Post Office Inquiry live: head of legal faces grilling from victims' lawyers

 4.30pm: And that is that. Sir Wyn wraps up proceedings by thanking Rodric Williams for his detailed witness statement and thanks counsel for sticking to time. Next week is a key one, when we will hear from former Post Office general counsel Susan Crichton (Tuesday) and Chris Aujard (Wednesday). We'll be back then with live updates. Have a nice weekend everyone.

3.40pm: Jacobs' final point is around documents showing the Post Office opted not to call Gareth Jenkins as a witness in the Bates litigation because of his previous involvement with criminal trials.

Williams appears to struggle over some of the questions before chair Sir Wyn Williams (no relation) makes a rare intervention.

'Hang on, Mr Williams, we know why you didn't call Mr Jenkins - or at least there is a document which explains that - before the litigation which was that you thought his credibility was shot. That is why you didn't call him isn't it?' 

The solicitor concedes that this is correct.

3.15pm: Williams repeatedly denies the Post Office had a deliberate strategy to drag out the Bates litigation until the claimants ran out of money.

The inquiry then sees an email from Parsons to Williams in 2017 from claimant firm Freeths, which says: ‘My witness statement has really annoyed them. This is good – the more time they waste on side correspondence the less time they are spending on important matters!’

Williams is asked again if it was part of the strategy to wait until claimants ran out of money, but he says this was not right as there was cost budgeting already in place and the Post Office didn’t know what finances were available to claimants.

2.40pm:  Discussing the Post Office's potential response to Second Sight, Williams emailed colleagues: 'I'd like to avoid giving anything if at all possible (less is more).'

Jacobs says his clients all say the Post Office did not want this information getting out and did not want people knowing where monies had gone. The inquiry hears that Second Sight was never given an answer to its questions about the suspense accounts.

1.15pm:  Before the inquiry broke for lunch there were questions to Williams about why he appeared to do nothing to address the flawed conviction of Seema Misra from 2010, despite having evidence through the Second Sight report and other evidence that the evidence used to convict her was unreliable. Henry says at the very least Williams knew there had been a miscarriage of justice from 2016 onwards.

Misra, who was pregnant at the time she was jailed and gave birth wearing an electronic tag, did not have her conviction overturned until 2021. 

Williams says: 'I take no pride, comfort or confidence in having worked for an employer that engaged and conducted the greatest miscarriage of justice that we have seen. It is awful that people with convictions had them and had them for the length of time they did. And for my part in that I am truly sorry.'

Henry replies: 'You were not just associated with it, you were in the middle of the web.'

12.35pm: The inquiry sees an internal email from Williams discussing the Post Office response to a BBC enquiry about Horizon prosecutions, suggesting the organisation should be 'Post Office is acutely aware of the duties imposed on it when it brings a prosecution, and is confident that it has acted in accordance with those duties at all times.' 

Henry points out that at this stage Williams knew about defects in the system, knew that Jenkins' evidence in trials was compromised and knew that remote access was possible.

12.05pm:  Beer continues pressing on the issue of remote access and the Post Office's response as it emerged that branch accounts could be changed.

The key element appears to be the Deloitte report in 2014 for Post Office that this was possible, which appears to contradict the line being taken by Post Office. The inquiry also sees an email exchange from the time - between Rodric Williams and Andrew Parsons - where they discuss a witness statement from Fujitsu expert witness Gareth Jenkins, where he said that 'it is true that [remote] access is possible'. Parsons says it only refers to balancing transactions in branches but that this revelation would be a 'red rag' to the accountants Second Sight, who are assessing the robustness of Horizon. He later says this information would be 'entirely new' to Second Sight.

Williams says he does not know whether this should have been disclosed, saying he had 'not contextualised' the email exchange since receiving it. When asked why he did not raise these issues sooner, he says: 'I regret it, I promise.' For the first time he looks close to tears.

11.10am:  Discussion then moves to the instruction of accountants Deloitte to produce a purportedly independent report on Horizon in 2014. Williams' email instructions were that the Post Office 'wants to demonstrate' that the Horizon system is robust, fit for purpose and/or operates within an appropriate control framework'.

Beer says this note 'doesn't particularly suggest the Post Office was looking for objective findings' and that the organisation appeared to be framing the review in the outcome that it wanted.

Williams firstly says he doesn't want to be flippant before pausing and saying 'so I won't be'.

He answers: 'There are many things people want but they don't get them.'

Beers says: 'Is that your best answer?' Williams replies that it is.

10.15am:  The inquiry is pressing Williams on his response to the notorious Clarke Advice, relating to instructions given to external barrister Simon Clarke on the Post Office approach. A document written in 2013 says that Clarke was advised that minutes and emails relating to discussions about Horizon 'should be and have been destroyed' and 'shredded'. This was following a recommendation by Post Office head of security John Scott.

Williams says this is an 'extremely serious allegation' and the inquiry sees a letter he drafted for general counsel Susan Crichton in which she states the Post Office is 'deeply concerned' at the suggestion that documents should be destroyed. But there appears to have been no investigation by the Post Office about whether the advice was carried out.

9.55am:  Day two of Rodric Williams' evidence is now underway, with inquiry counsel Jason Beer KC once again asking questions to the Post Office's head of legal.

Once Beer is finished, inquiry chair Sir Wyn Williams had allowed three groups of core participants - representing victims of the scandal - 45 minutes each to put their questions to Williams.