4 ms·

Scandalous to me that although the software is entirely discredited, and although this has been known for years now, only 72 people have been cleared.

dataflow 5y ago
Yeah! That's the part that's left me scratching my head. They know the software is flawed (at least now!), and they still presume these people are guilty unless proven innocent? How is that not "miscarriage of justice"?!
- native_samples 5y ago
  Well, each case has to be annulled individually - the justice system doesn't do bulk acquittals I think. It's also hugely embarrassing to the justice system of course. In a way it's the fault of societies near blind assumption that expert=truthful. The Fujitsu people need to go to jail because they repeatedly assured the courts that the software couldn't be at fault even though they had a bug tracker full of loss-of-transactionality bugs. And the legal system just said, well, they're the experts, so if they said it, it's true.
  - dataflow 5y ago
    That sounds like perjury... did they really just lie to the court? Or were they just not competent enough to realize loss of transactionality can affect this? In the latter case it sure sounds like maybe courts should ask for the actual data (e.g. bug tickets) and have an independent expert assess them?
    - native_samples 5y ago
      The actual bug tickets etc are public. There is a report that's been published into what happened that goes into a lot of detail on each individual failure. In most cases they figured out what was wrong. The requirements for the system was kind of a programmers worst nightmare tbh - they needed a very complex and frequently changing database app to be usable offline, so they had to implement a lot of sync and conflict reconciliation logic that frequently turned out to be buggy or have race conditions. They also had incredibly awkward bugs like "the touch screen hardware we deployed had a bad manufacturing batch that caused a subset to start submitting random button presses 12 months after deployment". It took them a while to realize that the actions weren't genuinely being made by the post masters, etc. And yeah, iirc they lied to the court. Courts are supposed to anticipate this of course, but unfortunately defense teams near universally didn't push them on this or try to uncover their lies. Like I said, our culture has a severe problem with assuming experts are always honest and trustworthy. It's a totally flawed assumption and it resulted in hundreds of lives being destroyed in this case, but literally, nobody in the legal system including the defense really tried to probe whether the software really did work as the authors said it did. They just accepted the assurances made that it was perfect.
2ion 5y ago
I can't stress enough how this is gross neglegience on the side of the prosecution and justice system, I'd even say treason towards the affected citizens. Having a criminal record denies you opportunities in life and some countries won't even ever let you work or travel within their borders anymore, regardless if after a period of time a criminal record has been cleared in your home country for example due to expiry. For example, the disembarkment card for air travellers of any kind to Japan includes a mandatory question "have you ever been convicted of a crime including countries other than Japan" yes/no and the text of card leaves you no choice but to circle yes and guarantee that with your signature (or circle no and lie, running the risk of committing a crime in Japan if they do a check). Based on that info alone, they may cross-examine you or deny entry even to tourists at the airport. Again, leaving innocent citizens with a record cannot be excused on any level after the problem has become known.
daddylonglegs 5y ago
I think that - in theory - each case is unique and was individually tested at a trial where the evidence was weighed and judgement delivered. For each case lawyers need to prepare a case for appeal. Then the prosecution [1] has an opportunity to assess the case and to decide whether to contest it. If they don't contest the case then the subsequent court hearing (once it happens) should be quick. The set of people convicted for stealing from the Post Office could include someone who was caught red-handed with an open till, wearing a stripey shirt and a Zorro mask and carrying a large sack with SWAG written on it in bold letters. Obviously this hypothetical thief shouldn't be acquitted with all the innocent people. IANAL Since 2010 there have been large cuts to the police, the courts, the pay of barristers and to legal aid [2]. The result is a massive backlog in cases and covid came on top of that. So it currently takes years to get anything done in the British legal system. There is a lot more broken that just this particular piece of software. [1] I don't know if the response to these appeals is the duty of the Crown Prosecution Service or the Post Office. The costs will ultimately be borne by the public purse in either case, the PO is financially obliterated by it's liabilities. [2] The system for paying the legal costs of individuals in court in the UK. Very little of it is left now. Edit: I don't think anyone is still prison for these convictions. Most sentences were for less than three years and the whole process has been dragging on for a long time.

dataflow 5y ago

Yeah! That's the part that's left me scratching my head. They know the software is flawed (at least now!), and they still presume these people are guilty unless proven innocent? How is that not "miscarriage of justice"?!

native_samples 5y ago
Well, each case has to be annulled individually - the justice system doesn't do bulk acquittals I think. It's also hugely embarrassing to the justice system of course. In a way it's the fault of societies near blind assumption that expert=truthful. The Fujitsu people need to go to jail because they repeatedly assured the courts that the software couldn't be at fault even though they had a bug tracker full of loss-of-transactionality bugs. And the legal system just said, well, they're the experts, so if they said it, it's true.
- dataflow 5y ago
  That sounds like perjury... did they really just lie to the court? Or were they just not competent enough to realize loss of transactionality can affect this? In the latter case it sure sounds like maybe courts should ask for the actual data (e.g. bug tickets) and have an independent expert assess them?
  - native_samples 5y ago
    The actual bug tickets etc are public. There is a report that's been published into what happened that goes into a lot of detail on each individual failure. In most cases they figured out what was wrong. The requirements for the system was kind of a programmers worst nightmare tbh - they needed a very complex and frequently changing database app to be usable offline, so they had to implement a lot of sync and conflict reconciliation logic that frequently turned out to be buggy or have race conditions. They also had incredibly awkward bugs like "the touch screen hardware we deployed had a bad manufacturing batch that caused a subset to start submitting random button presses 12 months after deployment". It took them a while to realize that the actions weren't genuinely being made by the post masters, etc. And yeah, iirc they lied to the court. Courts are supposed to anticipate this of course, but unfortunately defense teams near universally didn't push them on this or try to uncover their lies. Like I said, our culture has a severe problem with assuming experts are always honest and trustworthy. It's a totally flawed assumption and it resulted in hundreds of lives being destroyed in this case, but literally, nobody in the legal system including the defense really tried to probe whether the software really did work as the authors said it did. They just accepted the assurances made that it was perfect.

2ion 5y ago

I can't stress enough how this is gross neglegience on the side of the prosecution and justice system, I'd even say treason towards the affected citizens. Having a criminal record denies you opportunities in life and some countries won't even ever let you work or travel within their borders anymore, regardless if after a period of time a criminal record has been cleared in your home country for example due to expiry. For example, the disembarkment card for air travellers of any kind to Japan includes a mandatory question "have you ever been convicted of a crime including countries other than Japan" yes/no and the text of card leaves you no choice but to circle yes and guarantee that with your signature (or circle no and lie, running the risk of committing a crime in Japan if they do a check). Based on that info alone, they may cross-examine you or deny entry even to tourists at the airport. Again, leaving innocent citizens with a record cannot be excused on any level after the problem has become known.

daddylonglegs 5y ago

I think that - in theory - each case is unique and was individually tested at a trial where the evidence was weighed and judgement delivered. For each case lawyers need to prepare a case for appeal. Then the prosecution [1] has an opportunity to assess the case and to decide whether to contest it. If they don't contest the case then the subsequent court hearing (once it happens) should be quick. The set of people convicted for stealing from the Post Office could include someone who was caught red-handed with an open till, wearing a stripey shirt and a Zorro mask and carrying a large sack with SWAG written on it in bold letters. Obviously this hypothetical thief shouldn't be acquitted with all the innocent people. IANAL Since 2010 there have been large cuts to the police, the courts, the pay of barristers and to legal aid [2]. The result is a massive backlog in cases and covid came on top of that. So it currently takes years to get anything done in the British legal system. There is a lot more broken that just this particular piece of software. [1] I don't know if the response to these appeals is the duty of the Crown Prosecution Service or the Post Office. The costs will ultimately be borne by the public purse in either case, the PO is financially obliterated by it's liabilities. [2] The system for paying the legal costs of individuals in court in the UK. Very little of it is left now. Edit: I don't think anyone is still prison for these convictions. Most sentences were for less than three years and the whole process has been dragging on for a long time.