Mr Bates vs The Post Office

[vaud]

This makes me chuckle - the other Gareth Jenkins at Fujitsu...

https://www.linkedin.com/in/garethjenkins/

[Short Grain]

vaud said:

This makes me chuckle - the other Gareth Jenkins at Fujitsu...

https://www.linkedin.com/in/garethjenkins/

Bet that's his standard introduction. You would have to I suppose! GJ is infamous at the moment. Today may alter the current perception of him as a possible villain in the whole thing! Seems quite willing to talk, not a lot of "I don't recall! so far.

[Bonefish Blues]

Straight up and down techie so far.

[SydneyBridge]

Not sure what i was expecting but seems a decent chap who knows what he is talking about

[Speed 3]

Was this the guy that ended up being the key Fujitsu whistleblower in the investigation for Alan Bates ?

[Camoradi]

Speed 3 said:

Was this the guy that ended up being the key Fujitsu whistleblower in the investigation for Alan Bates ?

That was Richard Roll I think

[Speed 3]

He's coming across as honest rather than slippery. The KC is trying to lead him into what the POL's motives were for system changes and quite rightly points out his role was to deliver the "what they want" not question the "why do they want that".

[vaud]

Short Grain said:

Bet that's his standard introduction.

He changed it recently (I know him vaguely)

Short Grain said:

You would have to I suppose! GJ is infamous at the moment. Today may alter the current perception of him as a possible villain in the whole thing! Seems quite willing to talk, not a lot of "I don't recall! so far.

Seems pretty credible and open so far. He's talking techie but not hiding behind it.

[Mojooo]

I get the impression he was just doing what he was told without understanding the wider context or even understanding he was an expert witness who is sposed to be independent of the fee payer.

[Bonefish Blues]

That's certainly the impression he's conveying.

[LeoSayer]

Mojooo said:

I get the impression he was just doing what he was told without understanding the wider context or even understanding he was an expert witness who is sposed to be independent of the fee payer.

Wouldn't this all have been explained to him in court?

[outnumbered]

LeoSayer said:

Wouldn't this all have been explained to him in court?

No, especially as he might not even have gone to court.

The people engaging him as an expert witness are responsible for ensuring he understood the responsibilities. The PO lawyers have already admitted that they didn't do that for Jenkins.

Edited by outnumbered on Tuesday 25th June 13:58

[LimmerickLad]

outnumbered said:

No, especially as he might not even have gone to court.

The people engaging him as an expert witness are responsible for ensuring he understood the responsibilities. The PO lawyers have already admitted that they didn't do that for Jenkins.

Edited by outnumbered on Tuesday 25th June 13:58

I find this so hard to understand as instructing an expert and informing him of his legal responsibilities is such a basic thing for a solicitor.......I even did it as a LIP in a Civil case a few years ago.??

eta

"The aim of this letter is to provide you with summary of the dispute, the key documents
and to identify the issues you will need to consider.
As an expert witness you will be aware of the need for you to comply with certain duties
and ensure that certain procedures are followed. These are set out in the following
documents and are enclosed/linked with this letter:
• Rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules, in particular CPR 35.7 and CPR 35.8
• Practice Direction to Part 35, in particular CPR PD 35, para 7
• The Civil Justice Council's Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims
(‘the Guidance’)— see link below"

Edited by LimmerickLad on Tuesday 25th June 14:10

[skwdenyer]

I note - with a nod to my questions here the other day - that Jenkins doesn’t accept that Horizon caused or was capable of causing the types of losses that SPMs have been convicted of losing.

I think that’s an important point to keep in mind.

I also find it barely credible that he hasn’t read the relevant judgements.

[Bonefish Blues]

It's still early in the first half, remember. Mr Beer has plenty of stamina

[Speed 3]

LimmerickLad said:

outnumbered said:

No, especially as he might not even have gone to court.

The people engaging him as an expert witness are responsible for ensuring he understood the responsibilities. The PO lawyers have already admitted that they didn't do that for Jenkins.

Edited by outnumbered on Tuesday 25th June 13:58

I find this so hard to understand as instructing an expert and informing him of his legal responsibilities is such a basic thing for a solicitor.......I even did it as a LIP in a Civil case a few years ago.??

eta

"The aim of this letter is to provide you with summary of the dispute, the key documents
and to identify the issues you will need to consider.
As an expert witness you will be aware of the need for you to comply with certain duties
and ensure that certain procedures are followed. These are set out in the following
documents and are enclosed/linked with this letter:
• Rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules, in particular CPR 35.7 and CPR 35.8
• Practice Direction to Part 35, in particular CPR PD 35, para 7
• The Civil Justice Council's Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims
(‘the Guidance’)— see link below"

AIUI he's saying he didn't get that type of notification originally and only became aware of this is 2020 when the legal case started. The KC actually warned him not to give specific details of that 2020 case to avoid waiving his rights and only to say "I only became aware of this in 2020" but then goes on to ask him dozens of times (so far) what his legal status as an Expert Witness was. I suspect the briefing letters went to Fujitsu Legal dept and weren't forwarded on to him.

[Mojooo]

He has asked him a few times whether he received a letter which set out the expert duties ...I am guessing ta some point he is going to show him an email where it has been attached.

Its worth saying that just because you are an expert at something doesn't mean you are an expert witness, Fujitsu should have ensured he was fully trained for the role - I think that may also have given him some more confidence to control the process and not be told what to say etc

[LimmerickLad]

I'm almost certain my wife had to undertake some sort of specific training and then go on an experts' witness register of some kind before she could act as an expert witness in her field.

[LimmerickLad]

ah here is the smoking gun at long last.

[Speed 3]

There is a strong whiff of 20/20 hindsight lawyering from the KC. At least Jenkins is being honest enough to admit he wasn't aware of the full context of complex law at the time (he wasn't a lawyer and looks like he wasn't advised well by those that should have done) and made decisions based on his professional technical judgement rather than just saying "don't remember". The guy was a coder working for the supplier. I think we'll subsequently see the actual manipulation by POL being the smoking gun.