Latest news with #miscarriageofjustice
The Independent
2 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Why is Fujitsu still winning government contracts in the wake of the Post Office scandal?
June 24 2025 was a red letter day for Fujitsu, the Japanese tech company. Winning two government contracts worth nearly £300m would be a cause for celebration for just about any company. The trouble is, just two weeks later, Fujitsu's name was being (justifiably) dragged through the mud for its role in the Post Office Horizon IT scandal, which led to some truly terrible human suffering and one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in British history. Some victims of the Fujitsu system's bugs, which led to false shortfalls in accounts (among other things), were financially ruined. Some were wrongly convicted of fraud and imprisoned. The first part of Sir Wyn Williams' report into the affair also revealed that there was a 'real possibility' the pain inflicted by the affair was linked to 13 suicides. One former subpostmistress told this newspaper that she would have been the 14th, if she hadn't been pregnant while in prison for crimes she simply did not commit. There should doubtless be consequences for those found to be at fault. Yet the company that created the system – and which employed people who knew it had issues as far back as 1999 – was still awarded two lots of government-paid work just a couple of weeks before the first volume of the report into the affair emerged. It beggars belief. But, wait, I hear you say, didn't Fujitsu promise not to bid for new government contracts until after the report back in January 2024? Well yes, it did. But here's the thing. There were carve outs. The pledge did not apply to existing contracts, extensions of existing contracts or to new work where its involvement was specifically requested. Those carve outs explain the results I got when I turned to a rather useful website called BidStats, a search engine for government contracts and tenders designed for those interested in bidding. When I looked for Fujitsu contracts over the last year, I found 27 entries. A few of those are double counts: there was sometimes an entry for both tender and contract. But even if you omit those, there were still more than 20 entries, involving a dizzying array of government departments, devolved administrations, quangos and other public bodies. They include the Home Office, the Ministry of Defence, the Department of Health & Social Care, Social Security Scotland, the Northern Ireland Department of Finance, the Foreign Office and the British Council. Some of the contracts I looked at extend for the next three years. You and I are going to be contributing to Fujitsu's profits for quite some time. The really staggering revelation is that the Post Office is shelling out up to £72m to extend the Horizon Services agreement from 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026. This is, we are told, for 'IT services: consulting, software development, internet and support' needed 'in order to prepare the Horizon Agreement for expiry and in order to receive transitional support'. The Post Office told me that 'it's simply not possible to turn off Horizon overnight and get a new system up and running the following day'. 'We have been trying to come off Horizon/Fujitsu for a number of years,' I was told. But another pertinent question is this: why is Fujitsu still making money off Horizon? The company says it is in discussions about contributing to the huge compensation bill that the taxpayer – not anyone connected with the scandal – is having to shoulder. Let me be very clear, I am not arguing against the payments. Far from it. The people who have suffered so horribly deserve every last penny. The government should pull its finger out to ensure they are paid. But while the discussions proceed, shouldn't the company be covering the work needed to disentangle the Post Office from its system pro bono until a suitable replacement can be found and installed at the Post Office's 11,000+ branches? I believe it should. I received a similar response to that of the Post Office from HM Revenue & Customs, concerning the £300m worth I referred to at the outset. Here it is: 'This extension will be for a limited time on strict terms to protect essential HMRC services.' But then the plot thickens. There was also a £125m contract 'to deliver a modern digitally enabled ICT solution that will support the transformation of Land Registration Services' awarded by Northern Ireland Department of Finance. That is new work, not an extension. Fujitsu says it is because it was named as the 'preferred bidder' before its promise (a promise that looks to me like it has more holes in it than Swiss cheese). The Cabinet Office, which is front and centre on this, said: 'We have been clear that those responsible for the Horizon scandal must be held to account. Fujitsu has committed to withdraw from bidding for contracts with new government customers until the Post Office Inquiry concludes. We will not hesitate to take action, where appropriate, based on the final findings of the inquiry.' That's rather better than the trite message paymaster general Nick Thomas-Symonds delivered when he was questioned on the subject of Fujitsu contracts by LBC, earlier this week: 'With regard to Fujitsu, that's a matter for procurement,' he said. 'Those matters are looked at extremely carefully. We have to – procurement has a particular legal framework around it.' Here's the problem: Migrating from one IT platform to another is complex and expensive, and also risky. We all know what happened when TSB tried to switch from an IT platform provided by its previous owner, Lloyds Banking Group, to one operated by Sabadell after the Spanish bank took over the UK bank. Chaos ensued, with queues of angry customers lining up at branches after they were locked out of their accounts. However, given the flaws with Horizon – and especially the way this affair was handled by all concerned, not to mention the damage done – it is simply unconscionable that Fujitsu continues to pick up multi-million-pound awards of work. It doesn't matter that these are (mostly) extensions designed to ensure 'continuity of service'. The government needs to try harder. It should also reflect on whether it is a good idea to become so deeply reliant on a company that a divorce appears to be horribly difficult – if not impossible.
The Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
I watched arrogant Lucy Letby as she simmered in the dock & saw chilling evidence that proves she IS an evil baby killer
Journalist Nigel Bunyan also reveals why he believes any future appeal is likely to fall short VOID OF HUMANITY I watched arrogant Lucy Letby as she simmered in the dock & saw chilling evidence that proves she IS an evil baby killer IN the eyes of the law she's a cold-blooded serial killer who murdered seven babies and tried to kill seven others at the hospital where she worked during a year-long reign of terror. But doubts over Lucy Letby's guilt have been slowly gaining traction, with her supporters - who include prominent politicians - expressing growing fears she was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. Advertisement 12 Doubts over killer nurse Lucy Letby's guilt have been gaining traction Credit: PA 12 Nigel Farage has said there are serious questions over Lucy Letby's case Credit: Simon Jones 12 Notes were found in Letby's room in which she called herself 'evil' Credit: PA The killer nurse, 35, is serving 15 whole-life orders in prison for the murder of seven babies between 2015 and 2016 at Countess of Chester hospital. She was also found guilty in 2023 of trying to kill seven others, but has always maintained her innocence. Advertisement Last week Reform leader Nigel Farage said there were 'serious questions' about the case which have left him with a 'horrible feeling' Letby might have been a 'very convenient scapegoat' and should be retried. Meanwhile Conservative MP David Davis is convinced her conviction is a 'clear miscarriage of justice'. But earlier this month it emerged Letby could be facing more charges over the deaths of babies at hospitals she worked in. Nigel Bunyan has been a journalist for more than four decades and covered the trials of GP Harold Shipman, the child killers of James Bulger, and the Rochdale grooming gang. He attended Lucy Letby's main trial and the retrial that followed. Advertisement As her case attracts more scrutiny than ever before, here Nigel details why he believes "beyond doubt" that she IS guilty, and that justice prevailed... IN the make-believe, boxset world of Netflix, Disney+ and the like, Lucy Letby just HAS to be innocent! A prominent Tory MP has said so. So too has Letby's shiny new defence barrister and a group of international experts who've rallied, unbidden, to her cause, without having been anywhere near either trial. Lucy Letby's legal team launch fresh bid against convictions for murdering babies – as new evidence is revealed The only catch is that in the real world – the one not liberally sprinkled with fairy dust theories of perceived innocence – Letby is the real deal. She actually IS a nailed-on serial killer of tiny, defenceless babies. Advertisement After attending her trial - and the retrial that followed it - I have no doubt whatsoever of her guilt. She is serving a whole life term for seven murders and seven attempted murders after being found guilty not just by one jury – but by TWO. Sadly, serial killers don't come with an identifying mark on their foreheads. And they don't always confess. But I watched every moment of her evidence at Manchester Crown Court, looking for some spark of authenticity, of humanity; something to make me doubt the prosecution case. I looked in vain. All I could see was a defendant standing behind a blank, unyielding wall of denials. Advertisement 12 Letby denied her involvement in the death of seven babies Credit: The Mega Agency 12 Nigel reported on high profile cases including killer GP Harold Shipman Credit: Alamy She was a woman shielding herself with simmering resentment, sullen in the dock and equally so when giving evidence. Dr Harold Shipman had something of the same aura – arrogant to the end, content to simply deny all charges. Dr Harold Shipman had something of the same aura – arrogant to the end, content to simply deny all charges Nigel Bunyan By the time Letby was called to give evidence we'd already seen the now-infamous Post-it notes she scribbled in the bedroom of her house around the corner from the Countess of Chester hospital where she committed her crimes. Advertisement 'I am evil. I did this,' she'd written. 'I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them (and) I am a horrible person.' Her supporters looked to other lines that could be interpreted as indicators of innocence. 'I haven't done anything wrong,' for example. And, 'Why me?' For all that the evidence against Letby was largely – and inevitably - circumstantial, taken as a whole it was totally convincing on all but a few of the charges. It's one thing to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but in her case that happened far too many times. Her colleagues who saw her as a friend didn't want to 'think the unthinkable' - that she was the enemy within - but eventually they had no option. Advertisement It wasn't just the statistical oddities about her presence; it was an innate feeling of unease among those who had once trusted her without question. Far too many babies were collapsing on the unit for there to be any other explanation than sabotage by a member of staff. And there were no other suspects. Chilling evidence 12 Lucy worked on a neonatal unit at the hospital in Chester Credit: CPS 12 Cops found notes where she called herself evil and claimed 'I killed them all' Credit: PA 12 Letby is accused of creating an air embolism in some of the babies which can cause death Credit: Getty Advertisement 12 A stock photo of an X-ray showing a venous air embolism (not the image of the victim shown in court during the trial) Credit: Kenneth Kizer/ For me, the case finally fell into place as I spent long nights compiling a 17,000-word timeline. Suddenly, for all the woolliness of the case as it unfolded in court, I could see how Letby had moved so deftly in the shadows, aided by her colleagues' understandable reluctance to believe ill of her. Many of them counted her as a friend, and when she broke down in apparent distress over the infants dying on her watch, they instinctively reached out in support. Letby's cynical manipulation is typified by the very first of her killings: one day volunteering to take group selfies during a colleague's hen-do in York, the next injecting Baby A with air 90 minutes after coming back on duty in Chester. Advertisement Before the jury reached their verdict I knew what it should be. Suddenly, for all the woolliness of the case as it unfolded in court, I could see how Letby had moved so deftly in the shadows, aided by her colleagues' understandable reluctance to believe ill of her Nigel Bunyan And the court of social media who protest her innocence may have taken a different view if they had seen all the evidence, as I have. During the trial a chilling image was shown to the jury: the X-ray of one of the dead babies, showing a white line of what could only be air running parallel to his spine. And the only explanation for that air was for it to have been forced into the infant's system. Which is how Lucy Letby achieved something that the reviewing paediatrician Sandie Bohin had never previously seen in neonates – she made some of them scream. Had the prosecution found the courage to release that image some doubters may be silenced. Advertisement But the CPS refused, saying it formed part of an individual's medical records. Medical expertise 12 Mark McDonald has taken up representing Letby and has got medical experts on her side Credit: PA 12 There has been a huge wave of public support for Letby claiming she is innocent Credit: CHRIS NEILL Much has been made of the international panel of medical experts drawn together by Letby's new barrister, Mark McDonald. But it is hugely significant that Ben Myers, the lawyer who led her defence in both trials, made the very deliberate decision NOT to call ANY of the medical experts he had briefed on the case. Advertisement In fact, the only defence witness aside from Letby was Lorenzo Mansutti, a plumber, who spoke briefly about drainage problems at the Countess. Myers' reasoning was clearly tactical, perhaps made because he doubted the ability of those potential witnesses to counter the allegations that Letby harmed babies mostly with injections of air or insulin. Lucy Letby achieved something that the reviewing paediatrician Sandie Bohin had never previously seen in neonates – she made some of them scream Nigel Bunyan Any future appeal is likely to fall short unless McDonald can come up with a satisfactory answer to Myers' decision. Ultimately the jury was swayed by the assertion of Nick Johnson KC, the lead prosecutor, that Letby had been caught out by 'a constellation of coincidences' that had no other plausible explanation. For all the protests to the contrary, I don't believe for one second that Letby was set up as a scapegoat. Advertisement She was simply found out by colleagues who finally realised she was the killer in their midst. Almost two years on, we now have the prospect of Letby facing a third trial. On top of that three members of the leadership team at the Countess were arrested last week on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter and may yet face trial themselves. And then there is the Thirlwall Inquiry into the killer's activities and the conduct of NHS personnel at the time. It's due to report next year. So all in all, overwhelmingly bad news for those wearing yellow butterfly emblems in support of their fake heroine. Advertisement Genuine miscarriages of justice do occur. Of course they do. But they're extremely rare. I abhor the white noise repeatedly being drummed up in her name - often by people who should know better Nigel Bunyan Years ago, for example, I wrote about Stefan Kiszko, who was exonerated over a murder he couldn't possibly have committed. But Letby? I just don't see it. More than that, I abhor the white noise repeatedly being drummed up in her name - often by people who should know better - while Letby herself remains silent; brooding in HMP Prison Bronzefield, Surrey. For me, as for the families, hers is a name that speaks only of sickening cruelty and betrayal. Advertisement As one of the mums said recently: 'You don't want to see her face, you don't want to hear her name, you don't want to hear people shouting that she's innocent. "She's not innocent, she was found guilty in a court of law."
Times
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Times
Criminal cases review boss resigns after miscarriages of justice
The boss of the beleaguered miscarriages of justice watchdog has resigned just weeks after acknowledging that she was in the office only 'one or two days every couple of months'. Karen Kneller, the chief executive of the Criminal Cases Review Commission, became the first high-profile scalp after Dame Vera Baird KC was appointed to chair the organisation last month. Baird, a former Labour solicitor-general, had publicly stated that she was unhappy with the commission's wider failings — most notably around the handling of the case of Andrew Malkinson, whose conviction was quashed in 2023 after he served 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit. Thousands of cases are being reviewed in the wake of the bungled handling of that case. But Baird was also understood to be concerned with working practices at the commission after Kneller told MPs on the justice committee in April that senior managers and other staff worked almost exclusively remotely. In a statement on Wednesday, the commission said that Kneller, a barrister who joined the watchdog in 2005 and was promoted to chief executive eight years later, had resigned from her £125,000 role. Amanda Pearce, the CCRC casework director, has been appointed interim chief executive. Pearce had also acknowledged to MPs that she worked predominantly remotely. The statement added that the justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, had asked Baird to review the organisation. The chairwoman said: 'The CCRC has a vital role to play in the criminal justice system, but confidence in the organisation has been badly damaged. Confidence in our work must be restored.' Kneller had also faced criticism for the organisation's handling of the Malkinson case. In a report looking at the processes, Chris Henley KC criticised the organisation for deciding in 2012, eight years after Malkinson's conviction, that fresh DNA evidence did not meet the legal test for referring his case for appeal. Referring to that report, Kneller told MPs on the committee that 'without doubt we got that case wrong' and that Malkinson had been 'failed' by her organisation. At the time, she told MPs: 'Everyone in the organisation deeply regrets what happened. I can't begin to think of the impact this has had on him. The double impact of being a victim of a miscarriage of justice and then the way we handled his case.' Matt Foot, the co-director of the campaign group, Appeal, which supported Malkinson, said a 'long-overdue resignation is a necessary first step in tackling the obstructive culture at the CCRC, which has stood in the way of justice for far too long'. Foot added that 'ultimately, a completely fresh senior leadership team — with a track record of challenging injustice — is required for the CCRC to become effective.' Kneller's resignation will potentially pose further questions over the viability of the commission as it came six months after the previous chairwoman, Helen Pitcher, quit before she was widely expected to be sacked by the justice secretary. When she resigned in January, Pitcher told The Times that she had been unfairly ousted from the commission over the Malkinson scandal, and said that 'a head had to roll and I was chosen for that role'. She questioned why she was the 'only target' given that Malkinson's case involved egregious failings by other bodies, including police who withheld evidence. Pitcher, 66, said: 'I was made a scapegoat for decisions largely made before I got involved in this organisation. In the inquiries that followed, I was not given the chance to properly defend myself. I shudder to think why anyone would want to go into public life on that basis.'
Sky News
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Sky News
Criminal Cases Review Commission boss steps down in wake of Andrew Malkinson case
The chief executive of the body that examines miscarriages of justice has resigned as the watchdog tries to rebuild public confidence in the wake of the Andrew Malkinson case. Karen Kneller's resignation from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) comes after former chairwoman Helen Pitcher stepped down in January, claiming she had been scapegoated over Mr Malkinson 's case. He was wrongly convicted of rape and spent 17 years in jail in one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British legal history. Last month, former victims Commissioner Dame Vera Baird became the interim chairwoman of the CCRC, having been asked by the Lord Chancellor to carry out a review of the organisation. She said: "The CCRC has a vital role to play in the criminal justice system, but confidence in the organisation has been badly damaged. Confidence in our work must be restored. "I thank Karen for her work at the CCRC over many years." Amanda Pearce, who is CCRC casework operations director, has been appointed interim chief executive, a position that had been held by Ms Kneller since 2013. The CCRC - an independent public body that reviews possible miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts of England, Wales and Northern Ireland and refers cases to the appeal courts - has had four critical reviews in the last 10 years. Mr Malkinson was knocked back twice by the CCRC until his legal team carried out crucial DNA testing that was then repeated by the commission and led to his release. A review found that he could have been released 10 years earlier if the CCRC had obtained new DNA evidence as early as 2009, and thousands of cases are being reviewed in the wake of the bungled handling of the case. In May, the Commons Justice Committee also warned that the position of chief executive Ms Kneller was no longer tenable. MPs said in a report that it followed "unpersuasive" evidence from her on the CCRC's challenges and response to public criticisms in April, and concerns on the performance of the review body.
The Independent
02-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Chief executive of miscarriage of justice review body resigns
The chief executive of a miscarriage of justice review body has resigned amid attempts to rebuild public confidence in the organisation. Karen Kneller, who had held the position since 2013, has left her job at the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), it was announced on Wednesday. Last month former victims Commissioner Dame Vera Baird became the interim chairwoman of the CCRC, having been asked by the Lord Chancellor to carry out a review of the organisation. The CCRC had been heavily criticised for its handling of the Andrew Malkinson case, one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British legal history. Ms Kneller's resignation came after former chairwoman Helen Pitcher resigned in January, but claimed she had been scapegoated over the Malkinson case. Dame Vera said: 'The CCRC has a vital role to play in the criminal justice system, but confidence in the organisation has been badly damaged. Confidence in our work must be restored. 'I thank Karen for her work at the CCRC over many years.' Amanda Pearce, who is CCRC casework operations director, has been appointed interim chief executive. Mr Malkinson served 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit, and was knocked back twice by the CCRC until his legal team carried out crucial DNA testing that was then repeated by the commission and led to his release. A review found that he could have been released 10 years earlier if the CCRC had obtained new DNA evidence as early as 2009, and thousands of cases are being reviewed in the wake of the bungled handling of the case. In May, the Commons Justice Committee also warned that the position of the current chief executive of the CCRC, Karen Kneller, was no longer tenable. MPs said in a report it followed 'unpersuasive' evidence from her on the CCRC's challenges and response to public criticisms in April, and concerns on the performance of the review body.
