we scroll down. disclosure of prosecution material under section seven of the criminal procedure and investigations act. i have considered your defence statement, dated august nine, 2012. under section seven, i am required to disclose to you any prosecution material which is not previously disclosed and which might reasonably be expected to assist your defence is described in your statement. 0n the basis of the defence statement you have provided, i have not identified any further prosecution material which is disclosable to you in accordance with the cpi a. over the page, it says, your client is charged with false accounting by failing to make entries onto the horizon system regarding the deposit slips found and thus the offence has occurred outside of the system, material relating to the horizon system is therefore not deemed disclosable at this time. was that something that you therefore agreed with? $51 was that something that you therefore agreed with? as i said, therefo
you not the horizon system, could you not have offered a view as to whether it is in the public interest to prosecute that case? i is in the public interest to prosecute that case? i have explained. prosecute that case? i have explained. in prosecute that case? i have explained, in this prosecute that case? i have explained, in this case, - prosecute that case? i have explained, in this case, the| prosecute that case? i have - explained, in this case, the public interest is the people not getting their funds, interest is the people not getting theirfunds, what interest is the people not getting their funds, what they have given to their funds, what they have given to the charity, credited to the charity. i can t say anything further. that is another. that s their mitigation, as i keep using that they were having losses, but i am unable to try and find what the losses were. they couldn t tell us, i had a lot on this or that day. so the cause of a discrepancy would not feature in t
due process. but as at june 2012, you were aware post office - due process. but as at june 2012, you were aware post office had i you were aware post office had advised independent experts to look at horizon? . advised independent experts to look at horizon? , ,, ,, advised independent experts to look at horizon? and l advised independent experts to lookj at horizon? and if at horizon? yes, second site. and if we scroll up at horizon? yes, second site. and if we scroll up to at horizon? yes, second site. and if we scroll up to the at horizon? yes, second site. and if we scroll up to the response - at horizon? yes, second site. and if we scroll up to the response from i at horizon? yes, second site. and if| we scroll up to the response from mr bolts. he says, in the context of this particular case, john is aware that he has certain days to avoid etc. my he has certain days to avoid etc. my understanding is that the post office line remains that the system is a robust one. the de
regarding the case of branwell, has the court decided anything regarding the court decided anything regarding the trial dates? also, in light of the trial dates? also, in light of the post office instructing independent experts at the horizon system, would this have any bearing on the case? the reason i ask is that one of the witnesses would like to put some leave, and the date in question is the 13th of august. this is an e mail in the context of the case of miss sefton and miss neald, but you are referring to another case, that of branwell, and raising theissue case, that of branwell, and raising the issue of independent experts having been appointed. there is that second site? it having been appointed. there is that second site? second site? it probably would have been at the second site? it probably would have been at the time. second site? it probably would have been at the time. the second site? it probably would have been at the time. the branwell- second site? it probabl
case. . investigating theft in the neald case, , ., .. investigating theft in the neald case. , ,, ., ., ., so investigating theft in the neald case. . ,, ., ., ., soat case. yes, sefton and neald. so at that time. case. yes, sefton and neald. so at that time. you case. yes, sefton and neald. so at that time, you are case. yes, sefton and neald. so at that time, you are investigating - case. yes, sefton and neald. so at that time, you are investigating a l that time, you are investigating a particular case in relation to discrepancies in horizon, and you were aware that there was a post office line that is that the system is a robust one. in office line that is that the system is a robust one. is a robust one. in there, but as i said before is a robust one. in there, but as i said before about is a robust one. in there, but as i said before about taking - is a robust one. in there, but as i said before about taking it - is a robust one. in there, but as i said before about t