Post Office scandal: Editor says sorry for adding to ex-Lancashire sub-postmistress' distress over Horizon conviction and jailing

Jacqueline McDonald pleaded guilty to charges of theft and false accounting at Broughton Post Office and was sentenced to 18 months in jail back in January 2011.

She served four-and-a-half months, but her name was eventually cleared just over a decade later after it was shown that she had been wrongly convicted as part of the Horizon IT scandal at the Post Office.

The ex-sub-postmistress of a branch in Cleveleys was an earlier victim of the affair.

Julie Wolstenholme ran the branch on Runnymede Avenue in the town and was suspended in November 2000 and sacked two months later after a Post Office investigation found she was in breach of contract when she refused to use the now controversial computer system. She was pursued for £25,000 through the civil court by the Post Office.

Speaking to The Gazette at the time, her father Mark Jackson, said that his daughter was “devastated, adding: “We had no choice but to stop using the computers because they kept crashing because they couldn’t cope with the amount of work. We asked for help for 10 months and the Post Office wouldn’t listen.”

On Thursday, the ongoing public inquiry into the scandal was told of a claim by Mrs. McDonald that the Post Office-employed investigator in her case had “bullied” her while he was looking into an alleged shortfall of around £94,000 at her branch.

Stephen Bradshaw was accused by the counsel to the inquiry of regarding her prosecution as somehow being “career-boosting” for him.

Since the wider injustice - in which more than more than 700 subpostmasters and mistresses were convicted - came to more widespread public attention following last week’s ITV drama, “Mr. Bates vs. the Post Office”, the Lancashire Post has come in for some social media criticism for the way in which it covered Jacqueline McDonald’s case at the time of her guilty plea and jailing.

There have been calls from some within the Broughton community for the paper to apologise, with one comment suggesting that the Post should be “first in line” to do so.

Responding to the criticism, Lancashire Post and Blackpool Gazette digital editor Vanessa Sims said: “Media outlets don’t very often apologise - and while we stand by our entirely accurate reporting of Jacqueline McDonald’s case in 2011, we are sorry that our coverage will no doubt have compounded her distress at knowing that she had felt compelled to plead guilty to crimes she didn't commit.

“At the time, the Post was - like many other local newspapers nationwide - publishing a legally sound account of court proceedings involving a sub-postmaster or mistress in which wrongdoing was either admitted or was the conclusion reached by a jury.

“Of course, we now know that Jacqueline’s case was one part of a patchwork of injustice being stitched across the country as a result of the Horizon scandal. However, back in 2011, while it had long been evident to those caught up in the shameful affair that they had been wrongly accused - and even, like Jacqueline, convicted and jailed - that was far from being widely understood.

“At the turn of the 2010s, some specialist national media titles, which had been investigating the allegations made by the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA) - led by the formidable Alan Bates, who gave his name to last week’s ITV dramatisation - were piecing together the puzzle of what is now widely regarded as the biggest miscarriage of justice in British legal history.

“However, here in Lancashire, there was no local uprising to suggest anything like that had befallen Jacqueline McDonald - nor, as far as we can ascertain, any evidence brought to us asking to investigate such a claim.

“In later years, of course, the facts surrounding her case became clear and the Post has since reported them in detail, both online and in print - and long before the recent increase in public interest in the scandal - including the overturning of her conviction and evidence she submitted to the public inquiry. Just today, we have reported more of her written testimony, which was put to the Post Office investigator in her case.

“Jacqueline has the utmost sympathy of everyone here at the Post for everything she has endured and we do sincerely regret that her awful experience included having to see her reputation tarnished in her local paper,” Vanessa added.

‘I don’t know where the money is’

During Thursday’s sitting of the Horizon IT inquiry, the transcript of an interview between Jacqueline McDonald and the Post Office investigator in her case, Stephen Bradshaw, was read out by counsel to the inquiry Julian Blake.

The exchange included the investigator saying: “Would you like to tell me what happened to the money?”

Ms McDonald replied: “I don’t know where the money is - I’ve told you.”

Mr Bradshaw continued: “You have told me a pack of lies.”

Ms McDonald said: “No I haven’t told you a pack of lies, because I haven’t stolen a penny.”

Mr Blake said the witness’s words sounded “somewhat like language you might see in a 1970s television detective show”.

Responding to Ms McDonald’s allegations of his aggressive behaviour in his witness statement, Mr Bradshaw said: “I refute the allegation that I am a liar.

“I also refute the claim that Jacqueline McDonald was bullied, from the moment we arrived, the auditor was already on site, conversations were initially (held) with Mr McDonald, the reason for our attendance was explained, Mr and Mrs McDonald were kept updated as the day progressed.”

The investigator added: “Ms. Jacqueline McDonald is also incorrect in stating Post Office investigators behaved like Mafia gangsters looking to collect their bounty with the threats and lies.”

Mr Blake showed Mr Bradshaw his “self-appraisal” of Ms McDonald’s case, in which the investigator said: “The offender pleaded guilty to false accounting but would not accept theft.

“I challenged the recommendations of the barrister and persuaded him that a trial would be necessary, as the reason given by the defendant, Horizon integrity, would have a wider impact on the business if a trial did not go ahead.”

Mr Blake then asked the witness: “It seems, certainly from your own feedback, from your own appraisal, that you saw it as in some way career-boosting to press on with Ms McDonald’s case because of problems with the Horizon system having a wider impact on the business, do you not accept that?”

Mr Bradshaw responded: “The issue would been discussed with the prosecution barrister – as you’re well aware, when you’re filling in one-to-ones, there’s always a flamboyant way of putting the words across.”

Throughout his witness statement, Mr Bradshaw said his investigations had been conducted in a “professional” manner.