Suggested that he was not aware that the post office was able to prosecute subpostmasters, individuals that work for the organisation. That was the most striking moment because he was Managing Directorfor several years. Because he was Managing Directorfor severalyears. During because he was Managing Directorfor several years. During that time, there were hundreds of prosecutions against Sub Postmasters and after establishing at the beginning of his testimony how important that was, that he was running the business, he then said that he just didnt even know that these prosecutions were being brought forward by the post office, that there was no independent body, no review as to whether those decisions made sense and he realises that two thirds of those cases, those decisions, were being taken by the post office owe you wonder that how is it when youve seen these documents that are going to him, talking about these criminal cases, that he didnt understand as the man in the top job that these prosecutions were the post offices own decisions. So he has given apology but its a very different response to what you are hearing yesterday from his successor david smith. It is not that david smith was saying, you know what when i think about it in hindsight, they were inherent risks, with the words he used, with prosecutions taking place in house. That is not what alan cook are saying. He is saying he didnt even know about it. The cps which is he didnt even know about it. The cps which is run by the government effectively, is it able to make a decision, one might distance oneself from it and decision, one might distance oneself from itand might decision, one might distance oneself from it and might say the cps has made that decision but two thirds of them were from the post office and as you rightly say, 160 during his tenure. That is a lot of people, sheer numbers which might have made him sit up and take note . Thats him sit up and take note . Thats what legal him sit up and take note . Thats what legal experts him sit up and take note . Thats what legal experts are him sit up and take note . Thats what legal experts are saying, i him sit up and take note . Thats i what legal experts are saying, that there is a risk involved when the post office is acting not only is the victim bolster the but also the investigator and the prosecutor. Alan cook says he had never encountered an organisation that had that power, that had that structure and so even if he was looking a document that was talking about literally an report, talking about these criminal court cases, he didnt understand that the post office had any strong involvement in office had any strong involvement in this and so, it does end up being a question in terms of how strong a leader he is. He kept saying he was a visible leader with his arms around everything, so how could you miss an issue that was so important and affecting hundreds of lives . Because remember over the course of this scandal, more than 900 Sub Postmasters and mistresses were prosecuted wrongfully over this Horizon System and that data. So its shocking, to be honest. You hint at there its shocking, to be honest. You hint at there were its shocking, to be honest. You hint at there were many cases prior to his tenure. So again, if he was reviewing the business, you would think this would be something hed noticed when he took over this particular role as being something quite unusual . Its particular role as being something quite unusual . Particular role as being something uuite unusual . � ,. , ,. , quite unusual . Its a common theme because yesterday quite unusual . Its a common theme because yesterday david quite unusual . Its a common theme because yesterday david smith, because yesterday david smith, remember he was Managing Director for 6 7 months in 2010 and that is when mrs misra was convicted. He said he was trying to wrap his head around things and then horizon started to take on more of a priority for him. Alan cook says it was only around the last three years of his time at the post office as Managing Director that he understood that these prosecutions were taking place. You have to wonder when it is something so important, something thatis something so important, something that is devastating people buzz lives, and is causing bankruptcy, several suicides are linked to this and mrs misra said that had she not been pregnant when sent to jail she would have killed herself. These are the mistakes we are talking about and for the people at the top do not have a better understanding of the impact of the post office was something that i think victims who were here, listening, i dont have difficulty understanding. This afternoon we difficulty understanding. This afternoon we are difficulty understanding. This afternoon we are going to be hearing from a very experienced executive in business. He was the former ceo of the Royal Mail Group and some of his Tenure Overlaps with that, with that of alan cook in 2006 2010. Can you explain the relationship between royal mail and the post office and i suppose there will be an effort this afternoon to try and see if theres any consistency with the story . Thats a crucial question because at the time when adam crozier was chief executive, royal mail and the post office where the same Organisation Office where the same organisation but there was a Governance Board that he did not sit on, and so you are right. At the beginning of his testimony, hes likely to focus on the relationship between royal and the relationship between royal and the post office and therefore what adam crozier would have been aware of at the time. The issue is that there were hundreds of Sub Postmasters who were prosecuted during his tenure and also there are Sub Postmasters who say theyve written to adam crozier during that period, one gave testimony to the inquiry in 2022, saying that he wrote to him, trying to explain what was happening and then received no response and then was told by a manager never to e mail him again so they will be questions as to whether he saw those e mails, whether he thought those issues were important in the first place. He is used to being under pressure because he held some topjobs. He being under pressure because he held some top jobs. He was at the helm of the football association, the Advertising Agency saatchi and saatchi and itv. And they were nationwide postal strikes during his tenure so he is used to being under pressure but in terms of the inquiry, hes going to have two answer questions with the victim is right there listening to his answers. Right there listening to his answers right there listening to his answers. ,. , answers. The point is that the post office was undergoing answers. The point is that the post office was undergoing at answers. The point is that the post office was undergoing at some answers. The point is that the post i office was undergoing at some point a fairly fundamental reorganisation and there is a suggestion that it was distracted by the fact that, and im imagining at this time, people are writing more and more e mails and sending fewer and fewer letters and sending fewer and fewer letters and that might have had some to do with it, but was there an element of this organisation with those at the helm saying we were distracted . Absolutely. You heard that yesterday from david smith and sir michael hodgkinson. They said there was a situation where the post office was facing a catastrophic financial issue. The former Managing Director said that a lot of the Financial Issues were taking up most of his time and when it came to e mails that came to him, he talked about mrs misras e mail and he said, i used to receive hundreds of e mails every day, this would have been an offhand response and the reason he greeted this Conviction E Mail with well done, please pass this onto my team. He was thinking because the Horizon System was proven to be robust during that trial but when it comes to accountability, the kind of responsibility this inquiry is trying to establish, it is a question, should you have been paying attention to these issues more, why didnt you consider it more, why didnt you consider it more of a priority . Even yesterday, the Inquiry Counsel shown internal documents about which issues were of which priority and he questioned why the horizon it system wasnt being considered higher priority saying that it was leading so many lives to be ruined by prosecution. Some of the Inquiry Counsel have been trying to establish over the last few days is why did you not ask more questions . Why did you not see it as important at the time, compared to what you mentioned, those financial priorities . What you mentioned, those financial riorities . � ,. , what you mentioned, those financial riorities . � ,. ,. , ~. , priorities . Lets go to alan cook now. He priorities . Lets go to Alan Cook Nova he began priorities . Lets go to alan cook now. He began by priorities . Lets go to alan cook now. He began by Putting Priorities . Lets go to alan cook now. He began by putting on. Priorities . Lets go to alan cook now. He began by putting on record what he put on record as a personal apology for what theyve been put through. Lets take a listen. I wonder if i could sayjust before we get started, id like to put on record most strongly my personal apology and sympathies with all Sub Postmasters, theirfamilies apology and sympathies with all Sub Postmasters, their families and those affected by this. As we get into the conversation, there will be an opportunity to elaborate but i think thats an important thing for me to say up front. I had assumed that the police and the dpp had been involved. I shouldnt have but i did presume. And that it had gone to court, was the expression they used. I had not encountered the notion of an organisation that could make that decision on its own and i suppose i had too much assumed knowledge and when we see the words written, i can see why they still perpetuated in my mind because it didnt overtly say we have taken the decision to prosecute. So its one of my regret that i didnt pick up on that earlier. �. ,. ,. , ~ that i didnt pick up on that earlier. �. ,. ,. , ~. , that i didnt pick up on that earlier. �. ,. ,. , earlier. Alan cook, who was the former managing earlier. Alan cook, who was the former Managing Director earlier. Alan cook, who was the former Managing Director of. Earlier. Alan cook, who was the| former Managing Director of the earlier. Alan cook, who was the former Managing Director of the post office between 2006 2010, 0ffice between 2006 2010, apologising for his oversights during that time regarding prosecutions of postmasters. Plenty of apologies and admission of oversight. Thats not really much solace to those who were convicted and this is the point that we are coming to, isnt it . Coming to, isnt it . Absolutely. When. Coming to, isnt it . Absolutely. When ive coming to, isnt it . Absolutely. When. Ive spoken coming to, isnt it . Absolutely. When. Ive spoken to coming to, isnt it . Absolutely. When. Ive spoken to the coming to, isnt it . Absolutely. I when. Ive spoken to the former Sub Postmasters and ive asked them what the reaction has been to several executives answers. And frankly, they dont really care. They dont believe the answers. They say they are tired of hearing the i dont remember us and i dont knows. Lots of them are talking aboutjail time. Kevin hollen right spoke to the bbc at the town hall and told Sub Postmasters in person that is evidence is established, they do believe that people responsible at the post office should face jail time. But for now, those questions are going to be asked by the Inquiry Counsel and i do believe that alan cook has resumed giving his evidence. Lets take a listen. The seven should evidence. Lets take a listen. The seven should have been too, my apologies seven should have been too, my apologies. We go page six. Mr cook, this is apologies. We go page six. Mr cook, this is a apologies. We go page six. Mr cook, this is a letter dated the 3rd Of September 2008 to this is a letter dated the 3rd Of September2008 to mr this is a letter dated the 3rd Of September 2008 to mr savage. Have you seen September 2008 to mr savage. Have you seen this recently . Five September 2008 to mr savage. Have you seen this recently . You seen this recently . Five minutes auo, you seen this recently . Five minutes ago. Yeah you seen this recently . Five minutes ago. Yeah if you seen this recently . Five minutes ago. Yeah if we you seen this recently . Five minutes ago, yeah. If we could you seen this recently . Five minutes ago, yeah. If we could go you seen this recently . Five minutes ago, yeah. If we could go to you seen this recently . Five minutes ago, yeah. If we could go to the you seen this recently . Five minutes ago, yeah. If we could go to the end | ago, yeah. If we could go to the end ofthe ago, yeah. If we could go to the end of the letter ago, yeah. If we could go to the end of the letter please, ago, yeah. If we could go to the end of the letter please, at ago, yeah. If we could go to the end of the letter please, at the ago, yeah. If we could go to the end of the letter please, at the end ago, yeah. If we could go to the end of the letter please, at the end of. Of the letter please, at the end of the page of the letter please, at the end of the page. It says yours sincerely and then the page. It says yours sincerely and then weve redacted that but it said alan and then weve redacted that but it said alan cooke. Did you sign this letter . Said alan cooke. Did you sign this letter . | said alan cooke. Did you sign this letter . ,. , ,. , said alan cooke. Did you sign this letter . ,. , , letter . I would assume so, yes. Could we letter . I would assume so, yes. Could we go letter . I would assume so, yes. Could we go to letter . I would assume so, yes. Could we go to page letter . I would assume so, yes. Could we go to page one. Letter . I would assume so, yes. L could we go to page one. Sorry, its page could we go to page one. Sorry, its page six. Could we go to page one. Sorry, its page six, aiming page one of the letter~ its page six, aiming page one of the letter. Could we go to the bottom, the letter. Could we go to the bottom, please . Thank you. Its referring bottom, please . Thank you. Its referring to bottom, please . Thank you. Its referring to previous correspondence about referring to previous correspondence about accounting errors. It refers to audits about accounting errors. It refers to audits and identified shortages totalling to audits and identified shortages totalling £50,000, £50,61917p of outstanding recovery. The last paragraph says in terms of the issue of Court Paragraph says in terms of the issue of court proceedings, the investigations taken by the post Office Investigations taken by the post office are to decide whether there is a criminal case to answer. This is a criminal case to answer. This is independent from any action that may he is independent from any action that may be taken by the Contractor Team whose may be taken by the Contractor Team whose role may be taken by the Contractor Team whose role is to focus on contractual related issues only. I believe contractual related issues only. I believe that the Contracts Manager has made believe that the Contracts Manager has made this differentiation quite clear during one of several conversations shes had with you over conversations shes had with you over the conversations shes had with you over the past few months. It gives me no over the past few months. It gives me no pleasure to write you a letter such as me no pleasure to write you a letter such as this me no pleasure to write you a letter such as this and i truly am sorry for any such as this and i truly am sorry for any impact this may have on your family~ for any impact this may have on your family~ at for any impact this may have on your family. At the same time, im mindful family. At the same time, im mindful of family. At the same time, im mindful of the cash and stock we are accountable mindful of the cash and stock we are accountable for public funds and the decision accountable for public funds and the decision is accountable for public funds and the decision is never taken lightly. The alleged decision is never taken lightly. The alleged offence of fraud against you are of alleged offence of fraud against you are of sufficiently serious nature to support are of sufficiently serious nature to support that this is a correct course to support that this is a correct course of to support that this is a correct course of action to take. A decision remains course of action to take. A decision remains unchanged. Make our decision remains unchanged. Make our decision remains unchanged. This shows decision remains unchanged. This shows that decision remains unchanged. This shows that you were aware that it was the shows that you were aware that it was the post Office Security team but the was the post Office Security team but the ones responsible as to whether but the ones responsible as to whether