Stay updated with breaking news from Neald case. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Non credit of people s money. you were aware that an important part of their case in the criminal proceedings was that the underlying discrepancy was caused by bugs, errors or defects in horizon. rays t errors or defects in horizon. as i said, errors or defects in horizon. as i said. not errors or defects in horizon. as i said. riot in errors or defects in horizon. as i said, not in this errors or defects in horizon. as i said, not in this case. errors or defects in horizon. i said, not in this case. this case must earlier that they did not credit somebody s deposit. you as an individual, me as a business or somebody else is a treasure i have made a complaint saying, i am paying money to a post office and it is not in my account. that is what was being investigated on this occasion. can we look at 440036, plays? irate can we look at 440036, plays? we have can we look at 440036, plays? - have seen defence statements in other cases, and this is the defence statement in the sta ....
That offence. bud issue, on why they had committed that offence- that offence. and for you that didn t matter? that offence. and for you that didn t matter? i m that offence. and for you that didn t matter? i m there - that offence. and for you that didn t matter? i m there to i that offence. and for you that i didn t matter? i m there to gather the evidence didn t matter? i m there to gather the evidence and didn t matter? i m there to gather the evidence and pass didn t matter? i m there to gather the evidence and pass it didn t matter? i m there to gather the evidence and pass it to - didn t matter? i m there to gather the evidence and pass it to the i the evidence and pass it to the solicitors. they had still committed the offence. miss sefton gave me a note explaining fully what they had done, why they had done it. did you consider it necessary done, why they had done it. did you consider it necessary to done, why they had done it. did you consider it necessary to ....
Reasons for the discrepancy were simply relevant? not at all. they sa if simply relevant? not at all. they say if there simply relevant? not at all. they say if there is simply relevant? not at all. they say if there is losses, simply relevant? not at all. they say if there is losses, but - simply relevant? not at all. they say if there is losses, but it s i say if there is losses, but it s very difficult to try and find the losses if they make the accounts and paperwork that correct, as shown by the audits on the day, that was £550 surplus. the audits on the day, that was £550 surlus. ., ., , , . , ., ., surplus. one of the aspects, one of the thin . s surplus. one of the aspects, one of the things people surplus. one of the aspects, one of the things people think surplus. one of the aspects, one of the things people think about i surplus. one of the aspects, one of the things people think about when j the things people think about when they are deciding whether to charge s ....
Lines that had been raised by the defence in that case? rays t lines that had been raised by the defence in that case? defence in that case? as i said, that s mitigation. defence in that case? as i said, that s mitigation. they - defence in that case? as i said, that s mitigation. they have i defence in that case? as i said, | that s mitigation. they have said they committed that offence because they committed that offence because they were having losses, but they never said, they were having losses, but they neversaid, i had a they were having losses, but they never said, i had a loss of this day and this, because they are making the paperwork correct. if and this, because they are making the paperwork correct. and this, because they are making the paperwork correct. if they were makinr the paperwork correct. if they were making the the paperwork correct. if they were making the paper the paperwork correct. if they were making the paper were the paperwork correct. if they wer ....
Left, they were allowed to collect any personal items from behind the counter. again, they apologised and said sorry for all they had done and that they felt terrible. was that your recollection as well, that they were apologising and felt terrible? yes, miss sefton and miss neald apologised all the way through. it was mr ryan who went with miss neald to recover the deposit slips, and they brought them back. he counted them up and there was 40 that was, give or take a bit, £35,000. was this again a case where you were the lead investigator? yes. can we look at paul 008734, please? the second e mail on the pages from your self to andrew bolts. he was a lawyer at cartright king. you say as follows. on another point ....