UK Post Office Scandal - Vennells vs van den Bogerd: professionalism?

[@ParanormalUKNetwork]

Wynn William's 'Why' absolutely stumped Vennells, and her complete inability to give any answer that would not cast her into a bad light was very telling, as were the tears that came after. Those stifled tears were solely for herself as she knew she'd been caught. Thus exposing exactly what you've said, that she put profit and reputation/'corporate image' above compassion and care for SPM and, ultimately the truth.

[@achitophel5852]

Welby wanted her as a bishop. Says it all.

[@mrhuffler9791]

And if she had decided to give her answer the following morning, that would have been even more damning. A stunningly good question.

[@ParanormalUKNetwork]

@@mrhuffler9791@mrhuffler9791 It rather suggests that Williams thought she'd like some time to make one up...

[@19otterman]

That was absolute genius from Sir wynn Williams.

[@toi_techno]

The rage tears of someone who believes they are too good to get in trouble

[@robertsmuggles6871]

Hi Paul. Thanks for this - Sir Wynn's parting shot worked - she fell apart when he asked "Why?". Throughout her testimony, Paula tried to occupy the moral high ground and uses this halo to neutralise or deflect criticism. Not victimhood but sainthood. She got away with it for years - how could such a 'nice' lady be so callous. In the theatre this called "the suspension of disbelief".

[@sylviaparker9010]

The "nice lady" worked for Jeffrey archer, remember the judges remark

[@peterduce3155]

She "projected" all the time and played the "victim".... "I would have been thinking...", was used often to explain a behaviour that was at odds with the evidence:.. and they did not match her actual actions. Was she part of the Peter principle? Her actions are completely at odds with her quoted beliefs .. complex personality.

[@robertsmuggles6871]

@@peterduce3155 I have yet to see a psychologist on youtube do justice to her testimony - I think it might be 'borderline personality disorder with narcissistic traits' [like Tony Blair] - but I am not an expert - a friend of mine is a trained counsellor and saw Vennells as a possible suicide risk. If it was me, I'd treat the court with contempt - like Elaine Cottam - Paula was very respectful - like a child that is contrite.

[@PaulDuckett]

Good points. Thanks so much for posting this Robert. It's good to hear your thoughts. p

[@PaulDuckett]

Interesting points. Yes, I do think Vennells was/is feeling it now. I think it's less remorse but more the awareness of how much hatred there is being directed towards her. that would give anyone the wobbles.

[@GeorgeMelvin-rc4sq]

Are they going to drag this out till all the victims have died ? When are they going to prosecute these swine ? when are they going to pay proper compensation to victims ?

[@russellbradley454]

Legally what for all right for what I call barrack room Lawyers whose unfounded allegations could prejudice any criminal cases.

[@r8chlletters]

This is thorough because it’s historic. It will allow much swifter prosecutions due to the detailed nature of it and will also hopefully be instrumental in leading ti significant reforms.

[@custossecretus5737]

The short answer is yes. It is the way like Hillsborough, Grenville and many others before and after. The sheer volume of evidence being generated now, will take decades to shift through, the televised inquiry will ensure a fair trial will be unable to happen. Good luck finding a jury that have not been biased by the inquiry or TV show. Justice came on swift wings for the sub post masters, it’ll come by snail mail for the post office bosses, Fujitsu and ministers. I’ll also ask, why the post office are not suing Fujitsu for a computer program they could manipulate at will. That wasn’t what the post office paid for. Also, we need to look at why Blair was convinced to accept the Fujitsu company by Japan in the first place, considering how Fujitsu failed with the NHS contract.

[@susanzundel6231]

That's what comes to mind!

[@annecampbell9236]

Yes they are! They should’ve paid up a long long time ago to help these postal managers whose lives have been ruined.!

[@davekeith576]

Such a small word ( WHY ) And yet it goes right to the heart of this .The silence was deafening.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, it was :) p

[@johnclarke-vs9qe]

Did Paula Vennells put profit above everything else? Didn't the Post Office on at least one occasion choose to "spend" £300k in legal fees to recover £25k?

[@brianlopez8855]

ask many public bodies, they freely waste such legal cost sums, yet none of the decision makers face any consequence for their effectual waste.

[@johnclarke-vs9qe]

Thank you, I stand corrected as it was before her time.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, I didn't know the answer, so many thanks mollienight for being on top of this.

[@softsoundart7460]

I think Paula's tears were not for the people she harmed, but for herself. It was the realization that she is going to pay for her actions.

[@trevorberridge6079]

The tears weren't real. She never shed an actual tear throughout the whole inquiry.

[@ChrisM541]

-I think- Paula's tears were not for the people she harmed, but for herself.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, it did seem like it.

[@wildsage6852]

She seems like a very self-righteous person and feels unduly attacked. It's sheers self pity. Not a shred of personal responsibility taken. She will never learn her lesson no matter how much she is made to pay.

[@ChrisM541]

@@wildsage6852 And similar to that insane US "God-given 2nd Amendment", this evil scum thinks her righteousness is God-given...given her other hat.

[@TheLucanicLord]

Beer showed more concern for her than she did for her victims.

[@AnnieH-1]

Is the look Mr Beer gives to his left every now and again a code for gottcha the itch ?

[@r8chlletters]

Actually beer was completely deft in his approach. There are standards he is upholding for all as she should have done for the poor subbies she shafted.

[@trevorberridge6079]

Beer had no time for her antics. He was just conducting himself correctly by acting as if he believed her fake distress.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, he did. Well spotted. p

[@wildsage6852]

I don't think he was concerned at all. It's a very good technique to use to put people in a place where they will tell you more if they think you are on there side. Police interviewers use it all the time.

[@javiermitchell7073]

I think in both cases they responded like they did because that was their way to defend themselves. In one case was: "I just did what I was told", in the other: " I'm sorry, I was careless, but this is in the past...."

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, good comment. Thanks so much for posting. You make a good point :)

[@RobertJonesWightpaint]

The Nuremberg defence: it didn't work there, either.

[@peterhoyer9575]

What a pair of pure counts!

[@BaronMichaelDeBlone1066]

Don't get me started on counts

[@marybusch6182]

The Germans might say gold scheiser

[@Ronald-o9x]

I like it.....😊😊ha ha!!!!

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks goodness your spellchecker didn't try to correct your spelling :) If only somone had told them to shut the front door. :)

[@JamesWilliams-em2is]

Excellent points Dr. The Inquiry has laid bare the gulf between the anodyne and soulless (indeed in some cases, even callous) behaviour of the Post Office's Corporate Masters, and the subpostmasters who have acted with integrity both during the scandal as well as the recent Inquiry. On those rare occasions when Rev Vennells or van den Bogard have acted teary, it appeared to me as though their "sadness" was directed inwards towards themselves, rather than towards their victims. One could make a cheap remark about Rev Vennells has singularly failed to show any of the supposed character and empathy her clerical position demands. Her thirty pieces of silver was £5.1Million.

[@PaulDuckett]

Nicely put. Thanks for the posting.

[@Syson66]

Paula Vennels came across all “Head Girl” - superficially confident, righteous and somewhat bumptious. But as one of the lawyers said during cross examination, the mask started to slip. And once the real, unedifying Paula started to emerge, we got the tears of a child crying because they’ve been found out.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, I got that sense to. There's a swagger, a inflated self confidence. And when it comes crashing down ... oh boy, it makes a right mess! Thanks for your comment. I thought it was great. p

[@stephenpowers51]

So right. I imagine she says “jolly” a lot, straight out of an Enid Blyton book. Talking of a child, Alice Perkins, once challenged, reminded me of the child who was never told “no”. She was nonplussed at being “spoken to that way”. They’re all just overgrown children… running our country… the heart sinks.

[@trevorberridge6079]

[2:39] Paul Vennells made a point of faking emotion at points where she was facing a particularly difficult question. You'll notice she's very distraught but manages to insert the idea that people don't necessarily commit suicide on the basis of one incident such as being bullied by the post office who demand huge amounts of money including money lost in a violent robbery where the sub-postmaster was injured. It's one of the most despicable shows of callousness ever.

[@PaulDuckett]

thanks for posting :) I think a lot of people would agree with you.

[@KeaneVincent-ws6kk]

The SPMS & all affected by the prosecutions seem to me to have been held in total disregard and even now are considered as being collateral damage while these POL employees involved in carrying out and ignoring the wrongful conduct fought/still fight, to protect their own professional and personal positions. CONTEMPTIBLE behaviour.

[@PaulDuckett]

Great to hear from you on this anda great posting, Yes, collateral damage indeed. p

[@serialcoins]

There did appear to be a group of controlling women at the centre of the Post Office hierarchy, surrounded by a lower group of compliant and hapless men. The women were ruthless, aggressive and conniving. It was almost as if these women were trying to be macho

[@achitophel5852]

They absolutely were. It's a hormone thing. Women really aren't good at this level, anywhere.

[@meganm1074]

There were men in the leadership positions earlier in the scandal.

[@serialcoins]

@@meganm1074 My point exactly

[@davekeith576]

But who's instructions did they follow. ( WHY ) .

[@rickowens4397]

I can't help but detect a wiff of "Gay Predijuce" in this rely. Is it just me?

[@chairmanalf7856]

I have watched the majority of these sessions and one thing has struck me. The post office seems to have employed a whole group of unfeeling harridans.

[@Sujowi]

You mean ‘professionals’!

[@chairmanalf7856]

@@Sujowi no, Harridans.

[@lindymcdonald8945]

Post office tend to be like that ...Half the time you go in get met with a proper "karen"

[@PaulDuckett]

It seems so, hey?

[@cassandratq9301]

They hire each other.

[@robfoulds9930]

This was a delightful surprise and Paul's analysis of these reprehensible women, who evidently and clearly gave not the slightest concern either for the people they were intentionally hounding or indeed the organisation they were very generously rewarded by. I refer to the Post Office, as distinct from the Subpostmasters, because if a prosecution of my staff was taking place at a rate of one every week for fourteen years i.e. well in excess of 700 in total, and I was supposed to be managing the PO in a professional manner, which of course includes a reasonable degree of objectivity, then surely surely wouldn't I be commissioning a senior member of my generously salaried staff to investigate and prepare a detailed report as to why this very overt set of circumstances was occurring. Sir Wyn Williams asked that simple question, didn't he?

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks, glad it was a nice surprise. Great posting. you've made some excellent points here. Yes, nice simple question from Sir Wyn, the simple questions are often the most effective. p

[@MartinJames389]

In a way, the veils are now more numerous, drawn so as to form multiple individual cubicles of amnesia. At least, that's what we've seen repeatedly claimed. Behind those veils are other curtains of obliquity, tapestries scrupulously embroidered with "nobodytoldme". All these fabrics are now torn and tattered, but we are still some way from seeing them entirely torn down.

[@PaulDuckett]

I love how you wrote this. Poetic. nicely captures things. Thank you. p

[@MartinJames389]

@@PaulDuckett The origin, sadly, is more drill lyrics than poetry.

[@abumstead1219]

They were both performing as they (as had all the PO staff witnesses ) all had been well schooled as to how to behave. It is no coincidence that they all have “no memory “of things they must have some memory of !

[@marybusch6182]

It's called the reagan defense. Or the MacArthur defense.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for posting this. :) I totally sympathise with your view on this but I have mixed feelings about it. I would struggle remembering things 10 years ago, but I think that sometimes it is a cover. Also, I can remember meetings 10 years ago that were consequential so maybe it either points to selective memory or a lack of caring at the time.

[@PiperStart]

Very interesting commentary, thank you.

[@PaulDuckett]

Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for the feedback, much appreciated.

[@alanwood4968]

Cut out this person did this and that person should have done that they are guilty moneys lost and reparation should be awarded. The people from post office management should be jailed and the moneys lost reparation should be paid before the end of this year. All MPs that where told about this should be sacked with non pensions for aiding and abetting the post office.

[@PaulDuckett]

Harsh but fair. Thanks for you posting. Great to hear your view on this. You capture the public anger nicely. p

[@janebuckland737]

Thank you. First time viewing for me of your channel, excellent break down of what was going on. Loved the finish with Sir WYN.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thank you for such lovely feedback. Yes, Sir Wyn was fab p

[@wflack]

Thank you for posting this. It really helps me to understand what is going on here.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for your lovely feedback. It helps motivate me to make more videos :) p

[@shakeyhorse]

Very insightful analysis. I have watched nearly every episode of the inquiry and I can only recall 3 or 4 people (giving evidence) who showed they were people with integrity. I must say Paul that your analysis should become compulsory viewing for everyone intending to work in any public or private organisation and distills the best take away lesson from the post office debacle. Thankyou

[@PaulDuckett]

Many thanks. I can't recall many folk with integrity either. Quite telling, hey? thanks for posting :)

[@Swaggerlot]

This isn't about professionalism, it is about morality. You will be hard put to find morality in any commercial organizations these days, especially banks and public institutions.

[@rollyunicorn]

They wouldn't even know how to spell it.

[@Swaggerlot]

@@rollyunicorn For bloody sure! Politicians and civil servants are the root of all evil these days

[@johnclarke-vs9qe]

You're correct, the "professional" thing to do was to ask why they had employed so many dishonest people, or could it be they were totally wrong?

[@Swaggerlot]

@@johnclarke-vs9qe You miss the point. It is not professional, it is moral and there was a total absence of it.

[@johnclarke-vs9qe]

I don't miss the point. It was both the professional AND moral thing to do.i.e the "correct" thing!

[@chrishaps6846]

Thank you

[@PaulDuckett]

ahhhh.... thank you! If good folk like you weren't taking the time to watch my videos, I'd have little to no reason to be making them. So, THANK YOU :)

[@stephenwinnall8420]

Is it only me who notices how many females were in the senior management and legal for PO (and RM?)? Is this just a coincidence, or was this all the old problem of an either all male, or an all female leadership having their own serious faults?

[@HestanIslandLad]

Brave lad. I thought that also.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for posting Stephen. It is an interesting point. For me, I'm not so sure that gender is the issue here, maybe more about social class (lots of toffs at the top table) and about people who all share the same warped world view. Gender is always a factor though given the way our world works, so it is an interesting question.

[@brianlopez8855]

funny that because women are so much more collegiate than "toxic" males.

[@stephenwinnall8420]

@@PaulDuckett For me, the class thing is probably an easy, enjoyable and reassuring way of coming to terms with why this all unfolded. Virtuous, but sometimes innapropiate, appointments of females to senior management over recent times is trendy. And it is still not so easy or comfortable to embrace as a reason for the po stuff up? Bad female managers are more difficult to get rid of due to their trendy, presumed virtuous nature? No one had the guts or desire to replace them years ago?

[@lobstermash]

@@PaulDuckett It's about the hiring. If you have a small group of women in power whose hiring practices are politically biased then gender will be a factor in maintaining the clique, but also a ruthless mindset. There's a very funny Tracey Ullman sketch about a psychopath going for a job interview at a bank that illustrates the point.

[@ChrisM541]

Let's all hope Sir Wyn does the right thing in his write-up...and condemns, in the strongest terms possible, not so much the "Post Office and their sub contractors, and, Fujitsu" as organisations, but instead, condemns ALL THOSE in positions to both construct and execute this sickening, evil coverup. They ALL damn well knew what they were doing was 100% wrong. The blame for all this HAS to be laid directly at the individuals implicated, and NOT watered down by blaming 'the system'. Only then can the next phase of this redress begin with all the tools it needs...criminal prosecutions. The danger is that since the government (owner/sole shareholder) is also implicated (and clearly was updated to these bugs and ALL their implications), then additional pressure might be added in order to produce an enquiry outcome that merely ticks the fewest boxes while protecting those who damn well shouldn't be protected. We'll see soon enough how this concludes.

[@PaulDuckett]

Well put Chris. thanks for posting this. p

[@dipi71]

12:06 Coming from a perspective of almost 40 years of software development: Fujitsu ought to lay open the complete source code history of Horizon and all their tools accompanying its daily transactions/corrections/accounting. It's the only way to have transparency in our data-driven economy. Very rare exceptions aside, same holds for _any_ software.

[@PaulDuckett]

Sounds very sensible to me. I am an advocate of open source software. The software space looks to me like It's a space that is still lacking proper, serious, grown up ethical and political thinking through ... social media debates politicians are involved in right now are low grade and retrograde and public debates seem more driven by investor interests in silicon valley who promote fear and hype and all that stuff seems so far away from the type of discussion that needs to be had regarding software development.. It shoudl have happened long before the latest hype cycle around AI. But, I am an amateur observer on this, so may have it very wrong.

[@MrButtonpresser]

Good analysis. It’s still very difficult to not be outraged by the PO actions. I don’t even live in the UK but this makes me so angry.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, I don't live in the UK anymore either and I am still feeling angry at all this. Thanks for posting :) p

[@waynedavies5569]

Hi Paul, Over recent weeks I have watched quite a number of the Witnesses give their evidence at the POL Inquiry and would agree with your analysis and opinion in this video… also you highlighted the WHY line of questioning from both Jason Beer KC and also Sir Wyn Williams which has allowed everyone to see the truth behind the shallow defence by AvdB and PV.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks so much for your posting. Yep, the simple question 'Why' has proven devastating to them! Well spotted. p

[@bsastarfire250]

Interesting, As an ex-Civil Servant in various settings, and working in private sector, it is very difficult to get people to ''behave'' , whatever that means. Standards are selectively applied and informal/ external power structures influence.

[@PaulDuckett]

Sadly I have the same experience working in the unviersity sector :( p

[@kg3718]

Very good short and sweet thank you😊

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks so much p

[@Lehanorah1918]

I noted that they removed,completely,the box of tissues,for the final day. Vennells didn’t once show any need for the ‘prop’ that came in so handy on the previous days,and yet the performative face contortion (the ‘cry face’*) was an exact mirror to that displayed previously. *making the face you “think” people should make when crying … see :Mairead Philpott

[@PaulDuckett]

Nice observation! Thanks for posting. p

[@rosemarybrown4407]

Very observant assessment - thank you I agree with your views on ‘professionalism’ - sadly these attributes are lacking in most organisations

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, sadly I agree. I'm part of the problem ... academics like me are the ones churning out these professionals from our universities. We fail to give them a sufficient moral education ... I think we likely focus on teaching them the wrong stuff :{

[@AlanPT9]

I imagine its an unreal ordeal to face questioning like that over two days and know its being shown live and reported in the press. One obvious strategy to get through it is to play it straight and keep emotions in check and not get combative.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, good point. I dare say nothing can really prepare you for being in the spotlight with so much public anger being directed against you. I suppose inspite of the terrible things they did, it's gotta being horrid having the public turn on you like that. p

[@davidbarnard2716]

I have only heard evidence of Horizon software glitches and bugs that have discovered supposed shortfalls in the cash balances of Post Office Subpostmasters accounts. I have always thought that a bug in any system might be equally likely to produce errors that introduce money where it doesnt belong. Have there been any instances discovered where there is more cash in the till (so to speak) than there actually should be according to Horizon? I cant believe that all SPM's would just pocket an illegitimate credit balance without raising this with the Post Office.

[@PaulDuckett]

Really interesting question. Of course, there would be no extra cash in the branch because it woudl be a false reporting but it does raise an interesting question as to what POL did in those cases. So, glad you asked it. p

[@wildsage6852]

I noticed that when being questioned about the SPM suicide she had to personalize to another instance in order to cry thus making it about her own sense of grief and self pity. She simply could not identify with those that she saw as being beneath her. She protected the PO brand not for the brand itself but for how it was an extension of her own ego. That's why she cried so much. Her ego was being attacked. I was a nurse for many years and got in trouble for protecting my pt when Dr's behaved badly they reacted in much the same way. Their ego came before pt care. Unfortunately for the SPM no one was acting as an advocate on their behalf to be a buffer against ego driven corporate mentality. Nurses are expressly given that duty of care to act as that buffer because of past abuses of power imbalances. I hope the lesson from this is that advocates are empowered to act in these cases without fear. Seems the unions could not or would do that. But that's a different matter altogether.

[@PaulDuckett]

Great reflection, thank you so much for sharing. Much appreciated. yes, we need more fearless advocacy and a political climate that enables that. p

[@FiddlerNick]

Interesting video. In my experience , senior management are generally driven by "the numbers" (profit, sales, margin etc) and objectively chase the achievement of targets as expressed in numbers . Even "soft" HR issues have become dominated by measurement and reporting numerically. Directors however , while they also have accountability for performance numbers, have a responsibility for the culture of the business and it's values, because these drive the behaviour in all the areas that "fall outside of the numbers". They have the very difficult task of reconciling the achievement of those numbers with working to the values- but that's what they are paid for. Sadly I've noticed that far too many boards in the UK are stuffed with accountants and others who think their job is to be isolated from the "day to day" and focus ruthlessly on "looking after the numbers". This can drive very dispassionate behaviour further down the management tree. The more I look at this enquiry, the more worried I am that it seems to be focussed mostly on the executives who were there when the music stopped and the shitshow that was the Horizon parcel was finally opened up. Sure there is accountability for ignoring the "parcel" for too long. But it was already there long before Vennells et al arrived. It had just grown bigger. Is anyone asking "Why was such a toxic contract (making SPMs accountable for the numbers generated by Horizon) put together? Didn't anyone at the time it was proposed ,ever ask the question "what if the system goes wrong?" Or was a view taken that "well it might go wrong but if it does, we have all the power so they won't be able to do anything" And who set all this up? It's not just about the tech failings of the computer system. It's about how the whole package (contract + techsystem + enforcement system) was put together and , as Wyn Wiliams said "Why?" We need to understand this if anything is to change in governance practices in the UK.

[@PaulDuckett]

This is such a good analysis. Thank you for taking the time to both put it together and to post it. I agree with your points. The irony is that just as they were in denial that there was a systemic problem with Horizon, they were unaware of teh systemic problem in the PO that was putting them all in harms way ... I don't think they saw it coming. And I completely agree with you on the economic imperative - everything driven by spreadsheets and if it can't be measured and articulated into a KPI it's not valued (that's often, I think, why culture is sidelined because it's harder to measure). I see it happening in higher education where everything has come down to profitability and governance has been twisted to serve that master more than, I fear, to serve the master of public interest and public safety.

[@FiddlerNick]

​@@PaulDuckett Nail on head. Years ago I was lucky enough to end up on the board of a fairly large Private Ltd Company and very lucky to have some very good colleagues, notably an MD who, while driving staff very hard on the performance numbers, took the view that "If I don't look after the workers who else will?" Also a Chairman that was wise enough to insist on the "right thing" being done rather than the one that gave an immediate fix to the numbers. I remember him castigating another Director who proposed delaying supplier payments to suppliers, to fix a cash flow problem "We will need those suppliers when we are stretched in the busy period...how will they service us then?" And you do have these dilemmas to deal with, where there is no "good" answer, only the least shitty one. But I have seen many companies where everything is numbers numbers numbers to the exclusion of almost everything and I believe it is a major problem in UK business. The "numbers" need to be achieved WITHIN the company values , but so often the "company values" are seen as an "extra" for the annual reports rather than something that should be part of every decision.

[@FiddlerNick]

@@PaulDuckett Nail on head. I've been on a company board -thankfully a good one that really did live the values, but I've seen a lot of companies where it is numbers numbers numbers and where values are a just an "extra" thing for a paragraph in the annual report rather than something to be considered in every decision.

[@heywoodm2000]

Excellent analysis.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks so much. Encouragement like that keeps me going :) p

[@carolynkimbrey1423]

Love this analysis

[@PaulDuckett]

Thank you so much. That's lovely feedback. It keeps me motivated to carry on with my channel. p

[@AlanPT9]

I doubt that Paula V went into the hearings cold - i imagine she could afford excellent lawyers and consultants to prepare her for the inquiry and instruct her how to best present herself. Her preparation would be to a much higher level than that which Angela could afford. (my speculation)

[@roswilliams2899]

IIRC she said she spent a year preparing her defence or was it 2 years? Anyway, she will have used lawyers to help her and what I want to know is who paid for those lawyers? Did she out of the bonuses that were paid to her by us (ie PO being owned "by us" along with some of the money illegally grabbed from SPMs) or was she able to use lawyers paid for by PO as she could say "I worked for PO so they must pay my expenses for my defence. So either way it seems likely our taxes will pay all her expenses. So all that must be recovered from her estate.

[@PaulDuckett]

Both great points. Yep, Vennells would have been fully lawyered up and van den Bogerd likely getting the leftovers. Funny that inspite of the Vennells appearance went down much, much worse. p

[@peterduce3155]

Excellent summary - thank you & The killer question "why?"

[@PaulDuckett]

Thank you :) And thanks for posting :)

[@jenniferholmes2732]

I think we all remember Hancock expressing his emotions on television when the first vaccine was given. Now we all now the immense damage it has done to the human race.

[@PaulDuckett]

Not sure I know what the relevance is of this. And, I didn't see that moment because I am in Australia.So, can't really respond very meaningfully to your post. Sorry. p

[@MelanieRuck-dq5uo]

For his final comments about why he does these videos and the way he said it, I really love Paul Duckett.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thank you Melanie, that's lovely of you to say that. p

[@eddieharris6004]

Found the quality of the audio poor....pity.

[@PaulDuckett]

So sorry about this. Another viewer said it was as though I had the microphone the wrong way round ... and they were right. I am a moron! All the gear, no idea! Will fix this (point the microphone in the right direction), next time. Hopefully you'll stick with me inspite of my stupidity when it comes to using audio-video stuff.

[@blue2sco]

Trouble is she was an ordained preist. She showed none of those values towards those affected in this scandal. Paula did not break down like this during the questioning by Parliament. This was a version of being cold like van de bogert.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, there is a hypocracy there, I agree. Thanks so much for posting. p

[@BLUESKY-zt1nv]

They have both now been offered £1 million each to write a book ..

[@martinreed1401]

Who by. I suspect your are lying

[@PaulDuckett]

We might need to fact check this one :)

[@carldori6172]

Thank you for your analysis.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks so much for you thank you :)

[@tkshots]

what a nice man...

[@PaulDuckett]

If you mean Mr Beer, or Sir Wyn, I agree :)

[@amandam5841]

Usually the person upset is asked if they want to take a break, so there was a difference in the way that Mr Beer handled this crying/tissue issue. The inquiry wants to get the best information they can in the best way. Maybe he didnt stop or ask if she is ok because she was CEO or another judgement [made at that time or predetermined on some of the information]. I was trying to figure out when and why she cried but cant be bothered and at least once it was in response to something said in the room which I could not hear but maybe was "not good enough". It does seem a bit rich to cry when talking about an ex-sub-postmaster (or his family) -- when she presided over a contract with them that made them responsible even for armed robbery losses, and thought that their problems were 'boring' -- even though she could not be bothered to get basic IT knowledge (or pretends not to have much) -- though does have some regrets.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, such a good question. Context is important. The bit where she started crying after Sir Wyn's question, right at the end, seemed to be in response to laughter coming from the public gallery when Wyn said she could come back tomorrow with an answer if she needed more time. I sensed that it was genuine tears because it was such a strong reminder to her of how low an opinion the public had of her. I think it was that and her feeling sorry for herself that kicked in at that point ... btu I am no psychologist .... oh heck ... I am a psychologist ... but don't trust my interpretation of human emotion. Us psychologist are the worst at understanding the human condition! p

[@philipwilliams2310]

..... have sub., Thank You for That 'Breakdown/Analysis' 👍

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for the sub! much appreciated :) p

[@HestanIslandLad]

Oh you brave lad. I though exactly the same but was too much of a coward to bring it into the arena. Thats what they get for 'ticking the box'. 😅

[@PaulDuckett]

Oh no... I'm worried now. Didn't realise I was being brave ... otherwise I would never have said it :)

[@renderedghost]

Excellent explanation.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for you supportive feedback :) p

[@Peter-sk5vg]

Interesting take on these people. Vennels' trajectory as ceo parallels that of the church...protect the institution rather than the victim...as a priest it propels her into Tartuffian territory. Hideous hypocrisy. I fully accept your analysis here

[@PaulDuckett]

You make a nice parallel here. Thanks for posting. It's a very useful way of thinking about this. p

[@jamescoburn6789]

I have had similar conversations within the NHS and JCP. Why do we do X? It's in the policy (frequently it isn't). It's like highlighting the bow doors are open on the ferry, you try to inform the crew but they don't see an issue as they've always done it.

[@PaulDuckett]

nice similie. I think you are right. p

[@Mark_Dyer]

There was a difference between the education of these two women: one having "climbed through the ranks"; the other University-educated, and accustomed to competing for senior management roles, in the open market. I have speculated on whether Ms Van den Bogerd felt that she, rather than the Rev Paula Vennells, should have been appointed CEO, and whether that led to some animosity on the part of Ms Van den Bogerd. For example, according to the docu-drama, the latter was not supposed to go near Martin Griffiths' family, without a representative from Mr Alan Bates' organisation being present. Did Ms Van den Bogerd take it on herself to visit; or was she 'ordered' to go by Ms Vennells? Unfortunately, the American degree - the MBA - would appear to have had a chilling effect on the concept of 'professionalism'. Gone are the days of Masonic, and Soroptimist, handshakes: to be replaced by the cold 'calculations' of a 'professional class' holding MBAs.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks Mark. Such a good posting. :) p

[@therealspixycat]

Was the 140K was the amount the Griffit would have gotten when selling the business? So it wasn't a compensation as such but it sounded that that money was already reserved? I can't recall the exact details but this was my understanding based on the interview and note English is not 1st language

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, I think you are right on this. Well spotted. p

[@randysoldman]

thank you doctor

[@PaulDuckett]

My absolute pleasure :) p

[@craigtroth4524]

I dont think that Mr Beers needed to ask her if she was OK as she had no concern or repsect for those who suffered at the hands of the Post Office so why should anyone care about her

[@PaulDuckett]

So sorry how crazy late my acknowledge of your comment has been, but just wanted to say how much I appreciate you posting. you make a good point.

[@egratis2367]

I have had two female bosses. Both of them exhibited what I can only describe as a 'hard line' persona when they were at work which was completely at odds with their personality when you were in their company on social occasions. Male bosses didn't seem to do this, they were the same person at work as they were outside it. I cannot help wondering if women feel a need to 'toughen up' and conceal/stifle their emotions if they are to survive and prosper in managerial positions.

[@PaulDuckett]

thanks for posting :)

[@greentombdive]

Nice one: subbed. However, 20 years as a paralegal has taught me that ‘analysis’, and ‘creativity’ (I.e. your vid), are quite differing ways-of-working, and are NOT two sides of the same coin. Beware of attempting to do both at the same time.

[@PaulDuckett]

Ah yes, very interseting point. Thanks so much for posting it. It is quite interesting how legal empirical research works differently from nonlegal empirical research. I am no expert but did serve as an associate dean for a while and saw how the School of Law had a different relationship to research than the area I was working in (research more aligned to the arts, humanities and cultural studies. In my area of work, creativity is an important part of analysis because the focus is on latent meaning, using metaphor, narrative and discourse. So, not 'fact' driven, so to speak, but about making connections that are not ordinarily apparent. But, I would agree mixing creativity with 'fact' based empirical research is very dangerous indeed :)

[@greentombdive]

@@PaulDuckett your’s is a curious mix of the ‘past’ and ‘present’ (‘was’ .. ‘is’). The motivational ‘WHY’ has always been my lode star. I’m with what, purportedly at least, Socrates had his: I KNOW less than Nothing. It’s the ‘why’ I avoid ‘definition’ ..

[@PaulDuckett]

Nice, I lke your thinking :)

[@anthonybartlett6924]

have i cried enough to get away with what i did, or should i act some more.

[@PaulDuckett]

Where did you learn mind reading :) thanks for posting :)

[@robertovers1863]

the three witches at the top around their caldron of big bonuses and big fat wages ! we can not let little people stop us from getting at this lot !

[@PaulDuckett]

That's a novel way of describing a conspiracy. I agree with you in that regard, they do seem to have conspired to allow this thing to happen. p

[@stephendriscoll7549]

No pity for Vennells tears! Look at all the grief given to the postmasters and their families!

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, nicely put. Thank you :) p

[@cliffordchapman4636]

What a terrible comment by her regarding that suicide, that the family she rang, supposedly said that there were other issues, as if planting a seed of doubt in the mind. Talk about sick.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, it turned my stomach too. p

[@johnmoncrieff3034]

The best way to be professional is to be scrupulously honest with everybody, And to look at all sides of an argument or situation, & consider all possibilities, before coming to a conclusion! Be prepared to discuss these possibilities openly and with candor! The Post office management were none of this, as they stubbornly refused to accept the possibility of any imperfections in their flagship computer program! Thus causing this whole horrendous scandal at as yet an unknown cost in lives and livelihoods and financial compensation. That they, more than likely will not have to make a contribution !!

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, I agree. I also think there is a bit of paternalism in this - at least that is my experience in the university sector - where they think it is in your interest not to tell you something ... but of course, its really in there interest. There were examples of that coming through in the testimonies, particularly around the disclosure stuff.

[@brianwaite6139]

Their only regret is being found out, certainly not for the poor sub post people whose lives they ruined and, in a few cases, ended

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, I agree. Thanks for your post. p

[@c-9233]

Sir Wyn's killer question: "Why?" had actually already been asked by Jason Beer KC, earlier on, for which Vennells gave a 'word soup' reply, but Sir Wyn wanted to hear a succinct answer to his succinct and appropriate one word question. To offer Vennells overnight to think about it was a masterstroke. Jason Beer's question regarding the pre-Select Committee briefing document is here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eXikmmmipsaCiKcsi=vIrt4s0Gei29wxih&t=6477

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, excellent pick up. I had missed that. Thanks so much. Great to see your keen eye for detail. it's important to pick up these things.

[@kanguruster]

What about the professionality or humanity of Susan Crichton with her professional ethics requirements? I think there'd be an interesting comparison between Ms Vennells (in the professional psychopath role) and Ms Crichton (playing the professional avoidant, perhaps).

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, that would be a good comparison. p

[@miketomlin6040]

Interesting women are being scapegoated in this matter when if you spend a 100-200hrs looking at the evidence it seems clear Fujitsu staff are the 'most' to blame in that they told the PO the system/s were fine and it took the PO about 10yrs to discover this was not true. Then they are faced with the common issue of do we admit to this, try and contain the situation, deny it, etc. (I did meet quite a few Bogerd's in senior positions in organisations, which tended to be unpleasant experiences. More so than putting profit before people, is making sure they are not going to be fired so aggressively 'deny' wrongdoing).

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, aggressive deny-ers. I have met a few of them too. Hopefully you got away from them unscathed. p

[@Suspan1]

I don’t understand how she was working as a priest in the C of E, when she wasn’t working but devoting all her time to the inquiry. How on Earth was she ever being considered as a possible Bishop of London? I must have got this all wrong 🤷‍♀️

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, it does somewhat boggle the mind :) Thanks for posting, p

[@JonDingle]

Unless the treacherous Post Office witchhunters face trial for their disregard, callous corruption and utter professional ineptitude then this "inquiry" is pointless because their crimes in condemning innocent subpostmasters will go unpunished.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for you post. I completely undersatnd your fears. I have them too. But, the question 'if not now, then when? keeps he hopefully in regards to the prospect of prosecutions....given this is a miscarriage of justice that is completely off the scale and will be seen as a defining point in the efficacy and morality of the British legal system.

[@standurham2525]

“Tear soaked moments of her testimony”? There WERE no tears, just the pathetic sniffling of hard-nosed old dictator.

[@PaulDuckett]

Harsh ... but fair! p

[@johnrussell5245]

Vennell's crying was a defence mechanism. When people cry other people back off or treat them more gently. It can be a learned response to elicit kinder treatment.

[@PaulDuckett]

Nice point John. Hadn't considered that and you are right to offer that interpretation up. I know I cry in front of my manager ... but it doesn't work on them... they still overload me with work!

[@sagetheowlfatfeathery2083]

They’re not sorry about what they did, they’re sorry for being caught. Plus, you can say what you like, but your actions are how you should be judged.

[@PaulDuckett]

thanks for posting :)

[@charlescawley9923]

Excellent. You can write the word 'objective' a million times on a blackboard- but we are essentially subjective creatures. This does not mean we cannot engage with and know of objectivity. The problem of Solipsism was manufactured by Socratic and post socratic philosophy still dominating. The age of reason did not understand reason because to reason, you have to temporarily give validity to contradiction to understand logic. Logic obsessed philosophers created closed system thinking that goes with closed system philosophies such as those of Kant, Leibniz, Descarte, leading to the denial of reality and elevation of relativism seen in Wittgenstein, particularly in The Investigations etc:. Worse, it created closed system political philosophies like those of Hobbes and Rousseau and, later, Marx. The arrogance of Bogerd and others in the Post Office stems from a similar attitude.. it is, in a way, inhuman. If you accept that existence includes subjective and inter-subjective affairs, although in different forms, the self-inflicted Solipsist problem evaporates. Different rules distinguish these domains despite all depending on physical reality. For instance, non-logic is tolerated in human memory and the inter-subjective where it is anathema to physical reality. The distinction between electronic logic and classical logic is informative. Anyway, well done.

[@PaulDuckett]

I love your analysis here. W haev much to learn philosophy. Sadly, in psychology, we dumped philsophy early on because we wanted to play at being real scientists! :)

[@charlescawley9923]

@@PaulDuckett Yes, what is a 'real scientist'? Skinner's operant conditioning and his rats, much loved by HR departments in many large companies? The point is not to reject any discipline, approach or tool but to use them all in trying to understand what's going on. Academic distinctions can be quite destructive, not least as unnecessary siloes. We see a forest of ivory towers, their inhabitants hurling stones at each other forgetting their duty to knowledge and discovery. Necessary distinctions and methodology to ensure academic structures and shared recognition of what passes for truth easily succumb to the mistake where method dictates truth. Hence endless shelves of academic papers, often only read by ten or fewer people.

[@lastdimestudios]

Excellent video. I will sub on the condition you do monetise as if you don’t the funds generated by your videos that rightfully should go to you will just end up in a rich person’s pocket!

[@PaulDuckett]

Ohhhh, okay. You do make a good point. But if I do this I'd need need to give the money to charity. As an academic I am mostly paid by the public so I consider it kinda my job to make videos like this to reach out and engage with public discourse.

[@lastdimestudios]

@@PaulDuckett Good compromise. Defo the right decision to monetise and you can direct the funds where you see fit rather than a rich person buying more assets.

[@jimconway5921]

An ivory tower viewpoint especially around the inner moment / thoughts / aspiration / expectation, so this analysis is based on the 'feelings' of the presenter as apposed to the facts from the evidence, which was vast and extensive, is adding no real value as the presentation extracted by the lawyers was absolutely daring of the Post Office and its senior management Team(s) IT included.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for posting this. I appreciate you sharing a different view. p

[@baysideharpy8350]

DEI in all its glory.

[@PaulDuckett]

:)

[@markmcintyre9893]

2:44 there was no tears that’s why he was unconcerned

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for posting. I think you might be right.

[@deepoole820]

She won't end up in prison but I wish there was some way she could be made to pay for her crimes.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, I am with you on that. p

[@Monthehoops-pg4vd]

No tear drop explosions there. They both acted like Demons.

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for posting, nice job! :) p

[@jhofster31]

Would Angel vd Bogard be considered a psychopath?

[@PaulDuckett]

Ohhhh, good question. I'd probably ask if her behaviour would be considered psychopathic as that is an easier one to answer ... yes!

[@Lordofthegeeks108]

They want it both ways, They want to be seen as consummate professionals (most likely so it doesn't affect their current standing and position in other companies) BUT at the same time, Overly trusting, bumbling people who didn't look into issues as much as they could have nor noticed any problems when they arose at the time because people kept things from them. (Not maliciously or out to save their own skin and the image of the company, just grossly incompetent) So I'm left with the impression that the top levels of the Post Office were well intentioned, dedicated professionals who were catastrophically incompetent and easily convinced by people beneath them in the pecking order that everything was fine with the system and there's no need to look any deeper than "we're idiots and very very sorry we destroyed hundreds/potentially thousands of people's lives"

[@PaulDuckett]

nice analysis, thanks for posting. p

[@tonytierney-h2s]

Vennells and her co conspirators have to go to jail

[@PaulDuckett]

I think you've caught the public sentiment nicely here. thank you, p

[@stephenlord599]

I think you are conflating two different things here. Firstly let’s just assume for the sake of argument that all we are seeing here is a poor performance of empathy from someone incapable of feeling empathy following the advice of her legal counsel. You can look back over endless video and audio recordings where she has never expressed regret or tears but that is a separate question to professionalism. Professionalism is upon finding out innocent people are being prosecuted saying no. It doesn’t require visible emotion simply to say “no they is wrong”, or variations thereof. That is not to say it must not contain emotion but that it is superfluous and in cases could be counterproductive. A simpler explanation is to just tag together professional and integrity. What I think/believe from that and other interviews and recording is I would believe quite accepted by the public and that is if those tears are real they are for her and she is a nasty callous self centred person who cared nothing for either her employees or the organisation. I may be correct in this regard or I may be mistaken but does that matter if that is the impression she gave to Sir Wyn, Bere and 95% of people that see it ? The entire thing could have been minimised early by simply acknowledging the evidence and simply saying “we need to stop because this is wrong”. The representation to the select committee could have been different and simply told the truth. In terms of professionalism then the post office and vennels may have had some integrity left. This culture is developed in layers where people and employees are able to express their opinions of right and wrong not fear for their own personal careers or job. Second sight acted professionally to a large extent and were penalised for that and any employee within POL would equally fear for acting with integrity. Ultimately the legal fate of Vennels will come down to if it can be proven she was knowingly lying. Not if she was lying or not if she had given explicit instructions not to be informed of certain things. A different perspective or way of acting with professional integrity can be seen by Moya Greene (ex Royal Mail chief) in her text to Vennels where she clearly and simply states what Vennels is doing is wrong and she can no longer support her or be friends. This however would not be something her employees could do in the environment Vennels created.

[@PaulDuckett]

This is really interesting analysis and I like the counter you have put up here to my analysis . Yours does make good sense. p

[@jamescoburn6789]

Pubic sector internal recruitment/promotion, creates this type of clique. If the clique are of low moral fibre they can do a lot of damage with their power.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, seems the wrong people get their hands on the positions of power ... or maybe that much power corrupts even those with the purest of hearts. Probably a bit of both.

[@stephengirling7859]

If there is a NDA then it isn't compensation, it's 'hush money' and should be illegal. Don't you just love callous liars when they get caught!

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, very good point. Thanks for posting :)

[@cndns2]

Post office senior employees were all complicit in this travesty against sub postmasters. Their performance should have won an Oscar.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, for acting and screenplay :)

[@mystify4me2u]

Crocodile Tears, put them in Prison

[@PaulDuckett]

Thanks for posting :) p

[@beammeup8458]

Mmmmhh women in "management" ?

[@PaulDuckett]

Or rather 'mmmmmmh, stupid people in management :) p

[@malcolmplumridge2367]

A company director's primary duty in law is to serve the interests of the shaeholders of the company of which he or she is a director. You or I might like him to have a duty to the employees or the general public, but his duty to the shareholders overides that. Also, the Post Office is NOT a public institution. It is a public company in that it's shares are available to be bought by a member of the public and that is all. It was a public institution but now it's not. Psychology is a wonderful science which tells us all about conditioning and brainwashing. If Stanley Milgram had been alive to watch these procedings he would have laughed his head off and said 'I told you so '.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, I do think Milgram would show a lot of schaudenfrauder (not sure if I spelled that right). POL is a particular type of institution. Yep, you are right that it is not a traditional public institution, but neither is it private corporation - it was a public corporation which is, I think, a fudge between the two and migth explain some of what had happened - it might have fallen between the cracks of the corporate world and the world of public institutions. Loved your posting those as it's could to pick up that issue.

[@daveallsopp320]

It’s a wonder BLIAR isn’t putting his nose into this

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, indeed! thanks for posting :)

[@DennisHughes-h8b]

Pretending to cry.

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, it's hard not to think so.

[@giovannimaiello7529]

Both vile, just one is a better actor than the other. After this enquiry both should be put on trial.

[@PaulDuckett]

I doubt you are alone in your thoughts here Giovanni p

[@kellyheighway5411]

Paula was faking her crying, if she was crying she was crying for herself. Not for the former postmasters or anybody else

[@PaulDuckett]

thanks for posting :) I don't think you are alone in thinking that.

[@camf7522]

13:30 😂 a question her lawyers had not prepared her to answer.

[@PaulDuckett]

Indeed !

[@a.c.4732]

"I see this all the time when training students to become qualitative research interviewers ......" Woopy F Doo .

[@PaulDuckett]

Yep, it's really hard to get students to move away from being a robot .... I think my next strategy is to put out that they are going to be dog food for AIs unless they start being a bit more human! p

[@normanhartill1424]

A "Professional" has a DUTY to the public!

[@PaulDuckett]

Yes, very well said. You are spot on. Thanks for posting.

[@westcommonroom9737]

Interesting analysis - but I don't think it stands up. These two clearly don't know why they acted like they did. Bogus or indeed learned attitudes to professionalism have nothing to do with what's mere post hoc rationalisation.

[@PaulDuckett]

Good to hear a different view on this. thanks for posting :)