is a section on business and procedural weaknesses. and you say there, due to the circumstances given in explanation of the shortage, at this moment in time i can see no failures in security supervision, procedures or product integrity that should be brought to the attention of the contract manager. is it possible to bring on screen side by side your witness statement that we will take you to. page 1a of that statement please. thank you. on the left—hand side, if we go page m. you recall that that is the page that addresses the general questions that were put to you in your request for evidence to the inquiry. and you say there, for

example, i don't know what technical issues were investigated by the post office. i can't recall if any or what information i received concerning bugs, errors or defects in the horizon system. we had this morning that you are aware of those magazine articles in 2010 and there was an e—mail correspondence the same year where there was discussion about a number of challenges to horizon integrity. what investigation had you carried out in relation to product integrity? itrailien relation to product integrity? when the roduct relation to product integrity? when the product came _ relation to product integrity? when the product came around, - relation to product integrity? tween the product came around, you relation to product integrity? m�*iez�*i the product came around, you can relation to product integrity? “team the product came around, you can see in this particular case, it was the case of sheets and stamps had been reversed out of the system. that ou've reversed out of the system. that you've said _ reversed out of the system. that you've said here _ reversed out of the system. that you've said here on _ reversed out of the system. that you've said here on your- reversed out of the system. that you've said here on your report that there is... you can't see any failures in product integrity. what

investigation said you carried out into product integrity to satisfy yourself? into product integrity to satisfy ourself? , ., . , ., ., yourself? the products that would show u- yourself? the products that would show up any _ yourself? the products that would show un any thing _ yourself? the products that would show up any thing wrong - yourself? the products that would show up any thing wrong with - yourself? the products that would show up any thing wrong with it. l show up any thing wrong with it. that's all i could say that i would look at each one at the time. i didn't go in at look at each individual product. that is another team within the post office. but you were aware at _ team within the post office. but you were aware at this _ team within the post office. but you were aware at this particular- team within the post office. but you were aware at this particular time i were aware at this particular time of significant allegations against the integrity of the horizon system, won't you? the integrity of the horizon system, won't ou? ~ , . ., won't you? with this in particular inuui won't you? with this in particular inquiry didn't _ won't you? with this in particular inquiry didn't seem _ won't you? with this in particular inquiry didn't seem to _ won't you? with this in particular inquiry didn't seem to be - won't you? with this in particular| inquiry didn't seem to be anything to do with horizon because it was reversing stamps. but to do with horizon because it was reversing stamps.— reversing stamps. but at this particular— reversing stamps. but at this particular time _ reversing stamps. but at this particular time do _ reversing stamps. but at this particular time do you - reversing stamps. but at this particular time do you accepti reversing stamps. but at this - particular time do you accept that you had significant knowledge of allegations about the integrity of the horizon system? it allegations about the integrity of the horizon system?— the horizon system? it was acknowledged _ the horizon system? it was acknowledged that - the horizon system? it was acknowledged that the - the horizon system? it was| acknowledged that the time the horizon system? it was - acknowledged that the time that people were stating there were issues with horizon. find people were stating there were issues with horizon.— people were stating there were issues with horizon. and it was your knowled . e issues with horizon. and it was your knowledge of— issues with horizon. and it was your knowledge of that _ issues with horizon. and it was your knowledge of that time _ issues with horizon. and it was your knowledge of that time people - knowledge of that time people had told so i probably _ knowledge of that time people had told so i probably would _

knowledge of that time people had told so i probably would have - knowledge of that time people had i told so i probably would have known. lets look at this. this is another case around a similar time, 2nd of march 2011. this is the case of damien owen. was this a case you will also the investigating officer? you are involved in that case? hat you are involved in that case? not at all. you are involved in that case? not at all- you — you are involved in that case? not at all. you didn't _ you are involved in that case? not at all. you didn't see _ you are involved in that case? not at all. you didn't see this - at all. you didn't see this dispensed _ at all. you didn't see this dispensed statement - at all. you didn't see this dispensed statement if . at all. you didn't see this | dispensed statement if we at all. you didn't see this - dispensed statement if we scroll down? 140 dispensed statement if we scroll down? ., ~ ., ., ., ., down? no knowledge of that. not damien owen. _ down? no knowledge of that. not damien owen. ok. _ down? no knowledge of that. not damien owen. ok. let's- down? no knowledge of that. not damien owen. ok. let's return i down? no knowledge of that. not damien owen. ok. let's return to kha�* am damien owen. ok. let's return to khayyam ishaq's _ damien owen. ok. let's return to khayyam ishaq's case, _ damien owen. ok. let's return to khayyam ishaq's case, then. - damien owen. ok. let's return to khayyam ishaq's case, then. we i damien owen. ok. let's return to - khayyam ishaq's case, then. we have the defence statement, we've just seen the defence statement of mr owen's case. let's look at the statement in khayyam ishaq's case. this is august 2012. can we please turn over the page? this is a document that you would have seen at

the time, isn't it?— document that you would have seen at the time, isn't it? yes. thank you. if we the time, isn't it? yes. thank you. if we scroll— the time, isn't it? yes. thank you. if we scroll down _ the time, isn't it? yes. thank you. if we scroll down this _ the time, isn't it? yes. thank you. if we scroll down this is _ the time, isn't it? jazz thank you. if we scroll down this is a document produced to set out the nature of the defendant's case. if we look at paragraph seven, that is over the page please. he states as follows, the nature of the defendant in relation to this allegation is that there was no appropriation of money is, the post office horizon's software had in the past of numerous occasions malfunction causing difficulties in reconciling sales, receipts stock figures. the defendant has reported this to the post office helpline seeking assistance but little or no successful assistance would have afforded to him despite requests. the defendant had of necessity to make certain adjustments of the system so as to ensure that the sales receipt and stock figures reconciled. if we carry on please

over the page, we have a number of disclosure requests that were made ijy disclosure requests that were made by the defence in khayyam ishaq's case. if we can scroll down a little more. we can see here the request of materials and all knowledge of the prosecution in existence whether in the hands of the prosecution of third parties that reasonably supports or is reasonably capable of supporting the contention that the post office horizon's hardware system has proved to be unreliable or inaccurate or the susceptible to man function or otherwise to the production of erroneous results. the results were the provision of final or internal and external investigation and require of reviews whether instigated by the post or another body

functioning of the post office horizon. if we turn the page. and guidance an e—mailfrom an e—mail from september 2012. it has come from cartwright king. an e-mail from september 2012. it| has come from cartwright king. this is an e-mail — has come from cartwright king. this is an e-mail sent, _ has come from cartwright king. this is an e—mail sent, you are included on the distribution list. who was sarah porter, do you recall? your mac i'm not sure if that was

somebody who works in contracting. i don't recall that name. you say... good morning sarah, please find attached copies of letters. that is attached copies of letters. that is a document that we have been looking at. . ., . ., , a document that we have been looking at. . ., . ., ., ., at. the defence are clearly aware of the current — at. the defence are clearly aware of the current horizon _ at. the defence are clearly aware of the current horizon issues - at. the defence are clearly aware of the current horizon issues and - at. the defence are clearly aware of the current horizon issues and are l the current horizon issues and are on a fishing expedition. this in my view is a red herring. stamp sales which had been reversed, thereby increasing the stock to achieve a balance were clearly not there at the time of the audit. so he has described it as a fishing expedition, what is your understanding of a forcing expedition?— understanding of a forcing exedition? ., , ., . ,, expedition? can i 'ust go back... i think sarah _ expedition? can ijust go back... i think sarah porter— expedition? can ijust go back... i think sarah porter may _ expedition? can ijust go back... i think sarah porter may well - expedition? can ijust go back... i think sarah porter may well be . expedition? can ijust go back... i | think sarah porter may well be the agent's... she worked with contracting or other agencies from the yorkshire area. it is a possibility that is where be.

fishing expedition isjust throwing anything around to see what comes out from it. we have seen a number of request for disclosure, did you seek and obtain the information that was sought. either by sarah porter or from either by sarah porter orfrom our prosecution agency can't write king didn't do it if they had asked me for anything i would have... you would have _ for anything i would have... you would have done _ for anything i would have... you would have done whatever they requested? we spoke earlier about the reliance of legal teams to cross disclose from other cases. here we have cartwright king, an external firm perhaps the lawyers for the case and you also have sarah porter who is potentially yet another external firm.— external firm. cartwright king became the —

external firm. cartwright king became the post _ external firm. cartwright king became the post office - external firm. cartwright king i became the post office lawyers. as the investigation officer, what other information they would have asked and i would have provided all the information back to them that they would have given back to the defence. in they would have given back to the defence. . they would have given back to the defence. , ., , ., they would have given back to the defence. , ., i. ., ,, , ., defence. in terms of your assumption that somebody _ defence. in terms of your assumption that somebody would _ defence. in terms of your assumption that somebody would have _ defence. in terms of your assumption that somebody would have disclosing| that somebody would have disclosing additional documents that weren't on your schedules, would we assume now in relation to cartwright king that they are responsible for this material. . they are responsible for this material-— they are responsible for this material. ., ., they are responsible for this material. . ., ., material. cartwright king would have taken over as — material. cartwright king would have taken over as the _ material. cartwright king would have taken over as the people _ material. cartwright king would have taken over as the people that - material. cartwright king would have taken over as the people that would | taken over as the people that would deal with the defence solicitors. what about the defence report in the seema misra complaint even the 2010 magazine articles that they were —— make was sent. this magazine articles that they were -- make was sent.— make was sent. as i explained earlier, make was sent. as i explained earlier. i _ make was sent. as i explained earlier, i would _ make was sent. as i explained earlier, i would have - make was sent. as i explained earlier, i would have disclosed everything that i had pertaining to whatever case whether it had been mr

ishaq's because i wouldn't have dealt directly with any defence solicitors. ~ ., ., , ., ~' dealt directly with any defence solicitors. ~ ., ., ~ solicitors. who do you think was responsible _ solicitors. who do you think was responsible for _ solicitors. who do you think was responsible for disclosure? i solicitors. who do you think was responsible for disclosure? our| responsible for disclosure? our la ers responsible for disclosure? our lawyers in _ responsible for disclosure? oi“ lawyers in behalf of the responsible for disclosure? iii “' lawyers in behalf of the post office. ~ ., ., ,, ~' lawyers in behalf of the post office. ~ ., ., ~' office. what do you think your duties were _ office. what do you think your duties were in _ office. what do you think your duties were in relation - office. what do you think your duties were in relation to i duties were in relation to disclosure? to duties were in relation to disclosure?— duties were in relation to disclosure? ., ,, ., ., disclosure? to let them know what had one disclosure? to let them know what had gone on- _ disclosure? to let them know what had gone on- so — disclosure? to let them know what had gone on. so your _ disclosure? to let them know what had gone on. so your duty - disclosure? to let them know what had gone on. so your duty was i disclosure? to let them know what had gone on. so your duty was to l disclosure? to let them know what i had gone on. so your duty was to let them know what was happening in a specific case. find them know what was happening in a specific case-— specific case. and then you saw it as their duty _ specific case. and then you saw it as their duty to _ specific case. and then you saw it as their duty to make _ specific case. and then you saw it as their duty to make disclosure i specific case. and then you saw it| as their duty to make disclosure is relation to the broader context. that is correct, yes.— relation to the broader context. that is correct, yes. this is at an earlier stage _ that is correct, yes. this is at an earlier stage in _ that is correct, yes. this is at an earlier stage in the _ that is correct, yes. this is at an earlier stage in the case. - that is correct, yes. this is at an earlier stage in the case. this i that is correct, yes. this is at an earlier stage in the case. this is | that is correct, yes. this is at an i earlier stage in the case. this is a memo from maureen moore is in the national security team of the post office and it is about this particular case, mr ishaq. and it is sent to you. she

particular case, mr ishaq. and it is sent to you-— sent to you. she was part of the casework team. _ sent to you. she was part of the casework team. she _ sent to you. she was part of the casework team. she was - sent to you. she was part of the casework team. she was a i sent to you. she was part of the casework team. she was a case | casework team. she was a case worker, casework team. she was a case worker. you — casework team. she was a case worker. you are _ casework team. she was a case worker, you are an _ casework team. she was a case worker, you are an investigatorj casework team. she was a case i worker, you are an investigator and she gives an opinion as to sufficiency of evidence. ida. she gives an opinion as to sufficiency of evidence. no. not at all. what sufficiency of evidence. no. not at all- what she _ sufficiency of evidence. no. not at all. what she is _ sufficiency of evidence. no. not at all. what she is basically - sufficiency of evidence. no. not at all. what she is basically done i sufficiency of evidence. no. not at all. what she is basically done is l all. what she is basically done is forwarded on. that's been addressed from legal services because this is a round about the time of the crossover between the criminal law team and cartwright king taking over completely. so the legal services, as the royal mail group when the split came, all these royal mail letters they would then send it to the casework team and in this case maureen and they would be forwarded on and be attached to the files. tiara on and be attached to the files. two whose attention was this particular document. i5 whose attention was this particular document. . ., whose attention was this particular document. , ., , . , document. is to let the security team know- _

document. is to let the security team know. as _ document. is to let the security team know. as the _ document. is to let the security | team know. as the investigating officer, team know. as the investigating officer. it's _ team know. as the investigating officer. it's a — team know. as the investigating officer, it's a memo _ team know. as the investigating officer, it's a memo it's - team know. as the investigating officer, it's a memo it's not i team know. as the investigating officer, it's a memo it's not a i officer, it's a memo it's not a letter, is this effectively mmo for your letter, is this effectively mmo for ou ., ., , letter, is this effectively mmo for ou ., ., . can letter, is this effectively mmo for you— can we - letter, is this effectively mmo for you_ can we scrolli your attentionyes. can we scroll over the page. _ your attentionyes. can we scroll over the page, please. - your attentionyes. can we scroll over the page, please. we i your attentionyes. can we scroll over the page, please. we can i your attentionyes. can we scroll i over the page, please. we can see at the very bottom it is from rob wilson who at that time was the head of the criminal law team. that wilson who at that time was the head of the criminal law team.— of the criminal law team. that is correct. of the criminal law team. that is correct- if _ of the criminal law team. that is correct. if you _ of the criminal law team. that is correct. if you look _ of the criminal law team. that is correct. if you look at _ of the criminal law team. that is correct. if you look at the i of the criminal law team. that is correct. if you look at the top i of the criminal law team. that is correct. if you look at the top of| correct. if you look at the top of the current _ correct. if you look at the top of the current page _ correct. if you look at the top of the current page he _ correct. if you look at the top of the current page he says, i correct. if you look at the top of the current page he says, you i correct. if you look at the top of l the current page he says, you will be aware of the provisions for the criminal procedure and investigations act 1996 concerning disclosure. please confirm whether there is any material that might reasonably be considered capable of undermining the prosecution case or assisting the defence case which has not already been disclosed. please also let me have various forms. so that as a test that you were aware of. . �* . that as a test that you were aware of. ., �* , . ., . , that as a test that you were aware of. . ., of. that's correct, they are all the forms for the _ of. that's correct, they are all the forms for the committee - of. that's correct, they are all the forms for the committee for i of. that's correct, they are all the forms for the committee for the l forms for the committee for the committal.

forms for the committee for the committal-— forms for the committee for the committal. , ., ., , committal. yes, so that as a test that is being _ committal. yes, so that as a test that is being repeated _ committal. yes, so that as a test that is being repeated to - committal. yes, so that as a test that is being repeated to you i committal. yes, so that as a test that is being repeated to you by. committal. yes, so that as a test i that is being repeated to you by the head of the criminal law team. do you still say that it was the responsibility of cartwright king to ensure appropriate disclosure are not your responsibility. cartwright kina , not your responsibility. cartwright kin: , if not your responsibility. cartwright king. if you _ not your responsibility. cartwright king. if you are — not your responsibility. cartwright king, if you are talking _ not your responsibility. cartwright king, if you are talking about i not your responsibility. cartwright king, if you are talking about the | king, if you are talking about the seema misra case, i would have disclosed everything that i had pertaining to that case. anything above and beyond i would expect the lawyers to disclose. thank you to our viewers on bbc two. you have been watching special coverage of the post office public inquiry. as i said, all internal work that i had i disclose to our lawyers. mi had i disclose to our lawyers. all internal work that related to this particular case. where did you get the impression from that that was all you needed to do?— all you needed to do? that's the way i've been all you needed to do? that's the way i've been told _ all you needed to do? that's the way i've been told from _ all you needed to do? that's the way i've been told from i _ all you needed to do? that's the way

i've been told from i started. - all you needed to do? that's the way i've been told from i started. the i i've been told from i started. the way to come down from when i started from trading school to whoever was the source like mr gardiner at the beginning and the lawyers. the lawyers hadn't said that we had done anything incorrect. so lawyers hadn't said that we had done anything incorrect.— anything incorrect. so was it part of our anything incorrect. so was it part of your training _ anything incorrect. so was it part of your training that _ anything incorrect. so was it part of your training that you - anything incorrect. so was it part of your training that you only i of your training that you only needed to disclose matters relating to a particular case and not be concerned with the wider issues. $5 concerned with the wider issues. is far as i recollect, yes. that's what it was. , ., far as i recollect, yes. that's what it was. ,., ,, far as i recollect, yes. that's what it was. i. ., far as i recollect, yes. that's what itwas. ., ., , far as i recollect, yes. that's what itwas. ., ._ . .,, it was. do you have any reflections on the fishing _ it was. do you have any reflections on the fishing expedition. - it was. do you have any reflections on the fishing expedition. do i it was. do you have any reflections on the fishing expedition. do you i on the fishing expedition. do you still see it as a fishing expedition?— still see it as a fishing exedition? “ , , ., expedition? as i said, people from time send e-mails _ expedition? as i said, people from time send e-mails as _ expedition? as i said, people from time send e-mails as if— expedition? as i said, people from time send e-mails as if they i expedition? as i said, people from time send e-mails as if they are i time send e—mails as if they are having a telephone conversation and it's propping up the correct word remake way to use fishing. at the time, prevalent way of speaking. would you think that wider disclosure about problems with the horizon system experienced by other

subpostmaster is is not a reasonable thing to disclose? ii subpostmaster is is not a reasonable thing to disclose?— thing to disclose? if there was issues there _ thing to disclose? if there was issues there than _ thing to disclose? if there was issues there than the - thing to disclose? if there was issues there than the lawyersl thing to disclose? if there was i issues there than the lawyers knew about it they should disclose it. but you know about it. the lawyers. as i said, but you know about it. the lawyers. as i said. i — but you know about it. the lawyers. as i said, i expect _ but you know about it. the lawyers. as i said, i expect the _ but you know about it. the lawyers. as i said, i expect the lawyers i but you know about it. the lawyers. as i said, i expect the lawyers to i as i said, i expect the lawyers to do it, not me. i had disclosed all relevant work i had pertaining to the case and the lawyers should deal with the defence lawyers. flan the case and the lawyers should deal with the defence lawyers.— with the defence lawyers. can we lease with the defence lawyers. can we please look _ with the defence lawyers. can we please look at — with the defence lawyers. can we please look at paul _ with the defence lawyers. can we please look at paul 0005962. i with the defence lawyers. can we| please look at paul 0005962. we with the defence lawyers. can we i please look at paul 0005962. we are in the 6th of february now. we have an e—mailfrom martin smith from cartwright king to yourself. i am going to just read from this e—mail. it says the defence were unable to persuade the judge to order any further disclosure. the defence solicitor told me that the defendant still operate the store in which the post office is situated. the defendant hadn't instructed them

that both sets of subpostmaster is had told him that they had experienced problems with the horizon system. although you had said in yourfinal horizon system. although you had said in your final statement that during the subsequent transfer of cash and stock after mr ishaq's suspension, the defence suggested this does not necessarily mean that no problems were encountered by the subsequent postmasters. i think it would be sensible obtain statements from both sets of postmasters to ensure that they had no problems with the horizon system. just looking at the words in quite marks that were in a statement that you produce for that particular case. you had stayed in a statement, during the subsequent transfer of stopped after his suspension there were no problems or discrepancies reported. what investigations at

that stage, prior to speaking to subpostmaster is had you conducted in relation to problems post dating mr ishaq. in relation to problems post dating mr ishaa. , in relation to problems post dating mr isha., , in relation to problems post dating mr ishaa. , i. in relation to problems post dating mrlsha. , , ., mr ishaq. sorry, can you repeat that. mr ishaq. sorry, can you repeat that- you — mr ishaq. sorry, can you repeat that. you subsequently - mr ishaq. sorry, can you repeat that. you subsequently and i mr ishaq. sorry, can you repeat that. you subsequently and we | mr ishaq. sorry, can you repeat. that. you subsequently and we will see ou that. you subsequently and we will see you took _ that. you subsequently and we will see you took a _ that. you subsequently and we will see you took a statement - that. you subsequently and we will see you took a statement from i that. you subsequently and we will see you took a statement from the j see you took a statement from the subpostmaster that followed mr ishaq's sub suspension. you've included in a witness statement that no problems or discrepancies had been reported. are we to read on to the fact that you said had been reported means that in order to make that statement all you looked at was whether a problem or discrepancy had been reported? by, whether a problem or discrepancy had been reported?— whether a problem or discrepancy had been reported? a statement was taken from the interim _ been reported? a statement was taken from the interim postmaster— been reported? a statement was taken from the interim postmaster and i from the interim postmaster and he had another one in west yorkshire. he stated in his statement that there was no problem whatsoever. irate there was no problem whatsoever. we will come to look at that. this particular e—mail is telling you that we would like to approach the subpostmaster is to take a statement

from them so this predates that statement. from them so this predates that statement-— from them so this predates that statement. ., �* , �* , ., ,~ statement. that's when he's asking me to no statement. that's when he's asking me to go down and _ statement. that's when he's asking me to go down and take _ statement. that's when he's asking me to go down and take the - me to go down and take the statement. br; me to go down and take the statement.— me to go down and take the statement. �* , ., , ., , ., ., statement. by that stage you would already said — statement. by that stage you would already said in _ statement. by that stage you would already said in a _ statement. by that stage you would already said in a witness _ statement. by that stage you would already said in a witness statement | already said in a witness statement no problems or discrepancies had been reported subsequent to mr ishaq. my question is how did you form the opinion? it ishaq. my question is how did you form the opinion?— ishaq. my question is how did you form the opinion? it would have been at the time we _ form the opinion? it would have been at the time we had _ form the opinion? it would have been at the time we had not found - form the opinion? it would have been at the time we had not found any i at the time we had not found any issues there had been reported any issues there had been reported any issues with the horizon. i5 issues there had been reported any issues with the horizon. is an assumption- _ issues with the horizon. is an assumption. no. _ issues with the horizon. is an assumption. no. again, i issues with the horizon. is an i assumption. no. again, without havinu assumption. no. again, without having the _ assumption. no. again, without having the case _ assumption. no. again, without having the case file _ assumption. no. again, without having the case file and - assumption. no. again, withoutj having the case file and whether assumption. no. again, without i having the case file and whether the call logs had been obtained from horizon. but there was nothing at the time to indicate any issues. you said no problems or discrepancies had been reported. really, what i am asking you is to are we to read that very carefully that you had referred

to being aware whether there were in fact any problems? ii to being aware whether there were in fact any problems?— fact any problems? if they are not reported- to _ fact any problems? if they are not reported. to me,... _ fact any problems? if they are not reported. to me,... because i i reported. to me,... because i have no reason to investigate the system. can we please look at pol 00059269. i'm going to start at page iii. this is the statement from you and it says that the call logs for the period of 8th ofjuly 2022 the 11th of february 2011 requested from the national lock centre. those were examined and shown that no calls were made to mr ishaq during that period. if we look over the page,

please, we can show the line i've just taken you to. it's at the bottom of that page. it says, during the subsequent transfer of cash and stock after mr ishaq's suspension in february 2011 no problems or discrepancies had been reported. we have a statement saying that i have obtained the call logs from july 2010 to february 2011 and mr ishaq can reported during that period. and you had at the bottom that no problems or discrepancies had been reported. by that particular stage, you hadn't in fact spoken to the subsequent postmaster. that would have been done _ subsequent postmaster. that would have been done in _ subsequent postmaster. that would have been done in the _ subsequent postmaster. that would have been done in the transfer- subsequent postmaster. that would have been done in the transfer from the old postmaster to the new postmaster. the incoming postmaster, mr patel has agreed this £10,000 of cash, the stamp books, so many of these. he's agreed that everything in the office at that time. so

that's what that refers to. ii in the office at that time. so that's what that refers to. if we score back _ that's what that refers to. if we score back to _ that's what that refers to. if we score back to the _ that's what that refers to. if we score back to the first - that's what that refers to. if we score back to the first page, i score back to the first page, please. ijust want score back to the first page, please. i just want to also ask you to the call logs that were obtained. thank you. when you say the call logs were requested from the national business support centre. we have had quite a lot of evidence about the separate horizon system help desk. was that something you obtained calls from. theh help desk. was that something you obtained calls from. then normally, initiall i obtained calls from. then normally, initially i thought _ obtained calls from. then normally, initially i thought it _ obtained calls from. then normally, initially i thought it was _ obtained calls from. then normally, initially i thought it was only - obtained calls from. then normally, initially i thought it was only one i initially i thought it was only one thatis initially i thought it was only one that is you quite rightly say, there was a separate horizon call line. normally the national business support centre would get those call logs for you as well. fight! support centre would get those call logs for you as well.— logs for you as well. and you would have to obtain _ logs for you as well. and you would have to obtain the _ logs for you as well. and you would have to obtain the horizon - logs for you as well. and you would have to obtain the horizon system i have to obtain the horizon system call logs from fujitsu. and you have

said that you thought it was all on the national business support centre. fist the national business support centre. �* the national business support centre._ the i the national business support centre._ the how| the national business support - centre._ the how long? centre. at the time. the how long? when they told _ centre. at the time. the how long? when they told me _ centre. at the time. the how long? when they told me that _ centre. at the time. the how long? when they told me that they - centre. at the time. the how long? when they told me that they don't. when they told me that they don't have the horizon ones you would have to go to fujitsu or sometimes they have got them. 50 to go to fujitsu or sometimes they have got them-— have got them. so are you saying that it was _ have got them. so are you saying that it was as _ have got them. so are you saying that it was as late _ have got them. so are you saying that it was as late as _ have got them. so are you saying that it was as late as 2013 - have got them. so are you saying that it was as late as 2013 that i have got them. so are you saying. that it was as late as 2013 that you found out about the other? it that it was as late as 2013 that you found out about the other? it could be, es. found out about the other? it could be. yes- thank _ found out about the other? it could be, yes. thank you. _ found out about the other? it could be, yes. thank you. can _ found out about the other? it could be, yes. thank you. can we - found out about the other? it could be, yes. thank you. can we please| be, yes. thank you. can we please look at paul— be, yes. thank you. can we please look at paul 00059675. _ be, yes. thank you. can we please look at paul 00059675. just, - be, yes. thank you. can we please look at paul 00059675. just, in - look at paul 00059675. just, in terms of the statement that we have just seen, you have said that cartwright king sent you a statement to sign. was that one that we just looked at was that drafted by

you or someone else?— no deficiencies have been reported since the suspension of khayyam ishaq in 2011. could you clarify whether further inquiries were made, as a full audit been undertaken since 2011 and what was the outcome of that audit? if no discrepancy has been highlighted from a subsequent audit, then please be on notice that we will require the data to commission our own audit. they are asking you there for what further inquiries were made as to the accuracy of the system, post mr

ishaq and whether an audit has taken place, do you agree with that? yes. place, do you agree with that? yes, but i'm not — place, do you agree with that? yes, but i'm not sure _ place, do you agree with that? yes, but i'm not sure if _ place, do you agree with that? yes, but i'm not sure if there _ place, do you agree with that? 13:3 but i'm not sure if there was an audit put on by the post office or technically what you have is that it was signed by mr patel, every weekly or bimonthly that is actually an audit of what he has in the ranch. i'm not sure if an independent audit... . ., , ., audit... the solicitors are asking if ou audit... the solicitors are asking if you could _ audit... the solicitors are asking if you could clarify _ audit... the solicitors are asking if you could clarify what - audit... the solicitors are asking if you could clarify what further i if you could clarify what further inquiries were made to justify the words you had included in the witness statement. $5 j words you had included in the witness statement. as i explained, there were — witness statement. as i explained, there were not _ witness statement. as i explained, there were not issues _ witness statement. as i explained, there were not issues reported, . witness statement. as i explained, | there were not issues reported, and it was stated that he had been bouncing ok. it was stated that he had been bouncing 0k-_ it was stated that he had been bouncin: 0k. , ., , . , bouncing 0k. they are effectively t in: to bouncing 0k. they are effectively trying to test _ bouncing 0k. they are effectively trying to test that, _ bouncing 0k. they are effectively trying to test that, they - bouncing 0k. they are effectively trying to test that, they want - bouncing 0k. they are effectively trying to test that, they want to l trying to test that, they want to see for themselves evidence of the actual figure see for themselves evidence of the actualfigure is being looked at by the post office.

actual figure is being looked at by the post office.— actual figure is being looked at by the post office. yes, but the post office has had _ the post office. yes, but the post office has had to _ the post office. yes, but the post office has had to put _ office has had to put another independent audit, whether that took place i am not sure.— place i am not sure. they're asking a aren't they? _ place i am not sure. they're asking a aren't they? can _ place i am not sure. they're asking a aren't they? can you _ place i am not sure. they're asking a aren't they? can you clarify - place i am not sure. they're asking a aren't they? can you clarify a - a aren't they? can you clarify a further inquiries are being made, has a full audit been undertaken? and i expect they would have been answered by cartwright king, either for myself or directly by them. lets have a look- _ for myself or directly by them. lets have a look. this is an e—mail from have a look. this is an e—mailfrom martin smith of cartwright king to yourself. and he says, just to keep yourself. and he says, just to keep you in the loop please find attached a copy of a letter that we have received from mr patel, that is the letter that we have just looked at. steve is in the process of taking statements from the two subsequent post postmasters who have not experienced any problems with the

horizon system and have not had any significant shortages. i do not propose to ask you to obtain the data period following his removal given there were no problems with the system and subsequent sorted as it would not undermine the crown's case. were martin smith or yourself well placed to tell whether were any problems with the system after mr ishaq had been suspended? $5 ishaq had been suspended? £5 previously explained, the ishaq had been suspended? 55 previously explained, the technical issues of the guidance system both me and mr smith would not be but based on what you are saying, why are they any issues with bouncing and the cash and stock that is in there at the postmaster that was in place at the time found there were no issues. 50 place at the time found there were no issues. , ., . no issues. so you have the subsequent _ no issues. so you have the subsequent postmaster i no issues. so you have the l subsequent postmaster that no issues. so you have the - subsequent postmaster that you no issues. so you have the _ subsequent postmaster that you have taken statements from this time, you have been asked very clearly by the defence whether an audit was taken

place because front and centre for their defence is the horizon system and the reliability of the horizon system. in what sense are we to understand that mr smith has any idea whether obtaining data for that period would have or would not have assisted or undermined at the crowds case? m assisted or undermined at the crowds case? ~ ~ assisted or undermined at the crowds case? ~' ~ ,, , ., case? i think mr smith is going, based on the — case? i think mr smith is going, based on the question _ case? i think mr smith is going, based on the question that - case? i think mr smith is going, based on the question that the l based on the question that the postmaster at the time was at balance each and every week and each and every month sol balance each and every week and each and every month so i think that mr smith has made the decision where that, you know, there was no issues showing, no data would show any loss. ., ., , ., showing, no data would show any loss. ., ., ~ ., . loss. how would you know that? because the _ loss. how would you know that? because the data _ loss. how would you know that? because the data has _ loss. how would you know that? because the data has got - loss. how would you know that? because the data has got the . because the data has got the transactions, if you've got the data it would show all the transactions that were taken in so what payments you made and if it's balancing, everything is balanced out, the left

and right is an equilibrium. flan everything is balanced out, the left and right is an equilibrium. can you see any issue _ and right is an equilibrium. can you see any issue with _ and right is an equilibrium. can you see any issue with relying - and right is an equilibrium. can you see any issue with relying on - and right is an equilibrium. can you see any issue with relying on whatl and right is an equilibrium. can you| see any issue with relying on what a subsequent postmaster has told you not investigating whether in fact were? , , ., not investigating whether in fact were? , , . . were? his statement was that he was balancin: were? his statement was that he was balancing 0k — were? his statement was that he was balancing 0k and _ were? his statement was that he was balancing ok and he _ were? his statement was that he was balancing ok and he was _ were? his statement was that he was balancing ok and he was an _ balancing ok and he was an experience postmaster because he had another branch so he was stating that he had no issues. 50 another branch so he was stating that he had no issues.— another branch so he was stating that he had no issues. so you don't think that that he had no issues. so you don't thinkthat it— that he had no issues. so you don't think that it was _ that he had no issues. so you don't think that it was incumbent - that he had no issues. so you don't think that it was incumbent upon i that he had no issues. so you don't. think that it was incumbent upon the post office to an fact check whether there were or were not bugs or defects affecting mr ishaq's post office after his termination? in that particular case with the postmaster i don't know what you would expect to find because everything has gone through correctly. everything has gone through correctly because he is balanced. we through correctly because he is balanced. ~ . , . balanced. we will look and see what he sa s. balanced. we will look and see what he says- let's _ balanced. we will look and see what he says. let's look _ balanced. we will look and see what he says. let's look at _ balanced. we will look and see what he says. let's look at what - balanced. we will look and see what he says. let's look at what he - balanced. we will look and see what he says. let's look at what he says l he says. let's look at what he says now. let's look at uk gii 0001429,

please. now. let's look at uk 611 0001429, please. first of all, is this your writing. can you assist us how he would have gone about taking a statement. i would have gone about taking a statement-— statement. i would have made arrangements _ statement. i would have made arrangements to _ statement. i would have made arrangements to see - statement. i would have made arrangements to see mr - statement. i would have made arrangements to see mr patel| statement. i would have made - arrangements to see mr patel and then the questions here. is arrangements to see mr patel and then the questions here.— then the questions here. is this verbatim as _ then the questions here. is this verbatim as you _ then the questions here. is this verbatim as you spoke - then the questions here. is this verbatim as you spoke to - then the questions here. is this verbatim as you spoke to him? | then the questions here. is this| verbatim as you spoke to him? i wouldn't say that the bait to the extent of every word. it's the, what he sort of said. and he would read it and check it afterwards at the end of it before signing it. lets have a look _ end of it before signing it. lets have a look towards _ end of it before signing it. lets have a look towards the bottom of the page, please. just returning to your evidence earlier today where

your evidence earlier today where you said you signed a statement by cartwright king, no questions asked. at this stage, had you had any training or understanding about the duties that relate to the obtaining of statements and how important it was that they were accurate? that comes with _ was that they were accurate? that comes with the _ was that they were accurate? “inst comes with the training, i had been taking statements from a number of years and they had never been any issues. he years and they had never been any issues. ., years and they had never been any issues. . . . issues. he said that i balanced the cash and stock _ issues. he said that i balanced the cash and stock on _ issues. he said that i balanced the cash and stock on a _ issues. he said that i balanced the cash and stock on a weekly - issues. he said that i balanced the cash and stock on a weekly basis l issues. he said that i balanced the i cash and stock on a weekly basis and produced a branch trading statement at the end of the balancing periods. the weekly balancing and trading statements were mainly done by my son—in—law... i think his evidence was that his son—in—law mainly did the work, but it was unable to produce... if he was unable to produce... if he was unable to produce these into myself or my son

would go to the post office to do