo. If he on tomoz right ringing in sick. Get ready for the comedy show

[@williamdavidpritchard4333]

The legal system in the UK is a laughing stock.

[@palemale2501]

Have a feeling this is one solicitor whose numerous serious malpractices will get him struck off

[@michaelmcginley7930]

Won't happen

[@palemale2501]

@@michaelmcginley7930 If he is not struck off then no lawyer will be - but I suspect he has done enough for it

[@Frank-cd2ij]

The evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is that the miscarriage of justice was due to the failure of highly paid legal experts who knew nothing about IT systems. None of the prosecutions should have proceeded. But they wanted the money not justice.

[@michaelwilliams8690]

Another one for jail. Cant remember, dont recall , i think but not sure. His job is to investigate when evidence shows it's not right. Again not me governor

[@palemale2501]

He seems to remember great detail for the things where he is shown innocent, but often nothing at all for most anything else

[@kesamek8537]

A masterclass in corruption.

[@fireskycam9889]

They need to draw a picture of Jason Beer riding a horse with sword in one hand and a shield with the St George's Cross on it in the other as he is riding towards the Post Office Headquarters and yelling "CHARGE".

[@chrisst8922]

On the Fourth Plinth in Trafalgar Square.

[@rogermoore5761]

I dont think any of these solicitors or post office managers and executives will get prosecuted on the grounds they would not get a fair trial. I hope I am wrong as they certainly do need to be held to account.

[@user-sj4nh5ku2p]

That’s my concern. Maybe don’t give them a trial : which is essentially the treatment the poor postmasters received be for being jailed ! Perjury is perjury though and this heinous act is being committed ( beyond any reasonable doubt ) every single day of this enquiry which is fast reaching farcical proportions!!

[@chel3SEY]

Yet more evasion of responsibility, retrospective spin on damning contemporary emails, selective amnesia, buck passing, verbal obfuscation. A long, elaborate exercise in arse-covering.

[@palemale2501]

He had no knowledge of prosecutor conduct rules but took the job anyway - no knowledge of expert evidence rules - obstructed evidence disclosure or shredded it - failed to demand PO (or he) reports expert's perjury to police - denied folk their case be reviewed for redress if pre 2010 or convicted, (then they appeal their conviction & PO malpractice exposed) - colluded in cover up

[@michaelmcginley7930]

Another criminal who will go unpunished

[@DeliciouslyGorgeous]

What they all fail to see is the big picture. Each one of them is using the same dialogue of excuses. They are completely completely transparent.

[@snapdragon1194]

Each one of these highly paid lawyers and senior bosses are only too willing to pass the buck and throw another person under the bus for their lack of work done on investigating anything. They were all on a serious cover up campaign, but now they recall nothing about what was happening. They all should be held accountable for systematically persecuting innocent victims of the Post office.

[@ianjonas7380]

Both Brian Altman and Simon Clarke next week. Let's see if their stories stack up.

[@palemale2501]

Jarnail Sing's (the PO senior criminal lawyer but was really only a conveyance lawyer) first testimony was a hoot, a complete self inflated buffoon, cannot wait for his second

[@ianjonas7380]

@@palemale2501 that's tomorrow

[@jimdaniels7472]

At 6;47 the meeting shows Susan Crichton saying Fujitsu need to be kept ONside, not as Mr Henry says OUTside. My interpretation makes far more sense in the context.

[@palemale2501]

Apparently it is only 95% of solicitors, that give the rest such a bad name.

[@joerudnik9290]

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@bristolfashion4421]

What a hoot! I think it's a given, surely... that elements in an organisation will only take the step described when the simple fact dawns that the organisation has got something badly wrong. If doing nothing wrong, no such step would ever be considered.

[@peterhansen5685]

All of these people are going to give such conflicting testimony that eventually nobody will believe them. And I wonder if any of these so-called legal experts are what their background says are true and they actually went to spin doctors school at second site University 😊❤.

[@Sepa234]

Fast forward to Mr Henry’s questioning ✊

[@Ground53]

I always do that.Mr Henry and the Beer are the best

[@andiharper4498]

How can anyone contemplate using this firm of lawyers when they seemingly lack sufficient integrity to undertake the basic task and responsibility of getting disclosure correct. Any potential customer to these lawyers should have serious concerns of their apparent inability or unwillingness to accept responsibility and accountability for their mistakes or shoddy behavior and practice. Surely there is a strong argument to ban these lawyers from future practice.

[@phillipsdrew]

Liar Liar pants on fire.

[@user-vh5up7lq6u]

Let’s get this right not one of the POL solicitors have given evidence at the inquiry they have showed how to dodge forget and pass the buck, they know how it works there all getting paid to attend expenses etc.this has shown solicitors and kc’s to be very slippery once they are the ones having to answer questions

[@joerudnik9290]

I guess ‘Law school and training’ are very different from what most people think! Dodging Mistakes and Negligence 101, Advanced Amnesia and Memory Lapses 302, Feigning, Excuses and Producing Sincerity on Demand 510, Blame Placement and Framing Innocents 202 😂😂😂😂

[@fatwalletboy2]

Another melt

[@joerudnik9290]

‘Open, transparent, lawful’???😉