Hillsborough inquiry - verdict

[Tangled up in Blue]

Not to mention all the people who amended, and coerced other people into amending, their witness statements, and thereby perverting the course of justice.

According to BBC news this lunchtime, once the jury reached their verdict of unlawful killing their job was done. However, given the verdict there is now an obligation (can't remember the actual term used) on the CPS to investigate and see if anyone should be charged.

Yesterday was all about justice for the 96 who died at Hillsborough.Now the accountability can begin.

 

[rigsby]

Yesterday was all about justice for the 96 who died at Hillsborough.Now the accountability can begin.

The FA were happy to see the all the blame dumped on the Scousers 27 years ago. Now they are happy to see it go completely the other way onto the Police and Ambulance.

Time to have a look at the FA. Through out the Eighties there were several near misses which came very close to disaster. At least three or four at Hillsborough semi-finals. Others at Wembley, like Arsenal v Luton in the league cup final.

 

[londonblue]

The FA were happy to see the all the blame dumped on the Scousers 27 years ago. Now they are happy to see it go completely the other way onto the Police and Ambulance.

Time to have a look at the FA. Through out the Eighties there were several near misses which came very close to disaster. At least three or four at Hillsborough semi-finals. Others at Wembley, like Arsenal v Luton in the league cup final.

Near misses is something that is really only opinion and speculation (because it didn't happen), and would be difficult to prove (I would imagine). However, what is certain, is that they awarded an FA Cup semi final to a stadium that didn't have a current safety certificate. That, to me, is certainly worthy of investigation.

 

[Uncle Leo]

On rigsby's point above, I certainly remember reading about this one...

https://hotspurhq.com/2012/09/12/the-hillsborough-disaster-in-1981-it-could-have-been-tottenham/

Which others were there? (Not doubting, it is a genuine question)

 

[johnlattimerssponge]

The FA were happy to see the all the blame dumped on the Scousers 27 years ago. Now they are happy to see it go completely the other way onto the Police and Ambulance.

Time to have a look at the FA. Through out the Eighties there were several near misses which came very close to disaster. At least three or four at Hillsborough semi-finals. Others at Wembley, like Arsenal v Luton in the league cup final.

I certainly agree they have to shoulder some of the blame becauseas you rightly state there were previous problems at Hillsborough. In the 1981Semi final between Wolves and Spurs 38 of those from North London were injured. The ground was not then used to hold a Semi Final for several years before in 1985 the Leppings Lane end was ‘improved’ include the very pen’s that ultimately stopped fan’s being able to move across the terrace 1989. Then 1988 as per the following article Liverpool fan’s had safety issues behind the goal for the first time.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/fa-ignored-warning-of-crushing-at-1988-semi-final-8135609.html

So despite Liverpool FC voicing there concerns regarding the terrace they were allocated it by the FA. Whilst Nottingham Forrest whohad a smaller fan base were allocated the larger terrace with an additional 5,000 tickets. Added to the fact the ground did not have a current ground safety certificate makes the FA far-from blameless as well

 

[rigsby]

I certainly agree they have to shoulder some of the blame becauseas you rightly state there were previous problems at Hillsborough. In the 1981Semi final between Wolves and Spurs 38 of those from North London were injured. The ground was not then used to hold a Semi Final for several years before in 1985 the Leppings Lane end was ‘improved’ include the very pen’s that ultimately stopped fan’s being able to move across the terrace 1989. Then 1988 as per the following article Liverpool fan’s had safety issues behind the goal for the first time.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/fa-ignored-warning-of-crushing-at-1988-semi-final-8135609.html

So despite Liverpool FC voicing there concerns regarding thethat terrace they were allocated it by the FA. Whilst Nottingham Forrest whohad a smaller fan base were allocated the larger terrace with an additional 5,000 tickets. Added to the factthe ground did not have a current ground safety certificate makes the FA farfrom blameless as well

I believe the Coventry semi-final 1987 also had problems.

 

[OldBlueLady]

I fully expected the verdict that came regarding unlawful killing. What I don't want to see is 2016 opinions on accountability being applied to something that happened 27 years ago. Things were very different back then.

Obviously there has to be compensation to the relatives of the victims but I hope some sense will be applied and that private prosecutions against individuals don't end up happening. Whatever happened on the day happened because of a tragic set of circumstances, what happened afterwards with the lying and that are two totally different things and should be treated as such in my opinion.

 

[rigsby]

Near misses is something that is really only opinion and speculation (because it didn't happen), and would be difficult to prove (I would imagine). However, what is certain, is that they awarded an FA Cup semi final to a stadium that didn't have a current safety certificate. That, to me, is certainly worthy of investigation.

Near miss is certainly not opinion or speculation, it is recognisable and you have a duty to report it if you work in the emergency services, event organisers etc.

The whole idea is for everyone to be made aware of the circumstances of what happened and why it could have lead to disaster. The point being if you are a large institution like the FA responsible for 50,000 people at an event you certainly don't encourage a culture of 'we got away with that one'

Hillsborough was like other disasters, they are a chain of critical events. If you have predicted the problems in advance you only have to remove one event to avoid the disaster. Just a few I can think of would be

Look at and learn from previous Disasters at football ground
Look at and learn from near misses at Hillsborough
Choice of suitable stadium in the first place
Fences around the pitch that could not be easily opened
Pens that could not be easily opened
Poor ticket distribution by the FA
The problems of playing at a neutral ground. In effect the police have 50,000 away fans arriving
Poor pre planning. The previous year fans could not get near the turnstiles without a ticket.
Wrong person in charge. Lack of experience (first game was a cup semi) knowledge, training, or guidance from other staff.
Gate to the Tunnel was not closed when the middle pens were already full.
Communication equipment was poor or non existent. Had everyone known the gates were about to be open, it would have taken just one member of staff/police to realise the tunnel gate must be closed first.
The Major Incident procedure was totally ineffective. Clearly that had never done a combined exercise with all the emergency services.

That said for us fans in the 80's we were treated with utter contempt by the authorities and a lot of the police. Yes we were no angels and we all played our part in the lead up to Hillsborough. In some way or another we are all responsible for those 96 deaths.

Of course its much more convenient to find a scape goat like Dukenfield. He was faced with a critical situation around the turnstiles at ten to three. With reports of the wall about to collapse and people already being crushed.
How many of us can honestly say we would not have opened the gates, faced with that situation. A decision that must have been agreed or advised by his immediate staff.

Yes Duckenfield lied at first and then there was a conspiracy by many high ranking police officers and that's what they should be prosecuted for.

Whether David Dukenfield should be the one facing a manslaughter charge is of course debatable.

 

[Pubey]

I fully expected the verdict that came regarding unlawful killing. What I don't want to see is 2016 opinions on accountability being applied to something that happened 27 years ago. Things were very different back then.

Obviously there has to be compensation to the relatives of the victims but I hope some sense will be applied and that private prosecutions against individuals don't end up happening. Whatever happened on the day happened because of a tragic set of circumstances, what happened afterwards with the lying and that are two totally different things and should be treated as such in my opinion.

If people have acted criminally, why shouldn't they face the consequences?

 

[OldBlueLady]

If people have acted criminally, why shouldn't they face the consequences?

I don't believe anyone acted criminally on the day. There was a situation that developed and that was out of control and as outlined in Rigsby's post. The criminal aspect arose out of what happened after the event.

 

[londonblue]

Near miss is certainly not opinion or speculation, it is recognisable and you have a duty to report it if you work in the emergency services, event organisers etc.

The whole idea is for everyone to be made aware of the circumstances of what happened and why it could have lead to disaster. The point being if you are a large institution like the FA responsible for 50,000 people at an event you certainly don't encourage a culture of 'we got away with that one'

Hillsborough was like other disasters, they are a chain of critical events. If you have predicted the problems in advance you only have to remove one event to avoid the disaster. Just a few I can think of would be

Look at and learn from previous Disasters at football ground
Look at and learn from near misses at Hillsborough
Choice of suitable stadium in the first place
Fences around the pitch that could not be easily opened
Pens that could not be easily opened
Poor ticket distribution by the FA
The problems of playing at a neutral ground. In effect the police have 50,000 away fans arriving
Poor pre planning. The previous year fans could not get near the turnstiles without a ticket.
Wrong person in charge. Lack of experience (first game was a cup semi) knowledge, training, or guidance from other staff.
Gate to the Tunnel was not closed when the middle pens were already full.
Communication equipment was poor or non existent. Had everyone known the gates were about to be open, it would have taken just one member of staff/police to realise the tunnel gate must be closed first.
The Major Incident procedure was totally ineffective. Clearly that had never done a combined exercise with all the emergency services.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. What I meant was that you can only speculate as to the potential outcome of these near misses. I'm not saying they didn't happen, rather, we can't be sure what could have happened, and for that reason I would prefer to take people to task on what we know they did do, and the FA quite wrongly allowed a football match to be played at a stadium that wasn't fit for purpose, and from what I can work out, they knew it at the time.

That said for us fans in the 80's we were treated with utter contempt by the authorities and a lot of the police. Yes we were no angels and we all played our part in the lead up to Hillsborough. In some way or another we are all responsible for those 96 deaths.

I can honestly say I have never been even spoken to by a policeman at a football match, and there are plenty in the same boat. However, I completely understand what you're saying. I wouldn't say we're all to blame, I would say that a small minority of football fans had caused plenty of trouble previously, and for that reason the police (and other authorities) felt justified in treating all football fans like animals. Hillsborough was the culmination of all of that trouble.

 

[Pubey]

I don't believe anyone acted criminally on the day. There was a situation that developed and that was out of control and as outlined in Rigsby's post. The criminal aspect arose out of what happened after the event.

I guess we'll see. The whole case is being passed to CPS, I guess to see if there's a manslaughter charge that can be brought, as well as a perverting the course of justice case about what happened after the tragedy. Duckenfield has spent the last 25 years playing golf on a decent pension, after retiring early to avoid police prosecution. It's only right that the CPS exhaust all options for criminal charges.

 

[londonblue]

I don't believe anyone acted criminally on the day. There was a situation that developed and that was out of control and as outlined in Rigsby's post. The criminal aspect arose out of what happened after the event.

Can you say for certain that no-one was criminally negligent? If so, I would ask you how you came that conclusion, and what your qualifications for that are, especially baring in mind that the inquiry has just lasted 2 years, and I don't believe for one second that you have read the transcript of the entire inquiry. Personally I would rather leave it to the CPS, and a jury (should it get that far) to decide.

One thing we're definitely in agreement on, however, is that there seems to be plenty of evidence of criminality after the event.

 

[rigsby]

I don't believe anyone acted criminally on the day. There was a situation that developed and that was out of control and as outlined in Rigsby's post. The criminal aspect arose out of what happened after the event.

Quite agree. If you keep your night club emergency doors locked with a chain or fit a gas appliance when your not qualified then you are knowingly committing a criminal offence.

He was not being malicious when he gave the order to open the main gates. If you watch the CCTV of that moment you can see fans actually applauding the decision.

As you say the criminal aspect was after the event, which was sadly allowed to continued for 27 years.

 

[OldBlueLady]

I guess we'll see. The whole case is being passed to CPS, I guess to see if there's a manslaughter charge that can be brought, as well as a perverting the course of justice case about what happened after the tragedy. Duckenfield has spent the last 25 years playing golf on a decent pension, after retiring early to avoid police prosecution. It's only right that the CPS exhaust all options for criminal charges.

I must admit, I thought he'd died. How he lives with himself I have no idea. Not for what he did on the day, but what he did afterwards.

 

[manor15]

I fully expected the verdict that came regarding unlawful killing. What I don't want to see is 2016 opinions on accountability being applied to something that happened 27 years ago. Things were very different back then.

Obviously there has to be compensation to the relatives of the victims but I hope some sense will be applied and that private prosecutions against individuals don't end up happening. Whatever happened on the day happened because of a tragic set of circumstances, what happened afterwards with the lying and that are two totally different things and should be treated as such in my opinion.

If they acted criminally, they should be punished as criminals. Whether it was a policeman in 1989 or a random guy on the street in 2016.

I hope to see some claims/action taken against Kelvin McKenzie/The S*n as well after the verdict. Read an interesting piece not so long ago about the journalist who wrote the "The Truth" article, who claimed that McKenzie created the title, twisted his words and stated as fact things which he had written as unproven allegations.

 

[rigsby]

If they acted criminally, they should be punished as criminals. Whether it was a policeman in 1989 or a random guy on the street in 2016.

I hope to see some claims/action taken against Kelvin McKenzie/The S*n as well after the verdict. Read an interesting piece not so long ago about the journalist who wrote the "The Truth" article, who claimed that McKenzie created the title, twisted his words and stated as fact things which he had written as unproven allegations.

Apparently McKenzie now posts on the Zone......... as mrsblue

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I have my views on this, but I accept that the jury has spoken, so that should be the end of the matter.

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jan/03/double-jeopardy-change-law-retrial

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ars-on-what-can-we-learn-from-IRA-terror.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/marcia-clark-talks-physically-painful-o-j-simpson-verdict-20160307

 

[mrsblue]

Big well done to the families !


The police lied and lied again in order to cover up their errors,rank and file officers were bullied to alter their statements by top brass.Those who instigated and ordered the lying cover up should face prison.

 

[johnlattimerssponge]

A moving tribute to the 96 and their families on the front of Everton's programme.Respect.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490