Professional Pathologies, Causal Pathways and the Post Office Miscarriages of Justice

2000年，作为更加商业化的努力的一部分，邮局在其所有分支机构中引入了有缺陷的电子会计系统。该系统产生了错误的债务记录，邮局(PO)表示其工作人员应对此负责。根据这些错误的记录，邮政署人员被要求偿还他们没有欠下的钱；当被指控管理不善或不诚实时，他们失去了作为邮局副局长的工作或业务；许多人(估计超过700人)被起诉、定罪，许多人因偷窃和伪造账目而入狱。生计、声誉和自由都丧失了。这些定罪的第一次撤销始于2021年，当时上诉法院发现邮局的行为如此糟糕，以至于他们的定罪是对公共司法的“侮辱”。多年来，一连串的不良行为被曝光，这些行为往往是由PO的律师推动或监督的。上诉法院的判决是基于2019年高等法院的一起案件的调查结果，该案件认定PO一直在运行一种不符合目的的会计系统。律师们以压抑和误导的方式为该案辩护。这些案件揭示了一些事件，特别是在2010年、2013年和以后，警察警察内部问题的证据被忽视或被压制，对警察警察行为的受害者造成了灾难性的影响。韦恩·威廉姆斯爵士正在进行的诉讼和正在进行的司法调查已经并将产生大量关于邮局错误和不当行为核心的行为和决定的详细信息。这提供了一个将律师的行为和思维过程置于显微镜下的关键机会。在人们对律师道德的担忧与日俱增之际，我们可以发展新的思维，旨在降低此类行为的可能性。我们可以超越抽象、复杂、不太可能影响行为的律师道德传统方法，开发出能够鼓励律师更认真地对待自己的道德规则的方法。我们还可以做一些工作，帮助监管机构改进自己的规则手册和其他程序，追究律师的责任。为此，我们将运用最新的道德思想，并与从业人员合作，探索他们将如何或应该如何在现实世界中做出决定。我们还将利用丑闻受害者的陈述，以确保我们的知识和方法了解受害者如何经历有时令人困惑的法律界。尽管邮局丑闻的结果是可怕的，但导致丑闻的问题对于在商业(和其他)组织工作的律师来说是相当常见的。我们的方法和思维将确保我们从邮局丑闻中吸取的教训将远远超出这一可怕案件的范围。

In 2000, as part of a drive to become more commercial, the Post Office introduced a flawed electronic accounting system into all their branches. That system generated erroneous records of debts which the Post Office (PO) said its staff were responsible for. On the basis of those erroneous records, PO staff were asked to repay money they did not owe; lost their employment or businesses as sub-postmasters when accused of mismanagement or dishonesty; and, many (estimated at over 700) were prosecuted, convicted, and many were imprisoned for thefts and false accounting they did not commit. Livelihoods, reputations, and freedom were lost. The first quashings of these convictions began in 2021 after the Court of Appeal found that the Post Office had acted so badly that their convictions were an "affront to public justice". A litany of poor behaviour, often driven or overseen by lawyers working for the PO, over many years was exposed. The Court of Appeal's judgment built on findings in a High Court case in 2019 which found that PO had been running an accounting system that was not fit for purpose. The case was defended by lawyers in ways which were oppressive and misleading. Those cases revealed a number of episodes, especially in 2010, 2013, and beyond, where evidence of problems within PO was ignored or suppressed with catastrophic impacts on the victims of PO's behaviour. The litigation, and the ongoing judicial inquiry, being conducted by Sir Wyn Williams has, and will, produce a wealth of detailed information on the behaviors and decisions lying at the heart of Post Office's mistakes and misconduct. This provides a crucial opportunity to put the conduct and thought processes of lawyers under the microscope. At a time when concern about lawyers' ethics is growing, we can develop new thinking which will aim to make this kind of behaviour less likely. We can move beyond traditional approaches to lawyers' ethics which are abstract, complex, and unlikely to affect behaviour and develop approaches that can encourage lawyers to take their own ethical rules more seriously. We can also do work that will help regulators improve their own rule-book and other processes to hold lawyers accountable.To do this we will deploy the latest thinking on ethics, and work with practitioners to explore how they would or should take decisions in the real world. We will also draw on the accounts of victims of the scandals to ensure that our knowledge and approach are informed by how victims experience the sometimes bewildering world of law. Although the outcome of the post office scandal is horrifying; the problems that led to it are quite common for lawyers working within commercial (and other) organisations. Our methods and thinking will ensure that the lessons we learn from the Post Office scandal will be applicable well beyond the confines of this terrible case.