Official Old Man
Uckfield Seagull
Huge two days coming up. Angela van den Bogerd - former People Services Director at Post Office Ltd and Programme Director for the Branch Support Programme.
Last edited:
As you say, HUGE day today.Huge two days coming up. Angela van den Bogerd - former People Services Director at Post Office Ltd and Programme Director for the Branch Support Programme.
...but she isn't making a very good job of it.As you say, HUGE day today.
She has a lot of questions to answer.....
This is brutal.Huge two days coming up. Angela van den Bogerd - former People Services Director at Post Office Ltd and Programme Director for the Branch Support Programme.
Take away her pension and lock her up....but she isn't making a very good job of it.
She didn't know and she wasn't told and it wasn't her fault and anyway she is "truly sorry".
So that's ok then.
...but she isn't making a very good job of it.
She didn't know and she wasn't told and it wasn't her fault and anyway she is "truly sorry".
So that's ok then.
Isn't that the same for all of them ? Every single one of the witnesses linked to the PO has started (and I paraphrase) 'I'm so sorry for the people that have been convicted unjustly.". Not a single one has held their hands up and said "Yes, I PERSONALLY got it wrong and should PERSONALLY be held accountable.". Cowards each and every one....but she isn't making a very good job of it.
She didn't know and she wasn't told and it wasn't her fault and anyway she is "truly sorry".
So that's ok then.
No.Has anybody yet taken the blame
Yessaying it was not there responsibility and blaming someone else.
If the TV drama was at all accurate, she was at the absolute core of the prosecutions, the lies, the obfuscation and the cover-up. Fully deserving of some time in the nick.Huge two days coming up. Angela van den Bogerd - former People Services Director at Post Office Ltd and Programme Director for the Branch Support Programme. From what I understand, she was one of those who covered up the truth, allegedly.
Do you mean Fujitsu? Senior Fujitsu figures have appeared at the enquiry but I'm not aware of any of them explaining who was responsible for the secret room full of people remotely accessing branch accounts to try and hide system errors.Have not followed this in detail. Has anybody yet taken the blame or are they all saying it was not there responsibility and blaming someone else.
Has anybody from Horizon been interviewed yet
Sounds very likely from her performance today. She took decisions that could only have been taken on the basis of ignoring information she was given. The actions she took were designed to do one think only - scapegoat the postmasters and cover up what had actually happened. And the only way she could have been triggered into making the decisions she took was if she had been shown the relevnt information and decided on a malignant course of action. Her defense is that in retrospect the decisions she took were not correct but (get this) she has no recollection of seeing the information that triggered her actions.If the TV drama was at all accurate, she was at the absolute core of the prosecutions, the lies, the obfuscation and the cover-up. Fully deserving of some time in the nick.
Good analogyHer defense is that in retrospect the decisions she took were not correct but (get this) she has no recollection of seeing the information that triggered her actions.
It's as brazen as saying "I should not have stolen that woman's purse, but I have no recollection of it being in her handbag or how it came into my possession. Had I realized at the time that neither the purse nor the handbag were mine I would have taken a different course of action"
and a video camera, hopefully.Sounds very likely from her performance today. She took decisions that could only have been taken on the basis of ignoring information she was given. The actions she took were designed to do one think only - scapegoat the postmasters and cover up what had actually happened. And the only way she could have been triggered into making the decisions she took was if she had been shown the relevnt information and decided on a malignant course of action. Her defense is that in retrospect the decisions she took were not correct but (get this) she has no recollection of seeing the information that triggered her actions.
It's as brazen as saying "I should not have stolen that woman's purse, but I have no recollection of it being in her handbag or how it came into my possession. Had I realized at the time that neither the purse nor the handbag were mine I would have taken a different course of action"
I am not legally trained. However I am hoping and expecting that those who are will be able to unpack all this lying bollocks and put her in jail for perjury. In a cell with a massive lusty lesbian with sharp and dirty fingernails, hopefully.
Sounds very likely from her performance today. She took decisions that could only have been taken on the basis of ignoring information she was given. The actions she took were designed to do one think only - scapegoat the postmasters and cover up what had actually happened. And the only way she could have been triggered into making the decisions she took was if she had been shown the relevnt information and decided on a malignant course of action. Her defense is that in retrospect the decisions she took were not correct but (get this) she has no recollection of seeing the information that triggered her actions.
It's as brazen as saying "I should not have stolen that woman's purse, but I have no recollection of it being in her handbag or how it came into my possession. Had I realized at the time that neither the purse nor the handbag were mine I would have taken a different course of action"
I am not legally trained. However I am hoping and expecting that those who are will be able to unpack all this lying bollocks and put her in jail for perjury. In a cell with a massive lusty lesbian with sharp and dirty fingernails, hopefully.