Reflecting on the lessons more broadly, the paper argued that, in dealing with an organisation that “could not grasp the possibility that Horizon and its prosecution process were flawed”, lawyers “absorbed and reflected back their client’s view” without “sufficient independence and critical detachment”. Mr Altman found no reason to stop the prosecution work. This considered an earlier review of private prosecutions following discovery that the evidence was tainted. This one highlights a range of concerns with a review the Post Office commissioned from Brian Altman KC in 2013. The working paper is the sixth submitted to Sir Wyn Williams’ inquiry by the Post Office scandal project being run by the Evidence-based Justice Lab at Exeter University. Regulators also need to consider how to ensure that lawyers conducting ‘independent’ reviews for clients truly operate independently. The Post Office scandal highlights the dangers of lawyers absorbing and reflecting back their client’s view “without sufficient independence and critical detachment”, academics have argued. Post Office: Cognitive co-dependency is a real issue for lawyers

Horizon client