2012 when royal mail group became deformed and royal mail letters became independent as a private company that is when mr singh was attached to the post office. before that, in london in the criminal law decision. to that, in london in the criminal law decision. ., , decision. to somebody in the criminal law _ decision. to somebody in the criminal law division - decision. to somebody in the criminal law division would i decision. to somebody in the i criminal law division would have been aware of this and your expectation was that they would be responsible for disclosing that in another case?— responsible for disclosing that in another case? that is correct, yes. and that was _ another case? that is correct, yes. and that was not _ another case? that is correct, yes. and that was not something i another case? that is correct, yes. and that was not something that i another case? that is correct, yes. i and that was not something that you need to apply your own mind to? is i need to apply your own mind to? as i said, all need to apply your own mind to? as i said. all the — need to apply your own mind to? s i said, all the information i would have had would have been sent to our criminal law team and they may get to disclosure to the defence. did you expect the criminal law team themselves to take information and disclose it in another one of their cases? ~ . . : disclose it in another one of their cases? ~ , , . ., disclose it in another one of their cases? ,, . ., cases? with respect to something like this, i would _ cases? with respect to something like this, i would have _ cases? with respect to something like this, i would have expected i like this, i would have expected them as lawyers to let other people
singh, the post office lawyer responsible for criminal matters. he was the post office law responsible for criminal matters, wasn't he? do you call someone called hugh lymington?— you call someone called hugh l lymington?_ a you call someone called hugh - lymington?_ a form lymington? don't recall him. a form of words has — lymington? don't recall him. a form of words has been _ lymington? don't recall him. a form of words has been sent _ lymington? don't recall him. a form of words has been sent and - lymington? don't recall him. a form of words has been sent and if- lymington? don't recall him. a form of words has been sent and if we - of words has been sent and if we scroll up we see an e—mail from someone called simon baker, about that, thank you, do you recall him? i do not know. he says, please can help us crop the message around the second review, we need to combat the assertion that the review is acknowledgement that there is a problem with horizon. mr singh has drafted some words below, do they strike the right tone? scrolling up, we have an e—mailfrom ronan kelleher, the head of pr and media
that is why i say i didn't know about bugs, errors or defects. nobody said that there was a particular bug or error or defect. that's what i am saying. no one has ever come or cascaded it down to see what particular book, error or defect was in the system. this kind of information _ defect was in the system. this kind of information is _ defect was in the system. this kind of information is presumably - defect was in the system. this kindj of information is presumably pretty pertinent to the case of ms mcdonald that you are charged with. prosecution, the criminal law team it was passed to them. you prosecution, the criminal law team it was passed to them.— it was passed to them. you say it would be. _ it was passed to them. you say it would be. you — it was passed to them. you say it would be, you didn't _ it was passed to them. you say it would be, you didn't say - it was passed to them. you say it would be, you didn't say it - it was passed to them. you say it would be, you didn't say it was. i it was passed to them. you say it| would be, you didn't say it was. it was. they would have had it because of the nature of their someone sent it to us for information and it would have been passed to the criminal law team at the time. for the case. ~ , ., criminal law team at the time. for the case. ~ . ., criminal law team at the time. for the case. ~ i. . ., ., the case. when you say criminal law team do you — the case. when you say criminal law team do you mean _ the case. when you say criminal law team do you mean the _ the case. when you say criminal law team do you mean the post - the case. when you say criminal law team do you mean the post office? | team do you mean the post office? the post office lawyers. they told me that mr singh came on board in
i had no dealing with that case, that was done with the other officer, and this is what was done with our solicitors.— officer, and this is what was done with our solicitors. lawyers obtain instructions _ with our solicitors. lawyers obtain instructions from _ with our solicitors. lawyers obtain instructions from their _ with our solicitors. lawyers obtain instructions from their clients - with our solicitors. lawyers obtain instructions from their clients on i instructions from their clients on the whole. was the post office providing instructions to the lawyers in this respect given a where was this coming from? has lawyers in this respect given a where was this coming from? ben where was this coming from? as i have explained, _ where was this coming from? isi have explained, the investigation would put all the papers together and send it off to the lawyers. lawyers made the bulk of every decision. that would sort of come back to us. we wouldn't say, oh, yeah, we will have to claim as long as they see this or say that. that would be decided at a higher level than me, and its comes from, whether it is mr singh in charge of any of the other lawyers. can we look at the next, please?
defended, i think the last sentence was that by mr singh but the one before it was added in this chain of e—mails. were you aware that the contents of your witness statement that we've seen reflected was drafted by a man of the people the head of pr at the post office? blot head of pr at the post office? not at all, all head of pr at the post office? not at all. all i — head of pr at the post office? not at all, all i saw _ head of pr at the post office? not at all, all i saw was the final version _ at all, all i saw was the final version from cartwright king. do you think it was — version from cartwright king. do you think it was appropriate _ version from cartwright king. do you think it was appropriate for - version from cartwright king. do you think it was appropriate for your - think it was appropriate for your witness statement to have been drafted in the way it was? not really, no. drafted in the way it was? not really. no-_ drafted in the way it was? not reall , no. , ., . , h really, no. yes it not really. it's not my words. _ really, no. yes it not really. it's not my words, a _ really, no. yes it not really. it's not my words, a statement - really, no. yes it not really. it's not my words, a statement is i not my words, a statement is normally— not my words, a statement is normally what you say to me and i would _ normally what you say to me and i would write — normally what you say to me and i would write that down rather than, this appears to be a business statement drafted by pr and approved by the _ statement drafted by pr and approved by the lawyers. did statement drafted by pr and approved by the lawyers-— by the lawyers. did you have any conversations _ by the lawyers. did you have any conversations with _ by the lawyers. did you have any conversations with the _ by the lawyers. did you have any conversations with the lawyer . by the lawyers. did you have any. conversations with the lawyer said cartwright king or mr singh about the contents of the witness statement you are signing? if i did, i cannot remember— statement you are signing? if i did, i cannot remember what _ statement you are signing? if i did,
at the post office at the time. do you remember when lyons whisk up again? the company secretary. susan crichton? i remember _ again? the company secretary. susan crichton? i remember susan. - again? the company secretary. susan crichton? i remember susan. the - crichton? i remember susan. the general— crichton? i remember susan. the general counsel. mr crichton? i remember susan. the general counsel.— crichton? i remember susan. the general counsel. mr clement and i believe is a — general counsel. mr clement and i believe is a lawyer, _ general counsel. mr clement and i believe is a lawyer, but _ general counsel. mr clement and i believe is a lawyer, but you - general counsel. mr clement and i believe is a lawyer, but you do - general counsel. mr clement and i believe is a lawyer, but you do notj believe is a lawyer, but you do not recall him? and ronan kelleher says as follows, as this message will most probably find its way into the media we need to get the message across from the start that we continue to have full confidence in the robustness of the horizon system and then reinforce it so i suggest the following tweaking the proposed wording from mr singh. i will go through this form of words and highlight the additional words that were added by the head of pr at the post office. it says after a number
didn't think, i've submitted some statements in criminal proceedings that may have cost some day to go to prison? i signed off horizon? figs that may have cost some day to go to prison? i signed off horizon? $5 i prison? i signed off horizon? as i said, i prison? i signed off horizon? as i said. i went _ prison? i signed off horizon? as i said, i went through as many documents, there was an awful lot of documents _ documents, there was an awful lot of documents to try and put together with the _ documents to try and put together with the statement. that documents to try and put together with the statement.— documents to try and put together with the statement. that can come down. with the statement. that can come down- you — with the statement. that can come down. you said _ with the statement. that can come down. you said that _ with the statement. that can come down. you said that statement - with the statement. that can come i down. you said that statement came from kodric king who asked you to sign it. do you know how that statement came to be drafted? it was drafted by cartwright _ statement came to be drafted? it was drafted by cartwright king _ statement came to be drafted? it was drafted by cartwright king and the post office. and the post office? security— post office. and the post office? security operates, i'm not sure. thank you. let's turn to the final page of this document. we have a proposed form of words from mr
Lord's Automative's CEO, Mr. Veer Singh, Honoured with Outstanding Achievement Award for Business Excellence Check our partners with a comprehensive guide on Fake Rolex: Best Websites To Buy Replica Rolex Watches.
When Pāpāmoa man Lovedeep Singh received a phone call in the middle of the night from his pregnant wife saying that her water had broken, he was in Auckland...