some way to explain why for example his witness statement in the words of the inquiry counsel was the bare minimum of what he could have offered to the inquiry in terms of what he knew about the horizon it system. what he knew about the horizon it s stem. . ~ what he knew about the horizon it s stem. ., ~ ,, ., system. thank you, we will leave it there so you system. thank you, we will leave it there so you can system. thank you, we will leave it there so you can run system. thank you, we will leave it there so you can run back - system. thank you, we will leave it there so you can run back into - system. thank you, we will leave it there so you can run back into the i there so you can run back into the room and make sure you were there from the start. we will go back to her throughout the day and as this inquiry progresses. as a reminder, she is going back because she and her colleague at the bbc are both reporting from the courtroom and giving us updates regularly on our news w
l mu no’it this morning. those words, i m not technically minded, this morning. those words, i m not technically minded, those - this morning. those words, i m not technically minded, those were - technically minded, those were pretty important in this phase, that evidence he was giving. that is exactly what the inquiry s council pounced on, he said if you want technically minded then why did you sign these witness statements that said the post office had absolute confidence in the robustness of the horizon it system? how did stephen bradshaw respond to that? that horizon it system? how did stephen bradshaw respond to that? bradshaw respond to that? that is incredibly important bradshaw respond to that? that is incredibly important point - bradshaw respond to that? that is i incredibly important point because some of the documents that were produced this morning showed witness statements signed by steve bradshaw, one of the statements was to do with a review called second sight
people have been shaking their heads as they were listening to the evidence. you can see that live page on the screen, again, we are giving you updates as they come. as a reminder, this phase of the inquiry is trying to understand what went wrong with the horizon it system and how this could have possibly happened. how so many hundreds of convictions could have happened, convictions could have happened, convictions that could now be overturned by the end of the year. as our correspondent mentioned earlier, this isn tjust about hundreds, this is about thousands who are affected by this scandal. many have had to deal with severe psychological impacts on their health, some have described being suicidal, one victim even being convicted and sent to prison as she
bradshaw himself saying that the post office has absolute confidence in the robustness and the integrity of the horizon it system. it was put to him that if he wasn t technically minded, how can he sign a statement with such words? he argued that this was put together by a team of solicitors, julian blake then reminded him and asked him if he knew it was also put together by the chief of the post office s pr department. that was one phase, establishing what he knew and when, there was also a question of the language he used in some of the interrogations, language that i can t repeat, those are the allegations made. and i believe we have the inquiry starting again, so i will take you there so we can hear this next phase as stephen bradshaw resumes giving evidence to the