Submit Workplace investigator deleted point out of Horizon failure, inquiry hears

A former Submit Workplace investigator deleted a part of a draft witness assertion that referred to the Horizon IT system’s failures, earlier than the prison prosecution of a publish workplace operative, a public inquiry has heard.

Graham Ward, a former Post Office monetary investigator, was questioned earlier than a public inquiry analyzing what MPs have described as one of many largest ever miscarriages of justice.

The state-owned physique wrongly prosecuted a whole lot of publish workplace operatives, alleging monetary shortfalls at their branches. It has since emerged that the Submit Workplace’s Horizon IT system was not dependable because it suffered from bugs, errors and defects.

Ward was requested about modifications he made in 2006 to a draft witness assertion from Gareth Jenkins, an IT engineer at Fujitsu, the corporate that developed the Horizon IT system.

The Submit Workplace had wished to make use of Jenkins’ assertion within the prison prosecution of Noel Thomas, a publish workplace operative from Anglesey, north Wales, who is among the highest-profile victims of the scandal.

Thomas was prosecuted and jailed for 9 months for false accounting in 2006 however had his conviction quashed in 2021.

The inquiry was proven a replica of the draft witness assertion made by Jenkins to which Ward made modifications highlighted in purple.

Ward despatched an electronic mail to colleagues in March 2006 through which he stated the assertion wanted “extra work” and he hooked up a revised draft through which he had made modifications and brought out some “probably very damaging” phrases.

The inquiry was advised that, within the revised draft, Ward had deleted Jenkins’ evaluation: “There was some form of system failure. Such failures are regular occurrences.”

Ward had additionally added a word to the doc that stated “it is a actually poor selection of phrases [which seems to accept that] failures within the system are regular and due to this fact could properly help the postmasters’ declare that the system is responsible for the losses!!!!”

Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry, put to him that he had intentionally made the modifications as he knew it was proof that might help Thomas’s defence that the Horizon IT system was responsible for the losses.

“Do you settle for by your conduct you eliminated materials data from Mr Jenkins’ witness assertion at a time a prosecution was afoot in opposition to Mr Thomas?” Beer requested him.

Ward replied: “No I don’t. I feel the choice to take away that needed to have been Mr Jenkins’ choice. I made a remark and I made a evaluate and I settle for that I shouldn’t have been doing that however the last choice to make that assertion – what went in there – that was for Mr Jenkins to resolve.”

Beer continued: “Can I recommend this was a fairly sloppy try at protecting up in prison proceedings proof of glitches in Horizon?”

Ward replied: “No completely not. I’m not attempting to cowl up something in any respect. I’m simply attempting to get a press release right,” he replied.

Ward added: “Again in 2006 Horizon [IT system] integrity wasn’t a difficulty for us in any respect … I used to be attempting to get a press release right … That was my intention. I’m actually sorry for the way it comes throughout, I actually am however I used to be attempting to do my job.”

Finally, the assertion was not heard in courtroom as Thomas pleaded responsible to false accounting on the idea that he accepted that Horizon was working completely, and there was not a jury trial.

The inquiry continues.