Post Office scandal



If you watch that programme does it explain what happened? It’s one of those things I can’t get my head around and don’t really understand what went on :(
 
jayjaysafc said:
I pray every night in hope mate
Click to expand...
I would be very surprised if that did not happen.

especially on the legal side of the prosecution authority for the PO.

It appears to be clear and indeed is clear that a number of people we prosecuted some imprisoned, some not and it is unclear how this info was not linked in some way to a disclosure issue.

Some of the evidence given to the enquiry states they were not disclosing that information as the people whose job it was to officially disclose, already knew about it, as those prosecution files went through their office.

very similar to not inviting a friend to your birthday party, because they knew all about it and you presumed they would know to turn up.

disclosure come in 2 parts, one for basic disclosure and the other is confidential. The prosecuting lawyers then decide what is to be disclosed. However the defence are given a very brief description of what is confidential and it is then up to both prosecution and defence counsels to argue before a judge their opinions and the judge decides.

I am not aware of what has actually happened here (something obviously has gone badly wrong) and it would be wrong to make assumptions but I do know what reports are hinting at.

For some reason the BBC are taking a leading role in this. Yet they ignored the story and it was ITV who had to grab the bull by the horns. The BBC could not get their investigation into, savile, Bashir, football corruption and others right. So I personally do not believe in their editorial direction at all. I will wait until the inquiry shows its findings. I understand a police enquiry is already ongoing, but carefully a few steps behind, so it is building up steam and I suspect long porridge and there will be a total shake-up of legal procedures, which will be fought and argued against by lawyers, barristers and judges.
 
soapster said:
I would be very surprised if that did not happen.

especially on the legal side of the prosecution authority for the PO.

It appears to be clear and indeed is clear that a number of people we prosecuted some imprisoned, some not and it is unclear how this info was not linked in some way to a disclosure issue.

Some of the evidence given to the enquiry states they were not disclosing that information as the people whose job it was to officially disclose, already knew about it, as those prosecution files went through their office.

very similar to not inviting a friend to your birthday party, because they knew all about it and you presumed they would know to turn up.

disclosure come in 2 parts, one for basic disclosure and the other is confidential. The prosecuting lawyers then decide what is to be disclosed. However the defence are given a very brief description of what is confidential and it is then up to both prosecution and defence counsels to argue before a judge their opinions and the judge decides.

I am not aware of what has actually happened here (something obviously has gone badly wrong) and it would be wrong to make assumptions but I do know what reports are hinting at.

For some reason the BBC are taking a leading role in this. Yet they ignored the story and it was ITV who had to grab the bull by the horns. The BBC could not get their investigation into, savile, Bashir, football corruption and others right. So I personally do not believe in their editorial direction at all. I will wait until the inquiry shows its findings. I understand a police enquiry is already ongoing, but carefully a few steps behind, so it is building up steam and I suspect long porridge and there will be a total shake-up of legal procedures, which will be fought and argued against by lawyers, barristers and judges.
Click to expand...
The BBC didn’t ignore the story - they’ve covered it extensively for many years, starting in 2011, when they were the first to break the story.

There was a Panorama expose on the scandal in 2015.

They also had a hugely popular podcast on it out years before ITV commissioned the drama which seems to have reached a new audience.

More details here
 
PhilY said:
The BBC didn’t ignore the story - they’ve covered it extensively for many years, starting in 2011, when they were the first to break the story.

There was a Panorama expose on the scandal in 2015.

They also had a hugely popular podcast on it out years before ITV commissioned the drama which seems to have reached a new audience.

More details here
Click to expand...
so they made a really good point in it then. they really got their point over.

Of course they did not.
 
soapster said:
so they made a really good point in it then. they really got their point over.

Of course they did not.
Click to expand...
Actually yes. I think everyone who was in any way affected was well aware of the issues long before the 2019 case (which itself was widely reported), as was anyone who takes their news from a range of reputable sources.

I’d heard about it in 2013 - and I’m not in any way affected.

It’s ok to just say ‘fair enough, I’d claimed that the BBC had ignored the issue but it turns out that I was wrong’ you know!
 
PhilY said:
Actually yes. I think everyone who was in any way affected was well aware of the issues long before the 2019 case (which itself was widely reported), as was anyone who takes their news from a range of reputable sources.

I’d heard about it in 2013 - and I’m not in any way affected.

It’s ok to just say ‘fair enough, I’d claimed that the BBC had ignored the issue but it turns out that I was wrong’ you know!
Click to expand...
they did not put or it appears they did not put the resources into it, like they did with say the football corruption. did they investigate Saville and bashir.

What on earth were the BBC doing employing a guy to make up bank statements (I think he was the eventual whistle blower, who was then disowned by the BBC)

I am not a hater of the BBC but I do think their integrity on some subjects leaves a lot to be desired (ON OTHERS THEY ARE TREMENDOUS).
at times you can speak a lot and say nothing.
 
soapster said:
they did not put or it appears they did not put the resources into it, like they did with say the football corruption. did they investigate Saville and bashir.

What on earth were the BBC doing employing a guy to make up bank statements (I think he was the eventual whistle blower, who was then disowned by the BBC)

I am not a hater of the BBC but I do think their integrity on some subjects leaves a lot to be desired (ON OTHERS THEY ARE TREMENDOUS).
at times you can speak a lot and say nothing.
Click to expand...
I’ve literally given you a link to a story which sets out (and includes links to) some of high profile BBC coverage of the story - you can even watch the Panorama programme from nine years ago if you wish.

(Panorama, of course, being their flagship investigative current affairs programme which is broadcast on BBC 1 in prime time!)

What else could/should they have done?
 
Last edited:
soapster said:
they did not put or it appears they did not put the resources into it, like they did with say the football corruption. did they investigate Saville and bashir.

What on earth were the BBC doing employing a guy to make up bank statements (I think he was the eventual whistle blower, who was then disowned by the BBC)

I am not a hater of the BBC but I do think their integrity on some subjects leaves a lot to be desired (ON OTHERS THEY ARE TREMENDOUS).
at times you can speak a lot and say nothing.
Click to expand...

The BBC were running it ten years ago, when nobody else was really interested. From 2015.

www.imdb.com

"Panorama" Trouble at the Post Office (TV Episode 2015) ⭐ 7.6 | Documentary, News

30m
www.imdb.com www.imdb.com
 
Why oh why didn’t Private Eye bring this to our attention years ago?

(Well if we’re gonna have a go at the BBC and somehow hold them culpable for the misdeeds of others in positions of authority we might as well have a dig at somebody else who reported something that the majority of us ignored until there was a drama that captured our imaginations and attention a little more tightly)
 
BiG said:
Why oh why didn’t Private Eye bring this to our attention years ago?

(Well if we’re gonna have a go at the BBC and somehow hold them culpable for the misdeeds of others in positions of authority we might as well have a dig at somebody else who reported something that the majority of us ignored until there was a drama that captured our imaginations and attention a little more tightly)
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for others but what I think is that the majority of the public had no real idea what was going on. It was only when it was put into such a plain and easy format to view / listen and with a lot of explanation that the public stood up and listened.

The job of the media is to deliver news in an easy to understand way. If the media were fully aware of the post office scandal and lets face it, people were being sent to jail, being made bankrupt and their lives destroyed and IF THIS WAS KNOWN why was the media not shouting it from the rooftops. When it is a political aspect they are quite willing to hound that tale for weeks or months on end. If it is the english football manager they are willing to do the same and even try sting jobs on them. They will go to the far end of a fart to dig up a story and put a slant on it.
so the media do have a job to hold the misdeeds of people to account. It is called investigative journalism. They have a duty to do that honestly and with integrity.
The PO scandal is now being classed as the greatest injustice in UK history, surely that is incentive enough to investigate
all sorts of people are creeping out of the woodwork, to say actually I was the first in 2010 to ask this or stated that etc. Yet nobody done **** ALL about it.(even those coming out of the woodwork. Ok you said that, but what did you do about it).
 
soapster said:
I cannot speak for others but what I think is that the majority of the public had no real idea what was going on. It was only when it was put into such a plain and easy format to view / listen and with a lot of explanation that the public stood up and listened.

The job of the media is to deliver news in an easy to understand way. If the media were fully aware of the post office scandal and lets face it, people were being sent to jail, being made bankrupt and their lives destroyed and IF THIS WAS KNOWN why was the media not shouting it from the rooftops. When it is a political aspect they are quite willing to hound that tale for weeks or months on end. If it is the english football manager they are willing to do the same and even try sting jobs on them. They will go to the far end of a fart to dig up a story and put a slant on it.
so the media do have a job to hold the misdeeds of people to account. It is called investigative journalism. They have a duty to do that honestly and with integrity.
The PO scandal is now being classed as the greatest injustice in UK history, surely that is incentive enough to investigate
all sorts of people are creeping out of the woodwork, to say actually I was the first in 2010 to ask this or stated that etc. Yet nobody done **** ALL about it.(even those coming out of the woodwork. Ok you said that, but what did you do about it).
Click to expand...

So the fact that you weren’t aware is the fault of the people who reported what they knew (a lot of which was unclear and obscured by people telling lies, which was part of the issue)? And the responsibility for it continuing to be covered up lies with the people who were reporting that it looked like a cover up, because they knew that something was happening, that it warranted further investigation by the people who’s responsibility it was to investigate?

Somehow the people who lied, covered up, who incompetently investigated when their job was to do so and who bore a legal responsibility, who were corrupt, cruel, and criminal are not the people you choose to criticise. Just the people who repeatedly investigated and reported on it. Because they should have made a tv drama about it instead? For you.

So, let’s just extend this; anything in the political, legal, corporate or whatever field that is a bit dodgy, that is known and reported, but maybe not understood or cared deeply enough about by the general public, should he subjected to a tv drama because that’s the way to best communicate stuff.

Toby Jones is gonna be busy.

(Or is it that hammering the BBC is perceived as fair enough under a range of circumstances. Is there and agenda or summat?)
 
soapster said:
I cannot speak for others but what I think is that the majority of the public had no real idea what was going on. It was only when it was put into such a plain and easy format to view / listen and with a lot of explanation that the public stood up and listened.

The job of the media is to deliver news in an easy to understand way. If the media were fully aware of the post office scandal and lets face it, people were being sent to jail, being made bankrupt and their lives destroyed and IF THIS WAS KNOWN why was the media not shouting it from the rooftops. When it is a political aspect they are quite willing to hound that tale for weeks or months on end. If it is the english football manager they are willing to do the same and even try sting jobs on them. They will go to the far end of a fart to dig up a story and put a slant on it.
so the media do have a job to hold the misdeeds of people to account. It is called investigative journalism. They have a duty to do that honestly and with integrity.
The PO scandal is now being classed as the greatest injustice in UK history, surely that is incentive enough to investigate
all sorts of people are creeping out of the woodwork, to say actually I was the first in 2010 to ask this or stated that etc. Yet nobody done **** ALL about it.(even those coming out of the woodwork. Ok you said that, but what did you do about it).
Click to expand...

The convictions were starting to be overturned in 2019 and 2020, long before ITV made a drama about it. This was as a result of the BBC and Private Eye investigations. It's been quite newsworthy since then and it seems you want to blame them for Joe Public's ignorance. Even this thread has been going since 2021!

I think you're giving ITV a lot of undeserved credit tbh.
 

Back
Top