Post Office inquiry: Solicitor who helped prosecute postmasters gives evidence

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 30 кві 2024
  • Martin Smith, a solicitor who helped prosecute postmasters, is set to give evidence at the Post Office inquiry.
    Read more here: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024...
    #postoffice #horizon #inquiry
    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.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 39

  • @davidbailey6262
    @davidbailey6262 14 днів тому +9

    I am amazed any of these PO employees were able to find their way home their memory is so bad.

  • @mrtom3297
    @mrtom3297 14 днів тому +10

    How much was Harry Bowyer charged out at oer hour. He says he did not read a number of email attachments, that Mr Sungh was unclear ( yet never asked for clarification) and did not understand the disclosure rules on litigation. Lazy, incompetent or a crook?

  • @jimrichards3916
    @jimrichards3916 14 днів тому +12

    He has a great memory for some things (non damaging) but a memory loss when it might be damaging to him! Have all these people been on a course to learn how to dodge questions!

  • @MRJERRYCURTIN
    @MRJERRYCURTIN 14 днів тому +3

    They were all so happy to have there heads in the trough bet they are tad uncomfy now

  • @MartynHarris-gb1gg
    @MartynHarris-gb1gg 14 днів тому +3

    Just listened again, he can accurately remember Justice Frasers findings, but cannot remember his own actions or inaction. Damning evidence of selective recall.

  • @themediaman100
    @themediaman100 14 днів тому +2

    It seems to me that these lawyers are accepting of the complaint raised by their clients - much like all lawyers. They have a vested interest in having the claims being upheld in court, but seemingly have little or no interest in questioning the evidence put forward by their clients. In the present light of day when we now know that the client had an agenda which was to conceal the truth about the real issue, and were quite successful in doing that with a legal team who didn't ask more. But proceded with a campaign of prosecuting innocent people because it would make everyone happy - Very happy in the case of the lawyers who raked in millions for their services to wittingly or unwittingly conceal the truth of which may be charitibly called corporate mismanagement, and secured the convictioms of innocent people to that end. Everyone concerned in this travesty should face their day in court and pay for their actions.

  • @cherryrotella3714
    @cherryrotella3714 14 днів тому +3

    Quite a bit of bluster

  • @frankgallacher4799
    @frankgallacher4799 14 днів тому +3

    Yet another I dont recall excuse

  • @geoffreyhattersley9186
    @geoffreyhattersley9186 14 днів тому +1

    “I cannot remember” Again!

  • @geoffreyhattersley9186
    @geoffreyhattersley9186 14 днів тому +1

    They were forced to make admissions!

  • @camf7522
    @camf7522 День тому

    2:56:01

  • @andyniblock43
    @andyniblock43 День тому

    Polygraph out of the question.

  • @camf7522
    @camf7522 День тому

    4:23:50

  • @camf7522
    @camf7522 День тому

    4:46:07

  • @seymourlj
    @seymourlj 14 днів тому

    John Cleese was a solicitor?

  • @fireskycam9889
    @fireskycam9889 14 днів тому +2

    I I I I I, UHM, ER, I I, DON'T UHM, ER, ER, ER, ER, RECALL.

  • @veritas5008
    @veritas5008 14 днів тому +3

    No doubt another Post Office employee suffering from Amnesia or Dementia?!

  • @geoffreyhattersley9186
    @geoffreyhattersley9186 14 днів тому

    Let’s keep it all a secret eh!!!!

  • @geoffreyhattersley9186
    @geoffreyhattersley9186 14 днів тому

    It wasn’t me guv’ it was the firms

  • @jamescoburn6789
    @jamescoburn6789 14 днів тому +2

    The only evidence was a faulty system which they victims pointed out. They were convicted in spite this, with nobody taking a deeper look into it. It beggars belief that independant experts weren't brought in to check out the large numbers of people pointing to the system.