THE Post Office’s legal team passed subpostmaster cases on to prosecutors in Scotland without being qualified in Scots law, the Horizon IT inquiry has heard.
Robert Daily told the probe he and other Post Office investigators were “not adequately supported” before a solicitor firm was brought in to advise in 2013.
Daily also said Horizon data alone was not sufficient to proceed with a prosecution of a subpostmaster in Scotland, but it was sufficient in England and Wales.
The former Post Office investigator was involved in the criminal investigation of two wrongly convicted subpostmasters who died before their convictions were overturned.
READ MORE: Jason Leitch responds to 'pre-bed ritual' WhatsApp row
Newcastle subpostmaster Peter Holmes was handed a community order and a curfew and William Quarm, who had a branch in North Uist in Scotland, was sentenced to 150 hours of unpaid work following their convictions.
Giving evidence at the inquiry on Tuesday, Daily said the prosecution of subpostmasters in Scotland required two corroborating pieces of evidence.
He said: “If you could only draw evidence from, for instance, Horizon data, and there was no supporting evidence then you couldn’t proceed with a case.”
Counsel to the inquiry Emma Price then asked: “Whereas in England and Wales, Horizon data alone would be sufficient, would it?”
Daily (below) replied: “I believe so.”
In his witness statement, Daily said he asked for support from Scottish solicitors after becoming “concerned” that he was not receiving the same support that he was in England.
The statement read: “It was recognised within (Post Office) legal services and the security team that they weren’t knowledgeable about Scots Law.
“I was concerned that I wasn’t receiving the same legal support and I recall that I asked if Scottish solicitors could be sought to assist and advise on whether there was sufficient evidence to submit a file to COPFS (Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service).”
Price asked: “Do you mean that there were no Scottish qualified lawyers within the criminal team?”
Daily replied: “Correct.”
Price continued: “Is it right therefore that prior to managing to gain approval for BTO Solicitors to advise on Scottish cases in… 2013… the criminal law team was providing a decision on whether a case should be passed to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service without being qualified in Scottish law?”
Daily said: “I believe so, yes.”
The counsel to the inquiry then asked: “Did that concern you at the time?”
Daily responded: “It did concern me more when I was on my own in Scotland from about 2000 into 2008, 2009 possibly.
READ MORE: Key questions remain over what Scottish prosecutors knew about Horizon
“I was the only investigator and I just felt as if, at times, I would pass a case down to the criminal law team and there wasn’t a full understanding of Scots law.
“I did approach the subject prior to 2013 to question if we could get anyone, but that just wasn’t forthcoming at that time – I can’t recall the dates when I did that.”
Price went on: “Can you recall how long before 2013 you raised that?”
The Post Office witness said: “Possibly a couple of years, I just can’t be certain.”
Price also asked: “Do you consider that Post Office investigators in Scotland were not adequately supported prior to the appointment of BTO Solicitors to advise in 2013?”
Daily replied: “Yes.”
More than 700 Post Office branch managers were convicted after Fujitsu’s faulty accounting software Horizon made it look like money was missing from their shops.
The saga prompted outcry from across the country after it was dramatised in a series for ITV this month.
Hundreds of subpostmasters are awaiting compensation despite the Government announcing that those who have had convictions quashed are eligible for £600,000 compensation.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel