Image source, Post Office Inquiry

Aujard is shown a document which appears to show Paula Vennells "resilling" from what he calls the executive committee's view over prosecutions of sub-postmasters.

"My recollections was the executive committee were in favour of ceasing prosecutions entirely but when the matter was discussed at the committee, Paula interjected or made the comment that the proposal should not be taken as what I had intended," Aujard says.

Aujard adds Vennells felt Post Office should continue to take some prosecutions rather than cease altogether.

We are back from lunch and Chris Aujard is facing questions this time on issues at a Post Office in Falkirk where there was a problem in 2005.

Stay with us as we bring you the latest from the Inquiry.

Several people and organisations were mentioned in today's iteration of the Post Office inquiry. Let's take a quick look at who each of them are.

Susan Crichton was the Post Office's general counsel - top in-house lawyer - until 2013.

Chris Aujard succeeded Crichton as the Post Office's general counsel and top lawyer. He worked at the company until 2015.

Gareth Jenkins is a former chief IT architect at Fujitsu, the company that developed the Horizon computer system.

Second Sight are independent forensic accountants who played a key role in exposing the scandal, finding flaws in the Horizon computer system which generated false evidence of cash shortfalls at sub-post offices, leading to wrongful prosecutions of sub-postmasters.

Jarnail Singh is a lawyer who was part of the Post Office's in-house criminal law team.

Paula Vennells was the Post Office's chief executive between 2012 and 2019.

Did key details fall between the cracks?published at 13:24 British Summer Time 24 April

13:24 BST 24 April

Peter Ruddick
Business reporter

When there is a handover in a job there is always a risk that things fall between the cracks. A risk that increases when someone is replacing a person leaving abruptly or under a cloud.

Is that what happened to the so-called Clarke advice? An external legal opinion that the former expert evidence from Gareth Jenkins was "fatally undermined".

This morning, we heard Susan Crichton admit she should have done more to raise this advice to the Post Office board. However, there was "a lot going on" with her departure from the organisation.

Her successor Chris Aujard knew about the 'Jenkins problem' from day two in the job. The closest he got to telling the board was a document referring to "associated issues".

Why did he not raise it more strongly? He says he assumed issues pre-dating him were already being resolved.

Is that credible? That is for the inquiry to decide. But it is a reminder that the very everyday issue of job handovers can have a big impact in a scandal like this.

Image source, PA Media

For those of you catching up with today's inquiry in your lunch breaks, here's a round up of the key lines so far:

Chris Aujard- former general counsel to the Post Office:

• He began by saying how "deeply sorry" he was to the sub-postmasters and others affected for the "anguish and suffering" they have endured
• Aujard also expressed "surprise" that the Post Office had brought private prosecutions against sub-postmasters
• He recalled that no one on the in-house legal team, or in the Post Office more broadly, told him about the bugs, errors or defects in the Horizon IT system
• Throughout, he was keen to emphasise his was a "caretaker" role until a permanent general counsel was found

Susan Crichton - former general counsel to the Post Office:

• Continuing on from Tuesday, Crichton suggested some in-house lawyers had an "unhealthy view" of sub-postmasters
• She also admitted that she should have made sure that the board was made aware that the evidence of Fujitsu's Garth Jenkins was flawed

The Jenkins problem within the Post Officepublished at 12:53 British Summer Time 24 April

12:53 BST 24 April

Simon Jack
Business editor

During questioning of Post Office former general counsel Chris Aujard, the inquiry was shown advice from Post Office barrister Brian Altman KC.

Altman said that even if the Post Office ditched Fujitsu's Gareth Jenkins from future prosecutions as his evidence was "tainted" - there was still a "Jenkins problem" as there was a risk that Jenkins could still influence any new Fujitsu employee evidence.

This was due to Jenkins not only being senior but he also one of the principal architects of Horizon which was vital to Fujitsu.

Horizon was Jenkins' baby and he would defend it either directly - or via a Fujitsu proxy.

The inquiry has broken for lunch. We'll have more updates from this morning's evidence session shortly.

We expect proceedings will recommence in an hour's time.

We're now moving on to Chris Aujard's knowledge of the law in the devolved nations.

Counsel to the inquiry Sam Stevens asks Aujard what knowledge he had of criminal law in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

None, Aujard says.

Stevens then questions how Aujard satisfied himself that the Post Office was acting in compliance with Scottish law.

Aujard says that when he joined the company he met with Cartwright King and Brian Altman KC, and in those meetings, he adds, he was reassured that there we no ongoing matters requiring his attention.

Image source, Post Office Inquiry

Stevens goes on to ask Aujard if he was aware the Post Office had brought private prosecutions against sub-postmasters in the past.

"I was aware, in a general sense, of the prosecutions being brought", he says, adding he was "very surprised" when he discovered it was done as a general power for any corporation.

Stevens then puts it to Aujard that he was aware the Post Office relied on data generated by the Horizon IT system to prove its case in those prosecutions, and that as such, it was essential this data was reliable.

"Correct," Aujard confirms.

Inquiry counsel Sam Stevens now asks Aujard his thoughts on the "competence" of Jarnail Singh, a lawyer who was part of the Post Office's in-house criminal law team.

Singh's name has come up several times at the inquiry.

"My recollection is that he was not someone I would go to for higher order matters," Aujard says. Instead, he would refer to law firm Cartwright King for matters including past prosecutions and issues arising from the mediation scheme.

Bugs, errors and defects in the Horizon system come up a lot in the inquiry. Stevens asks Aujard if he ever discussed these with Singh. While he can't recall a specific discussion, Aujard says the legal offices were "very small" and "open plan", so such matters were well known.

"When I joined the Post Office, the message I got was there were no bug, errors or defects apart from those identified in Second Sight report," Aujard adds.

Chris Aujard is now being asked about his understanding of the role of general counsel.

He first joined the Post Office as interim general counsel in October 2013, where he held a series of contracts until leaving the company in March 2015.

Aujard says the role as interim general counsel was primarily to ensure the Post Office board and employees were informed on legal matters, as well as managing a department of lawyers.

He goes on to tell the inquiry there is a difference between the role of an "interim" and "permanent" general counsel, and as interim general counsel he exercised more of a caretaker role.

Chris Aujard begins by expressing how "deeply sorry" he is to sub-postmasters, sub-postmistresses and Post Office employees, and their families, for the "anguish and suffering" they have had to endure.

He says the inquiry has come "far too late" for many of the victims.

But the former general counsel hopes the evidence he gives today "will get to the heart of what happened, and will stop something like this from ever happening again".

Image source, PA Media

Aujard took over from Susan Crichton in 2013, who was the Post Office's general counsel and top in-house lawyer.

We’re now hearing from Aujard himself, and counsel to the inquiry Sam Stevens is likely to ask Aujard about his involvement in the collapse of the mediation scheme for sub-postmasters and plans to get rid of the Second Sight team.

The independent forensic accountants, Second Sight, played a key role in exposing the Post Office scandal, finding flaws in the Horizon computer system.

As we've been reporting, the system generated false evidence of cash shortfalls at sub-post offices, leading to wrongful prosecutions of sub-postmasters.

Image source, Post Office Inquiry

Chris Aujard has just been sworn in to give evidence to the Post Office inquiry.

As a reminder, Aujard took over from Susan Crichton as the Post Office's general counsel - the company's top in-house lawyer - in 2013.

We'll be bringing you the latest lines from the inquiry, and you can follow along by pressing the Play button at the top of our page.

That brings to an end Crichton's evidence to the Post Office Inquiry. Next we'll hear from Chris Aujard, the Post Office's former general counsel.

The inquiry is taking a quick break, but we'll bring you the latest lines as soon as it returns.

Blake turns his line of questioning now to advice given around apologising to sub-postmasters.

He points out that Sir Antony Hooper - the chairman of the Post Office's mediation scheme - had said that employees should be prepared to apologise to sub-postmasters during the mediation process.

He then says Post Office lawyer Brian Altman was pushing back, saying an apology could raise the success rate of an appeal among previously convicted individuals.

Crichton responds by saying that she didn't remember getting advice from Sir Antony Hooper because she was probably on the way out of the business, but remembers what Altman has said.

She adds: "If we were going to go through with the mediation scheme, then that had to part of it".

Did you express this to anyone, Blake asks.

"I think so, but I really can't remember now," Crichton says.

Image source, Post Office Inquiry

The inquiry is looking at the relationship between the in-house lawyers and Cartwright King, a law firm which was acting on behalf of the Post Office.

Crichton, formerly the Post Office's general counsel, suggests that the Cartwright King legal team exerted a "level of defensiveness that I didn't really appreciate".

"I was aware that there was a conflict of interest," she adds.

For context, Crichton is referring here to the fact Cartwright King had also acted on behalf of Royal Mail's legal team before it was separated from the Post Office,

Crichton adds that there was an "element of marking our own homework".

Cartwright King entered administration in 2022 and a new management team took over. In a statement, external, the new owners said the firm was "horrified at the injustice" of the Post Office scandal.

The inquiry is now discussing advice from barrister Simon Clarke, acting for solicitors' firm Cartwright King, to the Post Office in 2013, which outlined that Gareth Jenkins was an unreliable expert witness and other concerns over documents that may have been shredded.

Remember, Jenkins, a former chief IT architect at Fujitsu, was considered to be an unreliable expert witness because he had failed to tell the courts about bugs and defects with the Horizon system which he knew about.

Crichton tells the inquiry she should, as general counsel, have put in place a process to ensure Clarke's advice and other matters of that significance were surfaced at board level.

She cannot recall why it was not raised, but remembers that "there was a lot going on".

Let's return to the inquiry now. Blake asks Crichton if she had discussed document retention and shredding advice in the Post Office with the organisation's chief executive.

As a reminder, the Post Office has been accused of shredding important documents that could have undermined its claim that there was nothing wrong with the Horizon IT system.

"I can't remember, but I should have done," Crichton replies.

Blake asks then if Crichton thinks that was significant enough to have been raised at board level.

"Yes", replies Crichton, before adding that there was no opportunity to do so.

Two runaway horses just have been filmed racing through central London, coincidentally, charging past Aldwych House - where the inquiry is taking place - on their way.

Warning: This video contains disturbing images.

You can find more details on the breakaway horses here.