Black Hole
May contain traces of nut
We're only getting one side of this story. Whilst I do not in any way seek to minimise the devastating impact of the attitude the Post Office took to accounting errors which should have been a smoking gun, I have questions:
Surely there are some cases of genuine fraud/theft within post office branches, pre-Horizon, which Horizon may have been intended to detect more easily. Were the Post Office therefore reasonable in thinking it was doing its job? Were Fujitsu incentivised to report deficits?
Lots of money crosses the counter at post offices, therefore there have to be very strong disincentives against fraud/theft, and examples made of anyone found to have committed fraud/theft. Where are the examples of actual fraud/theft now having been committed under the cover of a supposed Horizon error? Should all postmasters be automatically exonerated?
Where are the examples of when Horizon said there was a surplus of cash rather than a deficit? Did postmasters simply pocket that "surplus"? Or was the bug such that it could only ever show a deficit?
Surely there are some cases of genuine fraud/theft within post office branches, pre-Horizon, which Horizon may have been intended to detect more easily. Were the Post Office therefore reasonable in thinking it was doing its job? Were Fujitsu incentivised to report deficits?
Lots of money crosses the counter at post offices, therefore there have to be very strong disincentives against fraud/theft, and examples made of anyone found to have committed fraud/theft. Where are the examples of actual fraud/theft now having been committed under the cover of a supposed Horizon error? Should all postmasters be automatically exonerated?
Where are the examples of when Horizon said there was a surplus of cash rather than a deficit? Did postmasters simply pocket that "surplus"? Or was the bug such that it could only ever show a deficit?