I did a quick look around for some blogs about this early paper to digital transaction register migration, I didn't see much for such a major case.
Just a few basic things that wasn't included, no audit/transaction logs, transactions modified by tech support to keep the system running.
Operators couldn't prove they didn't steal funds, and the british law that computers systems are to be trusted as fact, pretty much convicted them all.
This isn't a software error and it is pretty clear.
There are two problems here. First, the branch manager is responsible for calculated shortfalls, even if the software is broken. Second, there is no way to overturn broken software. Third, the prosecutors are overzealous in trying to shut these people up and convict them straight away.
The software itself was just a convenient medium for abuse of authority.
Just a few basic things that wasn't included, no audit/transaction logs, transactions modified by tech support to keep the system running.
Operators couldn't prove they didn't steal funds, and the british law that computers systems are to be trusted as fact, pretty much convicted them all.