A lawyer for the Post Office at the height of the Horizon IT scandal has told the public inquiry he feels “no pride” to be employed by the company.
Rodric Williams, a civil law specialist who joined the organisation in 2012, told the hearing he was “truly sorry” for being associated with the “greatest miscarriage of justice we’ve seen”.
A first day of evidence for the New Zealand national, now among three legal leads at the Post Office, saw Mr Williams admit a “bunker mentality” among staff in relation to the media’s coverage of the faulty Horizon IT system.
Money latest: Bank criticised for decision to limit deposits
In his second day, Mr Williams was pressed on what he knew about the Post Office’s ex-head of security John Scott allegedly shredding minutes from a meeting concerning Horizon bugs.
The inquiry heard the Post Office feared sub-postmasters who had been convicted of offences jumping on a “bandwagon” and challenging their convictions if damaging documents surfaced as part of the mediation process.
The word came as part of a 2013 meeting between the Post Office’s in-house and external lawyers, which read: “It was widely agreed that there was likely to be a ‘bandwagon’ approach in relation to defendants challenging their previous convictions.”
Review ordered into another Post Office IT system amid claims of more wrongful convictions
Post Office boss Nick Read ‘exonerated’ after investigation into bullying allegations
Horizon scandal victim demands jail for those who denied her justice
Mr Williams was also accused of knowing “perfectly well” that the Post Office had “relied on a liar and a perjurer to convict innocent people” following expert evidence provided by leading Horizon engineer Gareth Jenkins in the trial of sub-postmistress Seema Misra.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
She was suspended from her branch in 2008 and handed a 15-month prison sentence, while eight weeks pregnant, in November 2010 after being accused of stealing £74,000.
The inquiry heard how the Post Office received advice from external barrister Simon Clarke in 2013 suggesting an expert witness, Mr Jenkins, and the Post Office had “breached their duties” to the court, and subsequent advice suggested meeting minutes talking about Horizon bugs had been shredded.
Questioned on his views on the wrongful conviction of Mrs Misra, Mr Williams told the inquiry: “I take no pride, comfort or confidence in having worked for an employer that has engaged in conducting the greatest miscarriage of justice that we’ve seen, or however it has been described.
“I don’t know where to go with this – it’s awful that people with convictions had them, and had them for the length of time that they did.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
“And for my part in that, I’m truly sorry that I’ve been associated with this. I’m truly sorry for that.”
Chairman Sir Wyn Williams interjected: “I think the point, Mr Williams, is at a moment in time, namely 2014, when on any sensible reading of Mr Clarke’s advice from July 2013, there was a problem about Mr Jenkins’s evidence, the Post Office and you personally appeared to still be asserting to the world that the conviction was safe, amongst other things, because expert evidence had been called and the jury, by inference, must have accepted it.
“Those two things don’t sit very easily together, do they?”
Mr Williams replied: “No, they don’t, sir. No, they don’t.”
Addressing the destruction of meeting minutes in advice given to the organisation, Mr Clarke had written: “An instruction was then given that those emails and minutes should be, and have been, destroyed: the word ‘shredded’ was conveyed to me.”
Counsel to the inquiry Jason Beer KC asked: “Presumably you were quite shocked to read it?”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The Post Office lawyer replied: “Yes.”
Mr Beer later asked: “What steps did you take to ensure that it was investigated in any way whatsoever?”
After the witness said he did not recall, the counsel to the inquiry continued: “Is the answer none?”
Mr Williams replied: “I can’t remember what happened at that time 11 years ago – so what I felt needed to be done or should be done I can’t recall now.”
Be the first to get Breaking News
Install the Sky News app for free
Read more
Review ordered into another Post Office IT system
Horizon victim demands jail for those who denied her justice
Following an interjection by chairman Sir Wyn Williams urging him to answer the question, Mr Beer continued: “Should the serious or very serious matters raised in Mr Clarke’s advice have been investigated by the Post Office?”
The witness said: “Yes.”
Asked if consideration was given to reporting the matter to the police, Mr Williams said: “I don’t believe so, no.”
Mr Beer continued: “Would you have been concerned if you found out that it was said to be the head of security that had given an instruction to shred documents?”
Mr Williams replied: “Yes.”
