Tag: Embezzling

Nick Wallis Told The Public Embezzler & Fraudster Seema Misra Committed Perjury (Part 45)

Josephine Hamilton
Seema Misra
Nick Wallis

Who Was Lying: Seema Misra, Nick Wallis Or Deluded Josephine Hamilton To The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry?

On the 11th of May 2009 Rebecca Thomson wrote and published an article for Computer Weekly (Read here).

Rebecca Thomson – Courtesy of the Mirror here

At some point after Rebecca Thomson’s article was published, and before Seema Misra’s trial was due to start, Seema apparently “turned up” at the shop of Josephine Hamilton.

Josephine Hamilton stated in her 2nd witness statement to the inquiry;

Seema Misra (a fellow sub-postmaster) saw the computer weekly article and turned up at my shop.

I took her to my solicitor and neighbour Issy Hogg.

Excerpts from Josephine Hamilton’s 10th of February 2022 statement of truth to the post office horizon IT inquiry here

The following excerpts are taken from Seema Misra’s trial testimony (from p.136 here);

  • Warwick Tatford: You did some research on the internet? 
  • Seema Misra: No, just the day before my first trial and there was like, then there was like, there was an article from a computer weekly which is like when I read the cases the same thing happen with me as well like figures doubling up, we are having losses and..
  • Warwick Tatford: All right. Let me just cut the matter clearly if I may because this is new information for the jury. There have been some articles about whether the Horizon system is any good or not in various magazines, is that right, that you saw prior to your…
  • Seema Misra: The day before my first trial
  • Warwick Tatford: All right. So earlier in the history of the court proceedings you were aware that other people were saying there might be a problem?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah, and then I read and the same thing happen with me as well when I read that incident and I remember staff saying that as well, there could be a system problem
  • Warwick Tatford: Fine. I fully accept that that might have given you thought about another possibility. So let us leave that on one side. What I want to understand though is why in defence statements you only talk about theft. You don’t mention until the defence statement that was served in January of this year anything in that old defence statement about Junaid, about Michael and about how there were losses from the beginning. You don’t mention anything about that at all, do you?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah. That is what I said. Like when I got that Javed and Nadia red handed they been nicking the money. That is what I thought that time
  • Warwick Tatford: But you knew, Mrs Misra, that the losses had begun in 2005 from day one?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: So it could not just be down to the thieves because they were happening when you were with Junaid?
  • Seema Misra: I was in – I was in complete mess anyway. I was not like pinpointing what is here and what is not. I was in like whole lot of mess. I was struggling with one counter, then I like because I was struggling trying to find where more money was going so like I was trying to like created more work for me because I was going on like a complete mess. So when I got them red handed I thought like it be them who were nicking the money
  • Warwick Tatford: You see, I suggest, Mrs Misra, that you were setting out one defence in your interview, theft. You were setting out one defence in your first defence statement, theft by employees. You then in a second defence statement add a whole raft of detail that you knew about at the time of your Post Office interview and at the time of your first defence statement. I am suggesting that these new additions have come because you have invented them?
  • Seema Misra: No
  • Warwick Tatford: You didn’t mention them earlier because they are simply not true?
  • Seema Misra: I didn’t invent them. This incident happened
  • Warwick Tatford: You know perfectly well, do you not, that in relation to some of those things you have read in articles that the prosecution have looked carefully at other complaints, have they not, and you have been disclosed material in relation to Calendar Square because that is an objective piece of material that gives a cause for concern about Horizon. You understand all that process, do you not?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: But you understand that the Post Office at the request of you and your solicitors have fully researched other articles and other suggestions of problems? You are aware of that, are you not?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah, that is right
  • Warwick Tatford: Thank you. So is it a case of you jumping on a bandwagon when you read something that might give you a hope and adding a few extra false limbs to your defence?
  • Seema Misra: No. If you recall, in my, I think it was Mr Dunks’ calls, I did make the calls on that, the losses as well and when Chesterfield transfer me to Horizon that…
  • Warwick Tatford: Yes, but you only made calls about the £6,000 loss according to Mr Dunks
  • Seema Misra: And when we go into the call there isn’t the call that I have been speaking to Chesterfield for two weeks and they ask me to ring Horizon help desk. There was a call, was it not? I think so
  • Warwick Tatford: I suggest there may have been some sort of disagreement with your staff and that prompted you to call the helpline, but whatever the rights and wrongs of that disagreement it does not go anywhere near to explaining why you were lacking £74,000?

Nick Wallis wrongly states in his book The Great Post Office Scandal;

As Seema’s trial date of 1 June 2009 approached, various preparatory hearings took place.

Excerpt by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

Seema Misra’s trial was due to start on Tuesday the 2nd of June 2009 – this fact was established during the 15th November 2023 inquiry evidence of prosecuting lawyer Warwick Tatford.

Hornswoggler Nick Wallis’s version of events differs from what Josephine Hamilton told the inquiry, in her “statement of truth”.

Below are further excerpts from Nick Wallis’s book;

The day before her trial, a desperate Seema was searching on the internet.

One of her search queries seemed to return a lifeline. ‘I put in something like “Post Office court case help,” ’ she said, ‘and Jo came up!’ A local news website was carrying the story of Jo Hamilton’s conviction.

Seema called Davinder in excitement. They decided to try to contact Jo. Even though the Post Office had long gone, Jo was still working behind the retail counter at South Warnborough Village Stores. South Warnborough Village Stores also just happened to be open on a Sunday, serving afternoon tea. Jo remembers taking Seema’s call. ‘She kept saying, “You’ve got to help me. You’ve got to help me.” She was crying and in a terrible state.’

The two women bonded on the phone. Jo told Seema about the journalist from Computer Weekly who had put together an investigation into Horizon.

These revelations seemed extraordinary to Seema and Davinder, who believed they were the only ones having problems with Horizon, because that’s what the Post Office had told them. Seema begged Jo for help.

Realising how little time was left, Jo ran over the road to Issy’s house and told her about Seema. Issy called up the Computer Weekly article on her computer. Jo wanted to know if there was anything that could be done. When Issy later told me about this dramatic moment, she laughed. ‘It was the day before the trial. Way too late. There was literally nothing I could do. Seema wasn’t even my client. I suggested to Jo that Seema should take a copy of the magazine to court, show it to the judge and ask for an adjournment.’

Jo ran back across the road, called Seema and explained what she had to do. The next day, Seema’s barrister approached the trial judge.

Excerpts by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

The “day before” Seema Misra’s trial was Monday the 1st of June 2009.

If Nick Wallis’s version of events is true, that Seema Misra contacted Josephine Hamilton on Sunday the 31st of May 2009.

Then Seema Misra wilfully made a false statement during her trial and committed perjury.

Why does Nick Wallis’s version of events differ to Josephine Hamilton’s version of events?

And why does Nick Wallis have Josephine Hamilton running “back across the road” to phone Seema Misra, if Seema was already at Josephine Hamilton’s shop?

The Lies & Deception Of Embezzler & Fraudster Seema Misra & Hornswoggler Nick Wallis – Includes Statement Of Truth By Josephine Hamilton (Part 45)

Josephine Hamilton
Seema Misra
Nick Wallis


On the 11th of May 2009 Rebecca Thomson wrote and published an article for Computer Weekly here.

At some point after Rebecca Thomson’s article was published, and before her trial was due to start on Tuesday 2nd June 2009, Seema Misra apparently “turned up” at the shop of Josephine Hamilton.

Josephine Hamilton stated in her 2nd witness statement to the post office Horizon IT inquiry;

Seema Misra (a fellow sub-postmaster) saw the computer weekly article and turned up at my shop. I took her to my solicitor and neighbour Issy Hogg. Issy managed to get the trial adjourned while a computer expert was appointed.

Excerpts from Josephine Hamilton’s 10th of February 2022 statement of truth to the post office horizon IT inquiry here

The following excerpts are taken from Seema Misra’s trial testimony (from p.136 here);

  • Warwick Tatford: You did some research on the internet? 
  • Seema Misra: No, just the day before my first trial and there was like, then there was like, there was an article from a computer weekly which is like when I read the cases the same thing happen with me as well like figures doubling up, we are having losses and..
  • Warwick Tatford: All right. Let me just cut the matter clearly if I may because this is new information for the jury. There have been some articles about whether the Horizon system is any good or not in various magazines, is that right, that you saw prior to your…
  • Seema Misra: The day before my first trial
  • Warwick Tatford: All right. So earlier in the history of the court proceedings you were aware that other people were saying there might be a problem?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah, and then I read and the same thing happen with me as well when I read that incident and I remember staff saying that as well, there could be a system problem
  • Warwick Tatford: Fine. I fully accept that that might have given you thought about another possibility. So let us leave that on one side. What I want to understand though is why in defence statements you only talk about theft. You don’t mention until the defence statement that was served in January of this year anything in that old defence statement about Junaid, about Michael and about how there were losses from the beginning. You don’t mention anything about that at all, do you?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah. That is what I said. Like when I got that Javed and Nadia red handed they been nicking the money. That is what I thought that time
  • Warwick Tatford: But you knew, Mrs Misra, that the losses had begun in 2005 from day one?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: So it could not just be down to the thieves because they were happening when you were with Junaid?
  • Seema Misra: I was in – I was in complete mess anyway. I was not like pinpointing what is here and what is not. I was in like whole lot of mess. I was struggling with one counter, then I like because I was struggling trying to find where more money was going so like I was trying to like created more work for me because I was going on like a complete mess. So when I got them red handed I thought like it be them who were nicking the money
  • Warwick Tatford: You see, I suggest, Mrs Misra, that you were setting out one defence in your interview, theft. You were setting out one defence in your first defence statement, theft by employees. You then in a second defence statement add a whole raft of detail that you knew about at the time of your Post Office interview and at the time of your first defence statement. I am suggesting that these new additions have come because you have invented them?
  • Seema Misra: No
  • Warwick Tatford: You didn’t mention them earlier because they are simply not true?
  • Seema Misra: I didn’t invent them. This incident happened
  • Warwick Tatford: You know perfectly well, do you not, that in relation to some of those things you have read in articles that the prosecution have looked carefully at other complaints, have they not, and you have been disclosed material in relation to Calendar Square because that is an objective piece of material that gives a cause for concern about Horizon. You understand all that process, do you not?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: But you understand that the Post Office at the request of you and your solicitors have fully researched other articles and other suggestions of problems? You are aware of that, are you not?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah, that is right
  • Warwick Tatford: Thank you. So is it a case of you jumping on a bandwagon when you read something that might give you a hope and adding a few extra false limbs to your defence?
  • Seema Misra: No. If you recall, in my, I think it was Mr Dunks’ calls, I did make the calls on that, the losses as well and when Chesterfield transfer me to Horizon that…
  • Warwick Tatford: Yes, but you only made calls about the £6,000 loss according to Mr Dunks
  • Seema Misra: And when we go into the call there isn’t the call that I have been speaking to Chesterfield for two weeks and they ask me to ring Horizon help desk. There was a call, was it not? I think so
  • Warwick Tatford: I suggest there may have been some sort of disagreement with your staff and that prompted you to call the helpline, but whatever the rights and wrongs of that disagreement it does not go anywhere near to explaining why you were lacking £74,000?

The day before Seema Misra’s trial, was Monday the 1st of June 2009.

Seema Misra did not call the helpline “for two weeks”, like she claimed to the jury, this was another of her bare faced lies.

She first called the helpline on the 21st of February 2006 and told them she’d had problems for “the last couple of weeks”.

Javed and Nadia, her two former members of staff, had left the West Byfleet post office by February 2006.

Seema Misra did not report Javed or Nadia to either the post office or the police for any alleged thefts.

On the 8th of April 2006 Davinder Misra, Seema’s husband contacted Surrey police and reported Nadia for allegedly being an “illegal immigrant”.

On the 12th of April 2006 former employee Javed, reported Davinder Misra to Surrey police for harassment and stated that “Mr Misra had started spreading rumours around the community, telling others that Javed had stolen £2,000 from the till and was not paying it back”.

Hornswoggler Nick Wallis’s version of events differs from what Josephine Hamilton told the inquiry in her “statement of truth”.

Below are a few excerpts from Nick Wallis’s book The Great Post Office Scandal;

The day before her trial, a desperate Seema was searching on the internet.

One of her search queries seemed to return a lifeline. ‘I put in something like “Post Office court case help,” ’ she said, ‘and Jo came up!’ A local news website was carrying the story of Jo Hamilton’s conviction.

Seema called Davinder in excitement. They decided to try to contact Jo. Even though the Post Office had long gone, Jo was still working behind the retail counter at South Warnborough Village Stores.

South Warnborough Village Stores also just happened to be open on a Sunday, serving afternoon tea. Jo remembers taking Seema’s call. ‘She kept saying, “You’ve got to help me. You’ve got to help me.” She was crying and in a terrible state.’

The two women bonded on the phone. Jo told Seema about the journalist from Computer Weekly who had put together an investigation into Horizon.

Seema begged Jo for help.

Realising how little time was left, Jo ran over the road to Issy’s house and told her about Seema. Issy called up the Computer Weekly article on her computer. Jo wanted to know if there was anything that could be done. When Issy later told me about this dramatic moment, she laughed.

‘It was the day before the trial. Way too late. There was literally nothing I could do. Seema wasn’t even my client. I suggested to Jo that Seema should take a copy of the magazine to court, show it to the judge and ask for an adjournment.’

Jo ran back across the road, called Seema and explained what she had to do. The next day, Seema’s barrister approached the trial judge.

Excerpts by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

Why does Nick Wallis’s version of events differ to Josephine Hamilton’s version of events?

Seema Misra has referenced Nick Wallis’s book in her statement to the inquiry (p.7 here).

Why would Seema Misra refer to Nick Wallis’s book in her statement, if she knew his version of events were wrong?

Why does Nick Wallis have Josephine Hamilton running “back across the road” calling Seema Misra, if Seema was already at her South Warnborough village shop?

The “day before” Seema Misra’s trial was Monday the 1st of June 2009.

If Nick Wallis’s version of events are true – that Seema Misra contacted Josephine Hamilton on Sunday the 31st of May 2009, then Seema Misra wilfully made a false statement during her trial evidence and committed perjury.

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Charade: The Continuous Lies, Deception, Manipulation, Concoctions & Contradictions Of Thief & Fraudster Seema Misra (Part 44)

Thief & fraudster Seema Misra

Seema Misra was quoted in a January 2024 BBC article headed Post Office scandal: The ordinary lives devastated by a faulty IT system here by Michael Race and Lora Jones.

Fraudster Seema Misra had stated;

They say they have so many other post offices who are doing fine, ‘it’s you having an issue’.

Seema Misra via the BBC dated 17th January 2024 here

Seema Misra did not make this allegation during her October 2010 trial.

It wasn’t until her evidence during the post office Horizon IT inquiry in 2022 that she made this allegation, in relation to one person – her area manager Elaine Ridge.

Elaine Ridge had formally suspended Seema Misra on 12th March 2008.

On 25th February 2022 during the inquiry, Seema Misra alleged that Elaine Ridge had told her during her interview “It’s just your post office we’re having issues with”.

During her trial, prosecutor Warwick Tatford asked Seema Misra about her disciplinary interview;

Did you in that interview at any stage say you were not competent to run the post office?

Prosecutor Warwick Tatford – Monday 18th October 2010 – from page 117E of trial transcripts here

Referring to April 2006, which was less than 10 months after she took over the West Byfleet post office, she told the jury;

I did to Elaine.

I said like as of mid April I just a bit lost the interest and all I doing, I didn’t do the balance properly.

I was just doing a snapshot and just putting the figures in

Seema Misra – Monday 18th October 2010 – from page 117F of trial transcripts here

Fraudster Seema Misra now contradicts her own evidence at trial and comes out with concocted statements like;

I used to be on the floor until the early hours of the morning trying to find out what went wrong, but [I] couldn’t find

Seema Misra via the BBC dated 17th January 2024 here

Yet Seema Misra told the jury during her 2010 trial;

I didn’t do any checks to check the actual cash and all that.

All I was doing print out a snapshot and entering into the system

Seema Misra – Monday 18th October 2010 – from page 73A of trial transcripts here

She also told the jury;

Well, I basically stopped doing a proper, proper check like counting and entering it as of mid 2006.

All I was doing to get this natural figure, checking the amount it should have been there and that is it entering

Seema Misra – Monday 18th October 2010 – from page 90E of trial transcripts here

She reiterated this stating;

I didn’t do any balancing as of mid 2006.

I didn’t do a proper balancing

Seema Misra – Monday 18th October 2010 – from page 90E of trial transcripts page here

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Charade: Embezzler & Fraudster Seema Misra Committed Perjury (Part 42)

Seema Misra committed perjury during her October 2010 trial when she lied to the jury about trainer Michael, the “£400 shortfall” and omitted the “ad-hoc” training.

Tap on the button below to read Part 40 of this blog series to learn more about Seema Misra’s perjury;

Paragraph 92 Of The Court Of Appeals Judgement In Hamilton & Ors V Post Office Ltd Is Based On Thief & Fraudster Seema Misra & Her Enablers Post Trial Concoctions (Part 40)

‘..A Good Trick If You Are A Liar’

During his closing speech to the jury, prosecutor Warwick Tatford picked up on Seema Misra’s lies, deception and “inconsistencies” and stated to the jury;

Mrs Misra’s account that she gave from the witness box, because the Crown say there were parts of that which were simply unbelievable.

First of all though did you find it frustrating listening to her yesterday afternoon because her evidence when I was cross-examining her, maybe it is my fault, but it took a long time, partly at least because she would not answer a straight question.

Did you notice that about her evidence, how she would come up with an answer that bore no obvious relation to the question at all?

Why did she do that?

Was she trying to help you or just trying to duck the questions she didn’t want to answer?”

Copies of extracts from trial transcripts of prosecutor Warwick Tatford’s closing speech to the jury from pages 33F-34A here

He then went on to state, in relation to Tamiko Springer and trainers Junaid and Michael;

….the Crown say she was not trying to help.

She was trying to be obstructive in her evidence.

She fails to mention things in her interview, in her notes which were handed over to Mr Noverre, and she mentions them at a late stage, one matter in particular only in the course of this trial.

Why didn’t she talk about Junaid and Michael and Timiko Springer and the fact that the losses were accruing from the very beginning?

Why didn’t she mention any of that in her post office interview?

Was it because she had not made it up then, because you would have thought it would have been an obvious thing to mention.

It has happened to her.

She is not a trainer who has to try and remember all the different offices they have been to.

She just has to remember what has happened to her, but she completely seems to forget about that.

It is not because she was not asked the question because she hands over some notes giving her account and she fails to mention any of those things on which she now relies.

The fact is it is easy to invent things five years later and it is quite a good trick if you are a liar because there is a decent chance that the people who you are talking about will not remember because of the length of time that has passed.

That is why the Crown say there are all these additions.

That is why the Crown say there were changes in the defence statements

Copies of extracts from trial transcripts of prosecutor Warwick Tatford’s closing speech to the jury from pages 34B-G here

Seema’s Hidden 21st January 2010 Defence Statement

Warwick Tatford had previously pointed the jury to parts of Seema Misra’s 21st January 2010 defence statement stating;

“…the details of the defence case as to be run in this trial are set out and in considerable detail, the Crown acknowledge that 5(a)(i) deals with Junaid. (ii) deals with Michael and then Timiko Springer is mentioned, (b)(i), just towards the bottom.

You will see that there is no reference there that the defendant told Timiko Springer about thefts and I cross-examined her on that

Copies of extracts from trial transcripts of prosecutor Warwick Tatford’s closing speech to the jury from page 18D here

To date – Seema Misra and her enablers have chosen to hide her 21st January 2010 defence statement from the public.

Link to Part 43 here

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Charade: Why Didn’t Warwick Tatford Comment On Paragraph 92 Of The Court Of Appeal’s Judgement In Hamilton & Ors V Post Office Ltd In His Witness Statement? (Part 41)

Warwick Tatford

In his 25th October 2023 witness statement for the post office Horizon IT inquiry here, lawyer Warwick Tatford was critical of paragraphs 277 – 285 in Hamilton & Ors v Post Office Ltd on thief and fraudster Carl Page.

This was referred to in Part 33 of this blog series, which can be read by tapping on the button below;

According To Hornswoggler Nick Wallis & His Great Post Office Scandal Thief & Fraudster Carl Page “Should Never Have Been Prosecuted” & Was “Completely Vindicated” (Part 33)

At paragraph 104 of Warwick Tatford’s witness statement to the inquiry it states in part;

Finally, I am asked whether there are any further matters that I wish to bring to the attention of the Chair of the inquiry.

I have dealt, fully I hope, with the cases of Mrs Misra and Mr Pages..

Excerpts from Warwick Tatford’s 25th October 2023 witness statement for the post office Horizon IT inquiry from page 56 of 61 here

Although Warwick Tatford stated in paragraph 101 of his statement “I accept the criticisms made at Hamilton and others paragraphs 91(i), 131 and 207”, he made no reference or comment on paragraph 92 of the appeal courts judgement.

Warwick Tatford did state in paragraph 100 “I was particularly concerned when I read paragraph 206 of Hamilton and others” yet nothing on paragraph 92.

At paragraph 99 he also stated;

I am asked to reflect about the trial now, particularly in light of the Hamilton judgement.

I have thought about this case for many years; that is why I remember it much better than other more recent cases.

I don’t pretend that I have come to any clear conclusions.

I am very troubled by the case and to an extent confused.

Excerpts from Warwick Tatford’s 25th October 2023 witness statement for the post office Horizon IT inquiry from page 54 of 61 here

Warwick Tatford should know that at no time during Seema Misra’s trial did she mention anything about any figure “doubling” during her training, as claimed by her and Second Sight in their disingenuous and biased 2015 report, referred to by the appeal court judges in Hamilton & Ors v Post Office Ltd.

He should also know that trainer Michael was asked by Jonathan (Jon) Longman if he recalled Seema Misra’s “onsite training”, apparently carried out between 7th and 13th July 2005, and it was said he had “no recollection of events so long ago”.

Tap on the button below to read more about paragraph 92;

Paragraph 92 Of The Court Of Appeals Judgement In Hamilton & Ors V Post Office Ltd Is Based On Thief & Fraudster Seema Misra & Her Enablers Post Trial Concoctions (Part 40)

Tap on the button below to read more on thief and fraudster Seema Misra and her West Byfleet post office and shop;

HORIZON Bashing Bandwagon Propaganda TIMELINE: The True Story Of Fraudsters Seema & Davinder Misra & Their West Byfleet Costcutters Shop & Post Office – Includes Chief Innocence Fraud Enabler Nick Wallis (Part 23)

Link to Part 42 here

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Charade: Thief & Fraudster Seema Misra Chose To Lie To The Jury & Intentionally Conflate Michael Opebiyi‘s 1st Week In The Branch With His Return To The Branch Weeks Later (Part 34)

Seema Misra
Jason Beer

18th October 2010 ~ Lies & Concoctions During Trial

On 18th October 2010 during her evidence in chief, Seema Misra attempted to dupe the jury by allegeding there had been “shortfalls” in her West Byfleet post office branch, at the end of her very first and second weeks balancing – in front of both her “onsite” trainers Junaid and Michael.

She had been given the keys to the post office on 29th June 2005.

Seema Misra’s evidence was that trainer Janaid arrived at her branch on Thursday 30th June, and stayed for one week, until balancing on Wednesday 6th July 2005.

Her evidence during trial regarding the weekly balance was an alleged “£150” figure at the end of her first week trading with Junaid, and an alleged “£400 shortfall” figure, at the end of her second week with Michael Opebiyi.

She lied to the jury and said that trainer Michael Opebiyi had “made a phone call from office, I don’t know where”, and that she did not hear from Michael again after Wednesday 13th July 2005.

There were no telephone calls to the horizon helpline during Seema Misra’s two week “onsite” training, between 30th June and 13th July 2005, with regards any “£400 shortfall”.

Defence lawyer Keith Hadrill asked Seema Misra about her second week in the branch, which began on Thursday 7th July 2005. Below are copies of extracts from trial transcripts regarding this (p.51 here);

  • Keith Hadrill: So the week goes by. Did you know what the transaction errors were or did you receive anything personally? The second week, the same trainer or a different trainer?
  • Seema Misra: No. This was Michael came in
  • Keith Hadrill: Was that from a Thursday to Wednesday or Wednesday to Thursday?
  • Seema Misra: (inaudible) Thursday
  • Keith Hadrill: What happened whilst Michael was there? Did he also sit behind and watch what you were doing?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah. He was sitting behind me, but I mentioned to him – as he come in “how is it going?” I said “not good. I am having to put money in every day to the post office”. He was more concerned than Junaid. He said “that should not be happening. Let us see how it goes”.
  • Keith Hadrill: Did it get any better?
  • Seema Misra: No: I have to again put money in every day and then when balancing with Michael it came round about £400 short
  • Keith Hadrill: At the end of the week?
  • Seema Misra: End of – yeah, end of the balancing Wednesday. That is my first balance –second balancing in office, first with Michael
  • Keith Hadrill: So the first day with Michael on the second week?
  • Seema Misra: That is right – no – yeah. That is right
  • Keith Hadrill: It is £400 short?
  • Seema Misra: No, no, no. That is on the second balancing £400 short
  • Keith Hadrill: So that is the end of the second week?
  • Seema Misra: End of second week
  • Keith Hadrill: Did you get any error corrections there?
  • Seema Misra: No. Michael said “it is a bit unusual. I know you have been doing the transaction correctly”. Then I remember him staying behind and he made a phone call from office, I don’t know where, but he said he had been observing. We are doing the transaction correctly. He can’t understand – and they have been putting the money in every day to balance the till and he can’t understand why the £400 shortfall is
  • Keith Hadrill: Right. So that gets to the end of the week. Did you get any more training?
  • Seema Misra: Not after Michael, no, but he said he will look into it
  • Keith Hadrill: Was that the last you heard of him?
  • Seema Misra: That is right

During his cross examination, prosecutor Warwick Tatford referred to Seema Misra’s memory with respect to trainers Janaid and Michael, and their time at her branch during her first two weeks trading.

Seema Misra agreed with Warwick Tatford that she had a “clear” memory of these events. Below are copies of further extracts from transcripts (p.114 here);

  • Warwick Tatford: Right. I see. You have a clear memory as I understand of what happened between you and Junaid and Michael in 2005 when losses were occurring from the very beginning?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: And that is an important part of your defence, isn’t it?
  • Seema Misra: I don’t understand that. Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying that the losses may be down to some kind of computer error, are you not, or are you not saying that?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah. We are saying that, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: Right, or they are down to your incompetence?
  • Seema Misra: Yes
  • Warwick Tatford: Or they are down to theft?
  • Seema Misra: Yes
  • Warwick Tatford: Do you accept it cannot all be down to theft?
  • Seema Misra: I don’t know. It is just I know the losses are there
  • Warwick Tatford: Let us just examine it. £89,000 loss when you dismiss the thieves. The thieves have gone. The losses continue. So the losses that continue cannot be down to the thieves because you have sacked them?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: So theft alone by your employees does not explain the loss, does it?
  • Seema Misra: Okay
  • Warwick Tatford: So it must be down to one or both of two matters, either computer error or your incompetence?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: Right. So your potential incompetence or the issue of your competence and the issue of computer error are important parts of your defence?
  • Seema Misra: Okay
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying as I understand it “I knew from day one there was a problem with the system because I was suffering these losses.” Yes
  • Seema Misra: I knew from the day one that we were losing money
  • Warwick Tatford: Yes, and day one in what would have been rather difficult for your employees to steal from you on day one with Junaid there, would it not?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah, when I look back, yes
  • Warwick Tatford: Yes. So from day one you were suffering losses which you could not explain and you now put those down to either failings on your part, a lack of competence, or some sort of computer problem. Do I have it correct?
  • Seema Misra: Sorry, say that again
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying you think there was a problem with the computer. Is that right?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying you are worried that you were not up to running the system, that you were lost?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: When you were interviewed by the Post Office on 14th January just after the audit those are matters you knew, were they not? You knew on day one that there were losses, that Junaid had found losses. You knew that Michael had had losses that he could not explain. Those are matters fresher in your memory than they are now because you were being interviewed in 2008. Yes?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: So why didn’t you say anything to the Post Office investigators in interview about what happened with Junaid and Michael?
  • Seema Misra: I got answered the question what they asked for. I did mention in Elaine Ridge’s interview that it was because staff was blaming might be a system error

Seema Misra lied to the jury and chose to intentionally conflate Michael Opebiyi‘s first week in the branch, between Thursday 7th July to Wednesday 13th July 2005, with his return to the branch, several weeks later.

During her evidence in chief Seema Misra had stated “Then I remember a guy came in, somebody from Network something” (p.57h here).

Almost a month after Seema Misra began trading, on 25th July 2005 a request was received relating to her branch for “ad hoc” training to be carried out regarding “balancing procedure”.

Following the 25th July request, trainer Michael Opebiyi was allocated to return to her branch on Wednesday 27th July, and again on Wednesday 3rd August 2005.

These were only one day assignments.

Referring to trainer Michael’s last day of week two of her time as sub-postmistress of the West Byfleet post officer (13th July 2005), Keith Hadrill had asked Seema Misra “Was that the last you heard of him?”.

To which she lied and stated “That is right”.

Keith Hadrill also asked Seema Misra “Did you get any more training?” to which she had stated “Not after Michael, no”.

This was a lie by concealment.

Michael Opebiyi had returned to her branch almost a month after she had last seen him, but Seema Misra chose to withhold this information from the jury.

She also chose to lie about the “£400 shortfall” figure, which was not known about until August 2005.

The “guy” referred to by Seema “from Network something” was intervention manager Alan Ridoutt.

Alan Ridoutt made a record of his dealings with Seema Misra, as well as the “£400 shortfall” figure.

The following are copies of some of Alan Ridoutt’s ”visits log”;

This branch was visited on 10, 17 and 27 August 2005 regarding balancing issues

I have spent many hours sorting out balancing issues and helping with the stock setup as well as arranging ad hoc training

This branch is currently holding a loss of £466.73 and an over of £96.80

That was put into the suspense account by the trainer ‘Michael’

Who told the [subpostmaster] that a voucher would be issued to clear it

I have spoken to Michael who confirmed that he did this

I have warned the [subpostmaster] that unless an error comes back they could be liable

Copies of intervention manager Alan Ridoutt’s notes

25th February 2022 ~ Lies & Concoctions During Public Inquiry

The aim of the public post office horizon IT inquiry should not ‘only be to establish the truth – what happened, why, and where accountability may lie – but also to alleviate public concern and restore confidence.

It should ‘provide an independent account of the facts and a mechanism for recommendations so that a reoccurrence of such events does not happen.

Is lawyer Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry, a post conviction activist or an independent inquirer?

On 25th February 2022 Seema Misra chose to lie to the inquiry about trainer Michael Opebiyi, and she literally attempted to re-write history – enabled by Jason Beer.

Below is an extract from inquiry transcripts where Jason Beer chose to go along with Seema Misra’s lies and concoctions regarding trainer Michael, which is surely in breach of his legal and professional commitments to the inquiry – and to the rule of law (p.44 & 45 here).

  • Jason Beer: Did there come a time when the trainer rang the helpline
  • Seema Misra: Yes. So the first week trainer, he was.. he was there but, like when the shortfalls were there and everything he said “Oh, and on Wednesday when you do rollover, it will balance up”. And on Wednesday when I do rollover, I have to put again money from the shop counter and he was just gone, nothing.. nothing said. But then when the next trainer came, Michael, the second week, and he asked me “Congratulations, how is it going and everything?”. I said.. you know, I told him what had been happening from the first day until the balancing. He was concerned. He said “Let’s see how it goes”. He was there like Junaid but, he was paying more attention to each and every transaction we do and on Wednesday he was there with the balancing and all that, and there was a shortfall. It was in hundreds.. I think a couple of hundred pounds. He called the helpline said he had been here whole week watching each and every transaction, me doing it correctly, but still there’s a shortfall. So the helpline asked him to do some procedure on the system and the figure doubled up
  • Jason Beer: Just tell us that bit again. He was getting some instructions down the phoneline from the helpline?
  • Seema Misra: Correct
  • Jason Beer: They said to do something with the system?
  • Seema Misra: Correct
  • Jason Beer: And that caused the shortfall to double?
  • Seema Misra: Double
  • Jason Beer: So what happened with the doubled shortfall?
  • Seema Misra: Nothing. He said, like, you know “Just keep an eye”. I can’t remember exactly how was it dealt with but he said “Keep an eye, if there’s any issues there’s a helpline number, call them up”. But he was shocked. He said “I can’t” – I ask him can he stay over another week or something. He said he can’t, he’s supposed to here (sic) for one week only

Why did Jason Beer choose to enable Seema Misra’s lies?

She was referring to events which occurred around a month after she began trading, when a voucher was issued to “clear” the “£400 shortfall” figure.

Seema Misra’s allegations that figures “doubled” was, and still is, yet another blatant concoction.

At no time during her evidence at trial did Seema Misra give any indication that any figures had “doubled”.

PART 34a ~ Continued.. Grave Concerns Regarding Jason Beer & His Legal & Professional Commitments To The Inquiry & The Rule Of Law & Fraudster Seema Misra’s Guile
*UPDATED* Grave Concerns Regarding Expert Witness Duncan Atkinson & His 18th December 2023 Misleading, Unreasonable, Inadequate & ‘Smoke & Mirrors’ Report On Embezzler & Thief Seema Misra & How It Does Not Consider The Very Real Innocence Fraud Phenomenon (Part 19)

Link to Part 35 here

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Charade: Grave Concerns Regarding Jason Beer & His Legal & Professional Commitments To The Inquiry & The Rule Of Law & Thief & Fraudster Seema Misra & Her Guile (Part 34)

Seema Misra
Jason Beer

18th October 2010 ~ Lies & Concoctions During Trial

On 18th October 2010 during her evidence in chief, Seema Misra attempted to dupe the jury by allegeding there had been “shortfalls” in her West Byfleet post office branch, at the end of her very first and second weeks balancing – in front of both her onsite trainers Junaid and Michael Opebiyi.

She had been given the keys to the post office on 29th June 2005.

Seema Misra’s evidence was that trainer Janaid arrived at her branch on Thursday 30th June, and stayed for one week, until balancing on Wednesday 6th July 2005.

Her evidence during trial regarding the weekly balance was an alleged “£150” figure at the end of her first week trading with Junaid, and an alleged “£400 shortfall” figure, at the end of her second week with Michael.

She lied to the jury and said that trainer Michael had “made a phone call from office, I don’t know where”, and that she did not hear from Michael again after Wednesday 13th July 2005.

There were no telephone calls to the horizon helpline during Seema Misra’s two week onsite training, between 30th June and 13th July 2005, with regards any “£400 shortfall”.

Defence lawyer Keith Hadrill asked Seema Misra about her second week in the branch, which began on Thursday 7th July 2005. Below are copies of extracts from trial transcripts regarding this (p.51 here);

  • Keith Hadrill: So the week goes by. Did you know what the transaction errors were or did you receive anything personally? The second week, the same trainer or a different trainer?
  • Seema Misra: No. This was Michael came in
  • Keith Hadrill: Was that from a Thursday to Wednesday or Wednesday to Thursday?
  • Seema Misra: (inaudible) Thursday
  • Keith Hadrill: What happened whilst Michael was there? Did he also sit behind and watch what you were doing?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah. He was sitting behind me, but I mentioned to him – as he come in “how is it going?” I said “not good. I am having to put money in every day to the post office”. He was more concerned than Junaid. He said “that should not be happening. Let us see how it goes”.
  • Keith Hadrill: Did it get any better?
  • Seema Misra: No: I have to again put money in every day and then when balancing with Michael it came round about £400 short
  • Keith Hadrill: At the end of the week?
  • Seema Misra: End of – yeah, end of the balancing Wednesday. That is my first balance –second balancing in office, first with Michael
  • Keith Hadrill: So the first day with Michael on the second week?
  • Seema Misra: That is right – no – yeah. That is right
  • Keith Hadrill: It is £400 short?
  • Seema Misra: No, no, no. That is on the second balancing £400 short
  • Keith Hadrill: So that is the end of the second week?
  • Seema Misra: End of second week
  • Keith Hadrill: Did you get any error corrections there?
  • Seema Misra: No. Michael said “it is a bit unusual. I know you have been doing the transaction correctly”. Then I remember him staying behind and he made a phone call from office, I don’t know where, but he said he had been observing. We are doing the transaction correctly. He can’t understand – and they have been putting the money in every day to balance the till and he can’t understand why the £400 shortfall is
  • Keith Hadrill: Right. So that gets to the end of the week. Did you get any more training?
  • Seema Misra: Not after Michael, no, but he said he will look into it
  • Keith Hadrill: Was that the last you heard of him?
  • Seema Misra: That is right

During his cross examination, prosecutor Warwick Tatford referred to Seema’s memory with respect to trainers Janaid and Michael, and their time at her branch during her first two weeks trading.

Seema Misra agreed with Warwick Tatford that she had a “clear” memory of these events. Below are copies of further extracts from transcripts (p.114 here);

  • Warwick Tatford: Right. I see. You have a clear memory as I understand of what happened between you and Junaid and Michael in 2005 when losses were occurring from the very beginning?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: And that is an important part of your defence, isn’t it?
  • Seema Misra: I don’t understand that. Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying that the losses may be down to some kind of computer error, are you not, or are you not saying that?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah. We are saying that, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: Right, or they are down to your incompetence?
  • Seema Misra: Yes
  • Warwick Tatford: Or they are down to theft?
  • Seema Misra: Yes
  • Warwick Tatford: Do you accept it cannot all be down to theft?
  • Seema Misra: I don’t know. It is just I know the losses are there
  • Warwick Tatford: Let us just examine it. £89,000 loss when you dismiss the thieves. The thieves have gone. The losses continue. So the losses that continue cannot be down to the thieves because you have sacked them?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: So theft alone by your employees does not explain the loss, does it?
  • Seema Misra: Okay
  • Warwick Tatford: So it must be down to one or both of two matters, either computer error or your incompetence?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: Right. So your potential incompetence or the issue of your competence and the issue of computer error are important parts of your defence?
  • Seema Misra: Okay
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying as I understand it “I knew from day one there was a problem with the system because I was suffering these losses.” Yes
  • Seema Misra: I knew from the day one that we were losing money
  • Warwick Tatford: Yes, and day one in what would have been rather difficult for your employees to steal from you on day one with Junaid there, would it not?
  • Seema Misra: Yeah, when I look back, yes
  • Warwick Tatford: Yes. So from day one you were suffering losses which you could not explain and you now put those down to either failings on your part, a lack of competence, or some sort of computer problem. Do I have it correct?
  • Seema Misra: Sorry, say that again
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying you think there was a problem with the computer. Is that right?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: You are saying you are worried that you were not up to running the system, that you were lost?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: When you were interviewed by the Post Office on 14th January just after the audit those are matters you knew, were they not? You knew on day one that there were losses, that Junaid had found losses. You knew that Michael had had losses that he could not explain. Those are matters fresher in your memory than they are now because you were being interviewed in 2008. Yes?
  • Seema Misra: That is right, yeah
  • Warwick Tatford: So why didn’t you say anything to the Post Office investigators in interview about what happened with Junaid and Michael?
  • Seema Misra: I got answered the question what they asked for. I did mention in Elaine Ridge’s interview that it was because staff was blaming might be a system error

Seema Misra lied to the jury and chose to intentionally conflate Michael Opebiyi‘s first week in the branch, between Thursday 7th July to Wednesday 13th July 2005, with his return to the branch, several weeks later.

During her evidence in chief Seema Misra had stated “Then I remember a guy came in, somebody from Network something” (p.57h here).

Almost a month after Seema Misra began trading, on 25th July 2005 a request was received relating to her branch for “ad hoc” training to be carried out regarding “balancing procedure”.

Following the 25th July request, trainer Michael Opebiyi was allocated to return to her branch on Wednesday 27th July, and again on Wednesday 3rd August 2005.

These were only one day assignments.

  • Keith Hadrill: Was that the last you heard of him?
  • Seema Misra: That is right

Again, referring to her first two weeks onsite training, Keith Hadrill had asked Seema Misra “Did you get any more training?” to which she had stated “Not after Michael, no”.

This was a lie by concealment.

Michael Opebiyi had returned to her branch almost a month after she had last seen him, but Seema Misra chose to withhold this information from the jury.

She also chose to lie about the “£400 shortfall” figure, which was not known about until August 2005.

The “guy” referred to by Seema “from Network something” was intervention manager Alan Ridoutt.

Alan Ridoutt made a record of his dealings with Seema Misra, as well as the “£400 shortfall” figure.

The following are copies of some of Alan Ridoutt’s ”visits log”;

This branch was visited on 10, 17 and 27 August 2005 regarding balancing issues

I have spent many hours sorting out balancing issues and helping with the stock setup as well as arranging ad hoc training

This branch is currently holding a loss of £466.73 and an over of £96.80

That was put into the suspense account by the trainer ‘Michael’

Who told the [subpostmaster] that a voucher would be issued to clear it

I have spoken to Michael who confirmed that he did this

I have warned the [subpostmaster] that unless an error comes back they could be liable

Copies of intervention manager Alan Ridoutt’s notes

25th February 2022 ~ Lies & Concoctions During Public Inquiry

The aim of the public post office horizon IT inquiry should not ‘only be to establish the truth – what happened, why, and where accountability may lie – but also to alleviate public concern and restore confidence.

It should ‘provide an independent account of the facts and a mechanism for recommendations so that a reoccurrence of such events does not happen.

Is Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry, a post conviction activist or an independent inquirer?

On 25th February 2022 Seema Misra chose to lie to the inquiry about trainer Michael Opebiyi, and she literally attempted to re-write history – enabled by Jason Beer.

Below is an extract from inquiry transcripts where Jason Beer chose to go along with Seema Misra’s lies and concoctions regarding trainer Michael, which is surely in breach of his legal and professional commitments to the inquiry, and to the rule of law (p.44 & 45 here).

  • Jason Beer: Did there come a time when the trainer rang the helpline
  • Seema Misra: Yes. So the first week trainer, he was.. he was there but, like when the shortfalls were there and everything he said “Oh, and on Wednesday when you do rollover, it will balance up”. And on Wednesday when I do rollover, I have to put again money from the shop counter and he was just gone, nothing.. nothing said. But then when the next trainer came, Michael, the second week, and he asked me “Congratulations, how is it going and everything?”. I said.. you know, I told him what had been happening from the first day until the balancing. He was concerned. He said “Let’s see how it goes”. He was there like Junaid but, he was paying more attention to each and every transaction we do and on Wednesday he was there with the balancing and all that, and there was a shortfall. It was in hundreds.. I think a couple of hundred pounds. He called the helpline said he had been here whole week watching each and every transaction, me doing it correctly, but still there’s a shortfall. So the helpline asked him to do some procedure on the system and the figure doubled up
  • Jason Beer: Just tell us that bit again. He was getting some instructions down the phoneline from the helpline?
  • Seema Misra: Correct
  • Jason Beer: They said to do something with the system?
  • Seema Misra: Correct
  • Jason Beer: And that caused the shortfall to double?
  • Seema Misra: Double
  • Jason Beer: So what happened with the doubled shortfall?
  • Seema Misra: Nothing. He said, like, you know “Just keep an eye”. I can’t remember exactly how was it dealt with but he said “Keep an eye, if there’s any issues there’s a helpline number, call them up”. But he was shocked. He said “I can’t” – I ask him can he stay over another week or something. He said he can’t, he’s supposed to here (sic) for one week only

During the inquiry Seema Misra was referring to events which occurred around a month after she began trading, when a voucher was issued to “clear” the “£400 shortfall” figure.

Her allegations that figures “doubled” was, and still is, yet another blatant concoction.

At no time during her evidence at trial did Seema Misra give any indication that any figures had “doubled”.

PART 34a ~ Continued.. Grave Concerns Regarding Jason Beer & His Legal & Professional Commitments To The Inquiry & The Rule Of Law & Fraudster Seema Misra’s Guile
*UPDATED* Grave Concerns Regarding Expert Witness Duncan Atkinson & His 18th December 2023 Misleading, Unreasonable, Inadequate & ‘Smoke & Mirrors’ Report On Embezzler & Thief Seema Misra & How It Does Not Consider The Very Real Innocence Fraud Phenomenon (Part 19)

Why Isn’t “Leading Academic Commentator & Researcher On The Post Office Scandal” Richard Moorhead From Exeter University Being Objective? (Part 32)

Richard Moorhead

Richard Moorhead has recently been described as “a leading academic commentator and researcher on the Post Office scandal” by John Hyde in the law society gazette here.

During her October 2010 trial for theft, Seema Misra told the jury that a trainer called Michael, who was supporting her during her second week of trading in the post office, had allegedly made a telephone call in the office but she did not know who he phoned.

What Seema Misra told the jury was;

Then I remember him staying behind and he made a phone call from office, I don’t know where

Seema Misra – 18th October 2010 – Source trial transcripts from page 52 here

All call logs to the Horizon helpline number were disclosed and addressed during Seema Misra’s trial, starting from the day she went “live”.

There were no calls made from the West Byfleet post office to the horizon helpline number during her first 2 weeks trading.

However by the time of the post office horizon IT inquiry, referring to Michael the trainer, Seema Misra lied and concocted the following;

On Wednesday he was there with the balancing and all that, and there was a shortfall.

It was in hundreds, I think a couple of hundred pounds.

He called the helpline said he had been here whole week watching each and every transaction, me doing it correctly, but still there’s a shortfall.

So the helpline asked him to do some procedure on the system and the figure doubled up

Seema Misra – 23rd February 2023 – Inquiry transcripts page 44 & 45 here

Below is an extract from the inquiry transcripts where Jason Beer chose to go along with Seema Misra’s concoctions, which is surely in breach of his legal and professional commitments to the rule of law (p.45 here);

What are Richard Moorhead’s thoughts on these blatant lies and concoctions and Jason Beer’s behaviour?

Ironically in October 2023 Richard Moorhead, along with Steven Vaughan and Kenta Tsuda from the university of Exeter wrote a report for the legal services board headed WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR LAWYERS TO UPHOLD THE RULE OF LAW? (Read more here).

Grave Concerns Regarding Expert Witness Duncan Atkinson & His 18th December 2023 Misleading, Unreasonable, Inadequate & ‘Smoke & Mirrors’ Report On Embezzler & Thief Seema Misra & How It Does Not Consider The Very Real Innocence Fraud Phenomenon (Part 19)

Link to Part 33 here

Is Deceptive Nick Wallis The Hack Richard Moorhead Has Alleged Is Being “Threatened” By SLAPP Like Tactics? (Part 31)

Nick Wallis – photo courtesy of BBC Scotland TV show “disclosure”

Referring to alleged “leading academic commentator” Richard Moorhead, John Hyde has stated today via the law gazette;

Moorhead said he is aware of a journalist being threatened with ‘SLAPP-like tactics’ by a law firm in relation to their reporting of the inquiry.

John Hyde for the law society gazette here dated 9th February 2024

SLAPP stands for strategic lawsuits against public participation.

Innocence Fraud Watch emailed the post office horizon IT inquiry about concerns regarding the evidence of Duncan Atkinson, which included the fact Nick Wallis has falsely accused a post office auditor in his book The Great Post Office Scandal.

He has also written and published lies and concoctions regarding the case against thief and embezzler Seema Misra.

Tap on the button below to read more;

Innocence Fraud Watch Have Alerted The Post Office Horizon IT Chair Wyn Williams About Grave Concerns Regarding Expert Witness Duncan Atkinson (Part 22)

John Hyde also stated;

Moorhead said the legal profession could no longer approach legal ethics as ‘business as usual’ and that this attitude would result in more scandals like Horizon.

He cited website testimonials for lawyers who were instructed by the Post Office which boasted of how one individual was a ‘steamroller that crushes anything that gets in his way’.

Another KC was said to be able to ‘turn a pile of refuse into something that looks great’.

John Hyde for the law society gazette here dated 9th February 2024

The following excerpts are taken from a paper written by Richard Moorhead, Karen Nokes and Rebecca Helm from the university of Exeter (Source p.41 here);

Richard Moorhead, Karen Nokes and Rebecca Helm have not considered the way the website testimonials for lawyers instructed by the opposition “sell their services”, especially in comparison to their actual online behaviour.

For example, a website testimonial for Edward Henry boasted he was “utterly charming too”.

Yet Edward Henry’s online behaviour betrays this testimonial.

Link to Part 32 here

The Lies, Concoctions & False Allegations Of Enabler Nick Wallis In His Great Post Office Scandal Book Re: Thief, Embezzler & Fraudster Seema Misra, Investigator Mr Morris & The October 2005 Auditor (Part 25)

Nick Wallis

Facts Vs Fiction

The following false statement is from innocence fraudster Nick Wallis’s book The Great Post Office Scandal on embezzler and fraudster Seema Misra;

On the morning of 14 January 2008 at 8.30am two Post Office auditors, Adrian Norris and Keith Noverre, walked into the West Byfleet Post Office.

Excerpt by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

Adrian Morris (not Norris) was not an auditor, he was an investigator and he did not arrive at the post office until “about ten minutes past two in the afternoon” (Source p.62 here).

Nick Wallis also falsely states;

It was Keith Noverre who had allegedly told Seema during her first audit on 5 October 2005 that if she ‘lost’ as much as £500 in future, she would be removed from her post.

Excerpt by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

Nick Wallis’s above concoction is not based on the facts of the evidence of the case.

After checking Seema Misra’s March 2008 disciplinary interview with Elaine Ridge, following which she was formally suspended, prosecutor Warwick Tatford established that what Seema had actually said was;

I knew I would get suspended if short of £500

Seema Misra (from 12th March 2008) Source trial transcripts from page 10 here

There was no mention on any audit, or any auditor.

Warwick Tatford told the court;

That clearly may be a reference to the warning by the auditor but there is no explicit mention of the warning itself, unless I am misreading something

Statement by Warwick Tatford – Source trial transcripts from page 10 here

Seema Misra’s original statement went on to morph out of all recognition.

The auditor story was invented by Seema Misra during her trial, and has since grown arms and legs, with Nick Wallis now falsely accusing Keith Noverre.

Nick Wallis also included an allegation made for the first time during her trial;

Seema had already been told that any discrepancy larger than £500 would cost her her job

Excerpt by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

Prosecutor Warwick Tatford asked Seema about the October 2005 audit, and auditor;

Do you remember you saw Keith Noverre give evidence. Was he there?

Warwick Tatford – Source trial transcripts from page 126 here

To which Seema replied;

He was not

Seema Misra – Source trial transcripts from page 126 here

Nick Wallis also falsely stated in his book;

Neither Seema nor Davinder were present. Seema was in Luton, borrowing yet more money from her sister-in-law, which she intended to put in a rem pouch and send to the Post Office.

Excerpts by Nick Wallis from his book The Great British Post Office Scandal published by Helen Lacey & David Chaplin of Bath publishing via kindle October 2021

According to the evidence, it was Ali Raza who had opened up the post office, a few minutes after Keith Noverre had arrived.

According to Keith Noverre, Davinder Misra came along a few minutes after Ali Raza.

Nick Wallis’s statement “Seema was in Luton, borrowing yet more money from her sister-in-law” contradicts Seema’s own evidence at trial.

When asked by Warwick Tatford “how much” sister-in-law Omika Kalia was “going to bring along” Seema Misra told the jury;

I didn’t get chance to speak to them because I have to call back, come back to office

Seema Misra – Source trial transcripts from page 152 here

There was also no evidence that proved Seema Misra was even in Luton that morning.

The fact Seema had stated “I didn’t get the chance to speak to them” and she had to “call back” suggested she had not actually seen Omika Kalia.

Seema Misra had included a reference to Nick Wallis’s false and misleading book, in her 17th February 2022 witness statement for the biased post office horizon IT inquiry;

Screenshot of page 7 of Seema Misra’s ‘statement to the inquiry’
Screenshot

Read more by tapping on the button below;

HORIZON CRIME PAYS TIMELINE: The True Story Of Fraudsters Seema & Davinder Misra & Their West Byfleet Costcutters Shop & Post Office – Includes Chief Enabler Nick Wallis #InnocenceFraud #GravyTrain (Part 23)

Link to Part 26 here