The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scandal at the Post Office: The Intersection of law, ethics and politics
Open accessAbstract
The Post Office Horizon scandal in the United Kingdom, possibly the most extensive miscarriage of justice in English legal history, was caused by a number of interrelated factors. These include: the legal presumption that computers are reliable; the unwillingness and failure of judges to order appropriate and necessary disclosure of documents by the Post Office, where required to ensure fairness at trial; the unethical conduct by the board and management of the Post Office; failure by government – the Post Office’s owner, and questionable litigation strategies adopted by the Post Office’s lawyers. Index words: Post Office; Horizon IT system; disclosure; discovery; electronic evidence; ethics; politics
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Cases such as the Robodebt scheme, the UK Post Office Horizon scandal, and the Dutch SyRI system show that highly automated and data-driven screening mechanisms deployed at the population level generate extremely harmful mass effects and make it difficult for individuals to obtain adequate redress and compensation.
“These cases show how highly automated and data-driven screening mechanisms deployed at the population level generate extremely harmful levels of mass effects and how difficult it is for individuals to obtain adequate redress and compensation.”
From Resh(AI)ping Good Administration: Addressing the Mass Effects of Public Sector Digitalisation (2024) · cites this paper as Marshall 2022
For the UK Post Office Horizon case, the Miscarriage of justice and Adversarial assumptions sections describe widespread harm from reliance on computer-generated shortfalls and substantial obstacles to obtaining redress and adequate compensation. The paper describes an accounting system used for postmasters, not a population-level screening mechanism; it does not establish that characterization of the case. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Law Commission presumption concerning the dependability of computer evidence
Ladkin, P. B., Littlewood, B., Thimbleby, H., et al. (2020) · Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review · doi:10.14296/deeslr.v17i0.5143 · Cited by 15
Recommendations for the probity of computer evidence
Marshall, P. W., Christie, J., Ladkin, P. B., et al. (2020) · Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review · doi:10.14296/deeslr.v18i0.5240 · Cited by 14
Self-citationThe harm that judges do – misunderstanding computer evidence: Mr Castleton’s story
Marshall, P. (2020) · Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review · doi:10.14296/deeslr.v17i0.5172 · Cited by 12
Self-citationAn approach to the judicial evaluation of evidence from computers and computer systems
Jackson, M. D. (2021) · Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review · doi:10.14296/deeslr.v18i0.5289 · Cited by 5
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [3]3. Peter Bernard Ladkin, 'Robustness of software', 17 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review (2020) 15- 24
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Resh(AI)ping Good Administration: Addressing the Mass Effects of Public Sector Digitalisation
Sanchez-Graells, A. (2024) · Laws · doi:10.3390/laws13010009 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Marshall, P.
- Affiliations
- Gray's Inn (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Marshall, Paul
- ORCID
- Marshall, Paul
- Venue
- Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review
- Publisher
- School of Advanced Study
- Published
- 2022-01-11
- Pages
- 12-28
- ISSN
- 1756-4611 (ISSN-L)
- 2054-8508
- OpenAlex
- W4312591268
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 8.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Education, Law, and Society
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal processes and jurisprudence
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Law and Evidence
- Keywords
- miscarriage of justice, disclosure of documents, discovery, digital evidence, computer reliability, judicial ethics, litigation strategy, IT system failures
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
