Affronts to the public conscience

I have just published my court report from today.

Please read it here.

It was a major victory for the appellants, driven by Seema Misra, Tracy Felstead and Janet Skinner. As a result of today, all the appellants can choose to have their appeal considered on both grounds of lack of disclosure AND affront to the public conscience. Also the concerns of the other appellants – that this would cause a delay to the quashing of their convictions – has been assuaged by the Court of Appeal. Those who were told by the Post Office that their appeal would not be contested will still have their convictions quashed during the week commencing 22 March next year.

There was an odd catch, which the court chose to deploy, in terms of making sure the public is aware of all this. But this shouldn’t detract from how important a day this is for the appellants and their legal team and supporters.

Mason’s mission

Another plug for academic paper I told you about last night.

Stephen Mason and Paul Marshall are two of nine authors behind an immensely readable academic series of recommendations urging a far better approach to the disclosure and understanding of electronic/digital evidence.

It was written as a direct result of the Horizon Issues judgment in Bates v Post Office and was published on the anniversary of that judgment being handed down.

If you are a lawyer, forensic accountant or IT/legal nerd, you can either read the introduction here or just dive straight in.

Thanks to all those who donated and joined the secret emailers in the light of my live tweeting today. I am really grateful.

yours

Nick