Jump to content

User talk:Anonymised2024: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reply
Line 292: Line 292:


:Horizon was introduced in 1999, well before Crozier's tenure. The issue with Vennell's tenure is she hired forensic accountants, Second Sight and then fired them when their report correctly identified Horizon as buggy and faulty.https://www.postofficetrial.com/2019/12/second-sights-ron-warmington-breaks-his.html?m=1 She promptly terminated their contract. Thus the giant cover up by her was rolled out. Plus she added monies from the suspense account to the balance sheet as profit which increased the chances of bonus payments paid to executives. [[User:Jaymailsays|Jaymailsays]] ([[User talk:Jaymailsays#top|talk]]) 02:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
:Horizon was introduced in 1999, well before Crozier's tenure. The issue with Vennell's tenure is she hired forensic accountants, Second Sight and then fired them when their report correctly identified Horizon as buggy and faulty.https://www.postofficetrial.com/2019/12/second-sights-ron-warmington-breaks-his.html?m=1 She promptly terminated their contract. Thus the giant cover up by her was rolled out. Plus she added monies from the suspense account to the balance sheet as profit which increased the chances of bonus payments paid to executives. [[User:Jaymailsays|Jaymailsays]] ([[User talk:Jaymailsays#top|talk]]) 02:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you. I agree completely about the audacity and scale of Vennells' wrongdoing and likely criminal activities. She is a liar and justice would, IMO, be well-served by a custodial sentence augmented by utilising the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 w.r.t. her profit-related remuneration, where the profit was extorted from subpostmasters who in reality owed nothing. However, I am sceptical that we will witness anything close to justice in respect of this appalling creature.
::CEO Crozier, however, oversaw a large number of civil proceedings against subpostmasters whom he was surely in a position to know were innocent. The outrageous case, to which the docu-drama rightly devotes much attention, of Post Office v Castleton [2007] EWHC 5(QB), which started with events c2005, was well-within the tenure of Crozier. Please read the final section in [[Womble_Bond_Dickinson|Womble Bond Dickinson]] which provides links to Crozier's involvement.
::There's also:
:::THE TIMES [[https://web.archive.org/web/20240109190433/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-responsible-post-office-scandal-blame-horizon-fujitsu-z0xn5tvb8]] archived from paywalled [[https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-responsible-post-office-scandal-blame-horizon-fujitsu-z0xn5tvb8]]
:::THE GUARDIAN - [[https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/aug/19/new-bt-chair-left-a-trail-of-wrecked-lives-as-royal-mail-boss]]
:::THE DAILY TELEGRAPH - [[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/08/post-office-horizon-scandal-bosses/]] (Different article)
:::LBC - [[https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/explained/key-figures-involved-post-office-horizon-scandal]]
:::DAILY EXPRESS - [[https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1851220/mr-bates-v-the-post-office-itv]]
:::PRIVATE EYE - [[https://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/special_reports/justice-lost-in-the-post.pdf]]
:::BNN - [[https://bnnbreaking.com/world/uk/the-uk-post-office-scandal-where-is-adam-crozier]]
:::DIGITAL SPY - [[https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussion/2458110/itv-boss-and-the-post-office-scandal]]
:::I hesitate to cite a justly deprecated source, but, FWIW, here THE DAILY FAIL is on the money - [[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12918565/itv-viewers-mr-bates-vs-post-office-drama-ex-royal-mail-chief-adam-crozier.html]]
::etc. as can be found by googling for Adam Crozier scandal [[User:Albin-Counter|Albin-Counter]] ([[User talk:Albin-Counter|talk]]) 22:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:50, 10 January 2024

Hello Jaymailsays! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:07, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Escobar’s son

Where did the facts come about Escobar’s new found son? I have proof that it is a lie LuctonLiarExposer (talk) 00:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Minor" changes

Please do not mark edits as "minor" when they are not - see WP:MINOR. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Katherine Parkinson, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. It's inappropriate for Wikipedia to infer anything from a person not wearing a wedding ring on a TV show. Lord Belbury (talk) 10:04, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Makes perfect sense. Jaymailsays (talk) 02:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The article Jérémie Laheurte has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. ... discospinster talk 03:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have added citations for this subject. Jaymailsays (talk) 17:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Jones

Hello, please see this edit summary of mine. Graham87 09:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jérémie Laheurte for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jérémie Laheurte is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jérémie Laheurte until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

bradv🍁 04:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The article Sasha Wass has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:53, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, work in progress, four citations added. Jaymailsays (talk) 09:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This Article has 9 citationsbut requires more. Jaymailsays (talk) 23:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Total of 11 citations. Jaymailsays (talk) 20:53, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Trudie Goodwin, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please cite better sources--and for all intents and purposes, what you did with that podcast just looked like pure promotion. Drmies (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did not add the podcast, I simply reused it after hearing the subject describe their own life, why would she lie? Incidentally her historic stated birthday is incorrect but I will not provide the evidence, no point. Why did you remove her husband's details? Jaymailsays (talk) 15:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Hello, I'm Sea Cow. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Denazification, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Sea Cow (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Information icon Hello, I'm Chiswick Chap. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Christopher Lee, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Material has been stated to be unreliable, it is no use edit-warring about it. Lee is well-known to have invented "war stories". Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:49, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] --Hipal (talk) 01:20, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Hipal (talk) 16:28, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page. --Hipal (talk) 19:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Jaymailsays" is now posting defamatory information to the Amber Heard page. Demi26x (talk) 21:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Defamatory? The factual citations on Amber Heard are well sourced and Court documents support 2010 first meeting. Otherwise it would be challenged as perjury. Jaymailsays (talk) 22:28, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bob Henrit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Disc. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

St Mark's, present or past tense?

Hi, I'm seeking debate on the above at Talk:St Mark's, Hamilton Terrace#2023 fire: Is the church no longer a church?.--A bit iffy (talk) 20:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in my opinion a Church is the congregation who worship within the confines of the place they regularly meet. A burnt out shell of a building cannot provide that facility, particularly when it becomes a dangerous structure. Often when a building is refurbished or extended,for worship, they will re-consecrate the ground due the perceived loss of sacredness during the changes whether planned or accidental. https://tabletalkmagazine.com/posts/is-the-church-a-people-or-a-place-2020-04/ Jaymailsays (talk) 21:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The brigade said "there were no injuries, though it noted the whole two-storey Anglican building was “destroyed”. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/27/st-marks-church-st-johns-wood-london-destroyed-by-fire Jaymailsays (talk) 22:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Auditing Britain – photography is not a crime, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drone.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Liam Conlon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Liam Conlon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liam Conlon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SmartSE (talk) 12:13, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You've repeatedly added poorly sourced information which is not supported by the sources you've cited to Liam Conlon. This is especially concerning given that it is obviously politically motivated. SmartSE (talk) 13:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bit Rich! Butchering a biography edit still in progress to achieve deletion is unprofessional and flawed. Jaymailsays (talk) 00:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Autoclaved aerated concrete, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AAC.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Information icon Hello, I'm Neveselbert. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, David Cameron, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:24, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello, I'm Novem Linguae. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Isobel Yeung, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Twitter and other self published sources are not reliable sources. Also please be careful of your capitalization and punctuation. Thanks, happy editing.Novem Linguae (talk) 03:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, X formerly twitter citation was all that was available pending reviews of the Isobel Yeung broadcast that were made available today. I have added and chosen two citations.
Dan Wootton
You might be interested in seeing X used as a supporting citation for Dan Wootton's 40th birthday for his Wiki profile. Jaymailsays (talk) 18:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1962 London smog, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DEFRA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ricardo dos Santos (athlete), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Information icon Hello, I'm David Gerard. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please stop deliberately re-adding unreliable sources to biographies of living persons. If you continue to deliberately violate WP:BLP, you risk sanctions. I urgently suggest you review WP:BLP. David Gerard (talk) 19:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Hi there, Jaymailsays. I reverted this change of yours at John Pilger as WP:OR because "He could be truculent in interviews and show very little respect if he thought the questions were badly researched" seems to be your analysis of the video you used as a reference. I do think that your analysis is correct. But: If we wanted to include the statement "He could be truculent in interviews […]" in Wikipedia:Wiki voice we would need reliable sources to explicitly support that statement. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 11:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to [2]. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Hello, your article here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanessa_Forero), did not meet WP:NPOV, and had sources blacklisted as unreliable per WP:RS

Please fix or consider drafting, as the article still may have issues. Cray04 (talk) 04:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Vanessa Forero requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Cray04 (talk) 04:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this page needs to be deleted speedily. Albin-Counter (talk) 01:25, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated wrong reversions on Paula Vennells

WRONG EDIT - At 23:14 on 6 January 2024‎ you edited Paula_Vennells to amend the signature count found at https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/strip-paula-vennells-of-her-cbe downwards from 700,000 to 600,000, with the laconic explanation "600k not 700k for now." However, as can be seen from the petition page timeline itself and successive copies of its archive, the count had already exceeded 700K ~9 hours before you made the edit downwards to 600K. Further, shortly after you made this wrong edit, the count exceeded 800K. It is currently ~815K. I first attributed this to an (odd) error, but after reading the other comments on this Talk page, I don't know what to think. I have updated the count to 800K. Albin-Counter (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your interpretation is wrong. Current amount is listed at,https://web.archive.org/web/20240106085506/https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/strip-paula-vennells-of-her-cbe Jaymailsays (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are talking NONSENSE. That is a version archived at 6 January 08:55 UTC. You are making your edit, undoing a correct number, at 7 January 01:07 UTC. This isn't rocket science. STOP, please.
Current correct archive - [3] showing 817,767 signatures. Further, why not consult the live petition website itself (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/strip-paula-vennells-of-her-cbe), rather than at outdated archives of it? Thanks. Albin-Counter (talk) 01:12, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, you are completely accurate about the surrender of honours; I have explained it to the users who reverted you and further propagated your material into Mr Bates vs The Post Office, where the same erroneous analysis you had corrected was being repropagated. The matter is highly emotional and charged; I realise you see this. I am similarly being reverted at Mr Bates vs The Post Office over my exposure of the role of 7+ yr SKY CEO Adam Crozier in the scandal; it seems his friends, allies or supporters are here, perhaps from Saatchi & Saatchi. Is it not significant that the excellent, 3+ hour SKY docu-drama omits even the smallest reference to the very central role played in the scandal by their own 7+ yr CEO? Albin-Counter (talk) 18:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you too have detected the vandalism and/or truth suppression rife in these articles, and indeed I've assisted you against it please consider assisting here - [[4]].

At 19:13 on 8 January 2024‎, I was reverted on my Wiki-exposure of in press coverage of a scandal in the (otherwise excellent) ITV docu-drama, which omitted any mention that their own ITV CEO for nearly 8 years (2010-2017) was Vennells' immediate predecessor (2003-2010) running the Post Office, and it was he not the guilty Vennells who embedded HORIZON and instituted or at least authorised the criminal prosecution of innocent PO staff.

I raised it here Talk:Mr_Bates_vs_The_Post_Office too. Please join in or, if you agree, even better undo 19:13 on 8 January 2024‎, the rogue deletion of pertinent material I put in. I hate those who assist, either out of inability to comprehend the significance or much worse than that, in this giant cover-up. Albin-Counter (talk) 21:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Horizon was introduced in 1999, well before Crozier's tenure. The issue with Vennell's tenure is she hired forensic accountants, Second Sight and then fired them when their report correctly identified Horizon as buggy and faulty.https://www.postofficetrial.com/2019/12/second-sights-ron-warmington-breaks-his.html?m=1 She promptly terminated their contract. Thus the giant cover up by her was rolled out. Plus she added monies from the suspense account to the balance sheet as profit which increased the chances of bonus payments paid to executives. Jaymailsays (talk) 02:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I agree completely about the audacity and scale of Vennells' wrongdoing and likely criminal activities. She is a liar and justice would, IMO, be well-served by a custodial sentence augmented by utilising the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 w.r.t. her profit-related remuneration, where the profit was extorted from subpostmasters who in reality owed nothing. However, I am sceptical that we will witness anything close to justice in respect of this appalling creature.
CEO Crozier, however, oversaw a large number of civil proceedings against subpostmasters whom he was surely in a position to know were innocent. The outrageous case, to which the docu-drama rightly devotes much attention, of Post Office v Castleton [2007] EWHC 5(QB), which started with events c2005, was well-within the tenure of Crozier. Please read the final section in Womble Bond Dickinson which provides links to Crozier's involvement.
There's also:
THE TIMES [[5]] archived from paywalled [[6]]
THE GUARDIAN - [[7]]
THE DAILY TELEGRAPH - [[8]] (Different article)
LBC - [[9]]
DAILY EXPRESS - [[10]]
PRIVATE EYE - [[11]]
BNN - [[12]]
DIGITAL SPY - [[13]]
I hesitate to cite a justly deprecated source, but, FWIW, here THE DAILY FAIL is on the money - [[14]]
etc. as can be found by googling for Adam Crozier scandal Albin-Counter (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]