She exudes irritation at being questioned...."I've had a very long morning...." Many times when the mask slips and micro expressions of anger are clearly visible.
Amazing how they can remember the details when it suits them. Can it not be proved that they are lying under oath by comparing the their responses to pressure question v benign question. Then arrest them for perverting the course of justice.
I accepted her presentation on the first day. Articulate and well delivered. I even started to feel sorry for her at one point. Hiwever, I completely changed my opinion at the later part of the second say. She resorted to the script when confronted with daming evidence. Same ploy as Vennells, 'thats not what i meant, although thats what it reads'. Total denial. The polished veneer fell. She, along with the rest show no shame or admit responsibility for the horrors the KNOW they caused.
'i can remember every single detail of what happened up to now including what your next questions are except the memory of where i'm obviously guilty'.
It was part of the establishment culture , and essential requirement for the role, blanks in the data stream = amnesia, easy peasy. Of course justice is served in the darkness where you will be alone with your true self. Life for some is unbearable because of the shame. Always best to live a true life🐥
These people are happy to take large sums in remuneration but display zero contrition and a bizarrely entitled, flippant, even patronising demeanour whilst being held to account. She was absolutely dogged in pursuing assurances about insurance cover for herself and the board but laissez-faire about the really important stuff. This line of ‘I didn’t understand, it was all beyond me’ is wearing really thin: she should be returning her pay and bonuses since she failed to do her job properly and therefore participated in the miscarriage of justice.
I am sorry but i clearly remember not being aware of the material substance in these smoking gun emails... including not knowing anything about the Horizon bugs, inspite of several such emails being sent to me (and briefing notes prepped for a meeting with me that took place).
Does the Inquiry know what questions/topics that the "other" lawyers are going to ask prior to the asking? If not, Jason has missed asking questions that the others asked, questions that under his ownership could have easily shattered that nasty piece of work to smithereens. Little wonder JS looked so miserable all the time. Having already watched too much of this inquiry, filled with lies and selective amnesia, all that is holding me together is the prospect of Gareth Jenkins - former Distinguished Engineer at Fujitsu Services Ltd, getting a new one torn for him live streamed around the planet, by the best inquirer who I would shudder even if all he asked was what the time was. For this inquiry not to lead to court action against the obvious characters will render it meaningless. Should I defer from holding my breath?
44:17 So Vennells is only looking for information that backs up what she wants to say, i.e. that the Horizon system can't be accessed remotely. And that's all she's interested in. She's not interested in whether or not that's the case, so she'll disregard or give low priority to any evidence to the contrary and only consider or give prominence to evidence she can use to support the "Horizon can't be accessed remotely" argument she wants to make. And this is the woman who received a CBE for her services to the Post Office?! How pathetic!
She exudes irritation at being questioned...."I've had a very long morning...." Many times when the mask slips and micro expressions of anger are clearly visible.
Precisely! Whyever didn't people want to tell her bad news do you think? She's a temper on her alright!
Amazing how they can remember the details when it suits them. Can it not be proved that they are lying under oath by comparing the their responses to pressure question v benign question. Then arrest them for perverting the course of justice.
I accepted her presentation on the first day. Articulate and well delivered.
I even started to feel sorry for her at one point.
Hiwever, I completely changed my opinion at the later part of the second say. She resorted to the script when confronted with daming evidence. Same ploy as Vennells, 'thats not what i meant, although thats what it reads'.
Total denial.
The polished veneer fell. She, along with the rest show no shame or admit responsibility for the horrors the KNOW they caused.
'i can remember every single detail of what happened up to now including what your next questions are except the memory of where i'm obviously guilty'.
It's a wonder they haven't jailed the lot of them,how do these people sleep at night. 😢
They can sleep at night because they don’t have a conscience!
How do these incompetent people get selected for these high profile jobs .
A very good question! Incompetence beyond words! How many more are there selected for their cut glass accent and influential connections!
Marrying a politician probably helps…..
It's not what you know it's who you know
And that’s what they call a days work …. You can tell as soon as they open their mouth!
The amount of selective memory from most of these Enquiry witnesses who worked for the PO is phenomenal
It was part of the establishment culture , and essential requirement for the role, blanks in the data stream = amnesia, easy peasy. Of course justice is served in the darkness where you will be alone with your true self. Life for some is unbearable because of the shame. Always best to live a true life🐥
These people are happy to take large sums in remuneration but display zero contrition and a bizarrely entitled, flippant, even patronising demeanour whilst being held to account. She was absolutely dogged in pursuing assurances about insurance cover for herself and the board but laissez-faire about the really important stuff. This line of ‘I didn’t understand, it was all beyond me’ is wearing really thin: she should be returning her pay and bonuses since she failed to do her job properly and therefore participated in the miscarriage of justice.
There is never a clear answer given to any of the wuestions. I would prefer a clear statement not this rambling nonsense they give out.
Send to Rwanda
I don't remember. I can't recall. I wasn't present and if I was I was sleeping...
How does she remember to get up in the morning the morning!
'obfuscation, obfuscation, obfuscation'. (evidence in favour) 'wait, i can remember that'. i'm not a very clever person but i see it this way.
Perkins answers: 'If i'm honest i would say...' - Huge fruedian slip.
I am sorry but i clearly remember not being aware of the material substance in these smoking gun emails... including not knowing anything about the Horizon bugs, inspite of several such emails being sent to me (and briefing notes prepped for a meeting with me that took place).
This made me very angry total denial shameful.
Even marble-mouthed people can lie through their teeth!! She sounds just like Vennells, different body, same script!!
How can all those in the POL suddenly only know about documentation today that were produced back in 2013? What were they actually doing in 2013?
And this woman is an ex civil servant.
No wonder government doesn't work
Polygraph all of them!
A breath of foul air!
Joan Collins. 'whatever happened to baby jane ?'
Does the Inquiry know what questions/topics that the "other" lawyers are going to ask prior to the asking?
If not, Jason has missed asking questions that the others asked, questions that under his ownership could have easily shattered that nasty piece of work to smithereens. Little wonder JS looked so miserable all the time.
Having already watched too much of this inquiry, filled with lies and selective amnesia, all that is holding me together is the prospect of Gareth Jenkins - former Distinguished Engineer at Fujitsu Services Ltd, getting a new one torn for him live streamed around the planet, by the best inquirer who I would shudder even if all he asked was what the time was.
For this inquiry not to lead to court action against the obvious characters will render it meaningless.
Should I defer from holding my breath?
WHO'S NEXT? HMRC?
she needs to go and see the wizard of oz i belive hes handing out brains
anyone still here ? (echo)
Fujitsu ran rings round the PO.
44:17 So Vennells is only looking for information that backs up what she wants to say, i.e. that the Horizon system can't be accessed remotely. And that's all she's interested in. She's not interested in whether or not that's the case, so she'll disregard or give low priority to any evidence to the contrary and only consider or give prominence to evidence she can use to support the "Horizon can't be accessed remotely" argument she wants to make. And this is the woman who received a CBE for her services to the Post Office?! How pathetic!
Alice Perkins is like a breath of fresh air in this whole convoluted procedure.
Hardly ! She started off well - then reverted to type.