Hold Fujitsu to account for Post Office scandal

Did Post Office Investigator Stephen Bradshaw regularly sign off INCORRECT witness statements that he hadn't written? He is asked questions about them at the Post Office Inquiry:

Post Office Investigator Stephen Bradshaw denies a statement in his name submitted for a subpostmasters criminal case as being his own, insisting to the Post Office Inquiry that it was written by legal firm Cartwright King:

Post Office Investigator Stephen Bradshaw swiftly BACKTRACKS on his Witness Statement to the Post Office Inquiry within minutes after evidence is shown of emails being sent to him about Fujitsu Horizon issues:

Post Office Investigator Stephen Bradshaw points the finger of Horizon blame directly at Fujitsu and the Board of the Post Office in his opening evidence to the Post Office Inquiry:

Why is the Post Office Inquiry taking so long? We look at the reasons and an update from Sir Wyn, chair of the Inquiry about issues relating to the logistics of running an inquiry and the issues surrounding disclosure:

Fujitsu DOWNPLAY Horizon Audit Concerns over a year after they first became aware of the issues and choose to communicate a single incident at one branch which they now say is resolved at the Post Office Inquiry:

Fujitsu become increasingly concerned that their OWN witness statements, past and current, are INACCURATE but Fujitsu Manager Peter Sewell tells the Post Office Inquiry that he cannot remember being concerned at the time:

Fujitsu Manager Peter Sewell is told AGAIN about CATASTROPHIC Audit Weaknesses in Horizon but doesn't appear to be particularly bothered as he answers questions at the Post Office Inquiry:

Fujitsu Manager Peter Sewell had NO Concerns Over INACCURATE Witness Statements provided to the Post Office for Court Cases despite managing the team providing them he tells the Post Office Inquiry:

Fujitsu Manager Peter Sewell is pointedly asked 'what is the point of your job?' as he discusses the extent of his involvement as an URGENT Horizon Audit change request to simply be to 'listen to people' at the Post Office Inquiry:

Following concerns in 2008, Fujitsu internally acknowledge that the Horizon audit process was 'prone to error'. So why were no steps taken to fix it? Fujitsu Manager Peter Sewell answers questions at the Post Office Inquiry:

No one at Fujitsu wants to take responsibility for Horizon Error checks evidence to the Post Office Inquiry shows as one team eventually agrees to do an 'informal favour' temporarily handling it:

After halting ARQ requests and witness statements, Fujitsu conclude that there is 'insufficient evidence' to justify a thorough investigation into the Horizon audit process in evidence shown to the Post Office Inquiry:

Fujitsu HALT Post Office ARQ Requests and witness statements, evidence shown to the Post Office Inquiry shows, over concerns around the integrity of the Horizon system in 2008:

Fujitsu Manager Peter Sewell says that he was unaware of the known issue relating to Horizon 'losing' transactions and creating shortfalls at Post Office branches in 2007 and 2008 in evidence to the Post Office Inquiry: