Vennells 'interjected' in talks to stop subpostmaster prosecutions

I’m going to ask you some questions about it Now. Before I do, I understand you’d like to say a few words. Yes, I I want to say so. I’ll start by saying how deeply sorry I am to the sub postmasters, sub postmistresses and post office employees for the anguish and and suffering that you and your families have had to endure. I know that for for many people, many people here and for many of you, this has come far too late. But I hope that the evidence that I can give today will help get to the heart of what has happened and in so doing I I hope that that will stop something like this from ever happening again. So that would be principally from those involved in the network, fellow members of the executive committee. Can you name names, please? So the names. I can’t, I’m afraid, recall the names of every everybody there. Kevin Gilliand would have been one. Angela Vande Bogo Parkgard would have been another. And there are probably the two principal ones I think that that going back to your knowledge of criminal law, we we’ve said that you were aware that I’m, I’m just going to say post office, even though it’s there was a split you were aware that post office was had brought private prosecutions in the past. I was, I was aware in a general sense of the prosecutions being brought. Again, as I say, my witness statement, I was very surprised, very, very surprised and I discovered it was done as part of a general power for any corporation or individual to bring, yeah, prosecutions. Could you just summarise what the difference of opinion was between Exco and Paula Velds? So my recollection is that the EXCO were in favour of seating prosecutions entirely, but when the matter was discussed, when that proposition was discussed at the committee, Paula interjected or made the comment that that that proposal D proposition D to seize everything entirely should not be taken as as what I’d intended to speak. Never bring prosecutions, but rather there should be limited a limited prosecutorial activity and the post office should continue to take some prosecutions. Did that include prosecutions relying on Horizon data? I don’t believe it was specific at the time. Did she say what her basis was for that difference? I’m no, I’m afraid. I’ve got no recollection of of that meeting other than limited recollection of that comment.