Non-motoring > Hillsborough manslaughter charge	Auctions
Thread Author: No FM2R	Replies: 70

New Wed 28 Jun 17 11:32   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

Mmm, can't think that this is going to go well or end well.... www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-40419819 Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Wed 28 Jun 17 14:30   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> Mmm, can't think that this is going to go well or end well.... IIRC they need permission of High Court to prosecute Dukenfield following orders made after unsuccessful private prosecution. Guess that will be forthcoming but many a slip twixt etc... Then there's fair trial issues. As well as passage of time I'd guess defence lawyers will explore whether it's possible, given all that's gone on, to find a jury that's not tainted. Not just the Coppers though, officers of SWFC too. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 28 Jun 17 14:48   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Hard Cheese

>> >> Mmm, can't think that this is going to go well or end well.... >> I'm in two minds, one says the families need justice, the other asks are some of these people scapegoats. And what happens if any of the key figures are found not guilty, how would that help the families ... Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 28 Jun 17 16:07   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Robin O'Reliant

In the case of fabricating evidence, which I believe at least one of the accused has been charged with a prosecution is right. But for mistakes made on the day in a very confusing situation I have serious doubts. This was at a time when football hooliganism was rife and it must have taken a while for the police to realise they were witnessing an unfolding disaster and not unruly fans who were trying to invade the pitch. Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Thu 29 Jun 17 12:49   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> But for mistakes made on the day >> in a very confusing situation I have serious doubts. Duckinfield is charged that: ii. In breach of that duty of care, he failed to take reasonable care: a. to identify particular potential confining points and hazards to the safe entry of approximately 24,000 spectators arriving from the Leppings lane area of Hillsborough into the designated sections of the stadium; b. to sufficiently monitor and assess the number and situation of spectators yet to enter within the stadium; c. in good time to relieve crowding pressures on and from spectators seeking entry to the stadium; d. to sufficiently monitor and assess the number and situation of spectators in pens 3 and 4; The hazards of the stand/ground were well known. There'd been what amounted to a full dress rehearsal, with crushing in same pens, on a previous occasion when Hillsborough was used as a neutral ground. Those hazards should have been mitigated for. By the time it got to what looked like a pitch invasion the damage was already done. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 28 Jun 17 18:39   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> And what happens if any of the key figures are found not guilty, how would >> that help the families ... One thing if they're found not guilty by the jury after a full trial. Another if they're cleared by direction of the judge on purely legal grounds. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 28 Jun 17 19:03   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - sooty123

I'm not sure there's going to be a big difference in that for the families. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 08:11   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Cliff Pope

I'm always a bit worried about this concept of "justice" for victims and families. I tend to feel that justice is something that is necessary for and enforced by society, through the proper agencies, and is not the same thing as revenge or "closure". I agree it probably makes people feel better to know that a culprit has been caught and suitably punished, but I'm not sure that is altogether a healthy motive. Reply to this message | Report message       3

New Thu 29 Jun 17 16:13   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Robin O'Reliant

>> I'm always a bit worried about this concept of "justice" for victims and families. I >> tend to feel that justice is something that is necessary for and enforced by society, >> through the proper agencies, and is not the same thing as revenge or "closure". >> >> I agree it probably makes people feel better to know that a culprit has been >> caught and suitably punished, but I'm not sure that is altogether a healthy motive. >> I agree. Unfortunately it seems to have become the standard in certain types of case, with victim's impact statements being used to add fuel to the fire. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 16:17   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

Insofar as the events of the day are concerned we seem to be prosecuting those who failed to predict what those attending the ground were likely to do and failed to prevent it. I don't love that, but ok. However, what efforts have been put into prosecuting those who actually did it? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 17:09   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Lygonos

>>what efforts have been put into prosecuting those who actually did it? If by that you mean criminal behaviour of individual fans, rather than the effect of a crowd (can't really prosecute a crowd as an entity) then that starts with evidence of such to go to the CPS. I'm more interested in seeing people in power and responsibility who repeatedly lied get their boabies toasted. Criminal negligence through a lack of talent is the lesser vice compared to lying and fabricating evidence to protect the services/bosses. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 17:18   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

>>I'm more interested in seeing people in power and responsibility who repeatedly lied get their boabies toasted. I entirely agree and they most certainly should, hence why I began with... "Insofar as the events of the day are concerned" Aside from that though, a lot of time and money seems to have gone and be going into prosecuting people for events on the day, but I'm not seeing any comparable effort, demand or publicity on tracking those down who actually *did* stuff. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 17:37   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> but I'm not seeing any >> comparable effort, demand or publicity on tracking those down who actually *did* stuff. What was the stuff people actually *did*? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 17:38   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

No idea, do you believe that they did nothing? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 20:03   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> No idea, do you believe that they did nothing? Well let's assume, as per RR's post, you mean supporters. I'm not a follower of footie but I understand that thirty years ago turning up en masse shortly before KO and with proportions of the audience tanked up and/or aggressive was SOP. The hazards Leppings lane presented to such a cohort who were not familiar with it's corridors/pens was obvious and proven by previous events. The hazards should have been mitigated by having police/stewards managing crowd to ensure folks were diverted to the less crowded pens. That such steps were not taken supports allegation of negligence. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 20:33   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

I didn't say supporters because I didn't mean supporters. I meant anyone who turned up. That aside, how do any of your comments address my point about anything they may or may not of done? You're just going on about the same stuff again. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 20:58   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>>You're just going on about the same stuff again. Since you're (uncharacteristically) coy about about anything 'they may or may not of* done'? I'm stuck for material to reply too. * flag for duty pedant Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 21:07   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

Leaving yet more of your endless little comments to one side, if there is nothing to reply to to, then why on earth reply? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 21:08   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

>>anything they may or may not of done Oooo, that's embarassing. Right up there with your/you're. So sorry. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 18:52   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Robin O'Reliant

>> >> What was the stuff people actually *did*? >> Highly unlikely that the fans did anything with criminal intent, but the people who died did not crush themselves but because of the build up of pressure caused by late arrivals pushing their way forward as they tried to get on the terraces. Anyone who was a regular at top class football matches prior to all seater stadiums will know what I mean. There was a lot of irresponsible behaviour by some elements within the crowd which put other people at risk. The cover up aside, the events of the day in question were the result of several factors coming together and causing a catastrophic loss of life. I myself was caught in at least a couple of similar instances where it would have taken just a bit more pressure or for one person to trip to have caused the same sort of incident. If you've ever been compressed in a crowd where apart from your feet you can only move from the neck up you'll know what I mean. It is terrifying. Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Thu 29 Jun 17 at 18:53 Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 10:28   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Cliff Pope

>> >> What was the stuff people actually *did*? >> I would imagine it's the combined effect of lots of people all trying to push into the same narrowing space. No one probably intended to crush to death those they couldn't see at the front, but collectively, it just happened. I'm sure we have all been "guilty" of pushing onto a crowded tube train - in the rush hour it's the only way to get on - and yes, there is a risk that somewhere unseen someone might slip over and be trampled. If anyone is guilty of anything, it's surely organisers and marshals who despite years of experience failed to control the obviously well-known propensities of crowds. Just as farmers don't let the entire flock fight through the sheep-dip at once, they regulate the gate to let them through a few at a time. But as has been said, these are judgements at the time. The real offence is trying to cover it up afterwards. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 20:51   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Fullchat

"Aside from that though, a lot of time and money seems to have gone and be going into prosecuting people for events on the day, but I'm not seeing any comparable effort, demand or publicity on tracking those down who actually *did* stuff." There seems to have been a total denial from Liverpool that any of their supporters 'did stuff' and any of that 'stuff' seems not to have emerged or been the focus of proceedings so far - for some reason.??? Liverpool supporters had a bad history, Heysel? Should this case ever get to court I'm certain that the defence through discosure will root out evidence (subdued?) of the 'the stuff' and produce the evidence of drink, ticketless fans and disorder. Last edited by: Fullchat on Thu 29 Jun 17 at 20:53 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 29 Jun 17 21:13   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

They do seem to have been the most angelic, law-abiding, quiet and orderly group of people ever to be involved in such an event. I find that difficult to believe. Hence my initial wondering about what, if any, efforts have been put into pursuing any misbehaviour by anyone who turned up, irrespective of their group, not just the easy and obvious ones. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 09:58   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> Hence my initial wondering about what, if any, efforts >> have been put into pursuing any misbehaviour by anyone who turned up, irrespective of their >> group, not just the easy and obvious ones. Aside from difficulty of identification what might they be charged with? Are there options beyond usual public order offences or anything framed specifically in relation to behaviour in football grounds? Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 10:15   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Fullchat

Heres a few. www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/football_related_offences/#a04 Ultimately at this stage I think prosecuting individuals would not be appropriate. However it would be appropriate to show that the supporters did have a part to play in the tragedy in contradiction to their total denial. Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Thu 29 Jun 17 21:21   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

There are many reasons and causes for the tragedy. Some of the fans, poor policing and control, managers of the ground and the FA. Not sure how you are going to legally pin the blame for all of those factors on one man. It's unlikely the real criminality will be prosecuted, that is all the ass covering that went on afterwards Ironically, had everyone been honest open and truthful at all stages afterwards, none of this stuff would now be happening Last edited by: Zero on Thu 29 Jun 17 at 21:24 Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Thu 29 Jun 17 22:45   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Ted

Another aspect of this disaster which is rarely mentioned is the pitchside fencing which was fitted to many grounds at the time. The danger could have been mitigated by explosive shoot bolts operated from the control room so the fencing could have collapsed onto the pitch when crowd pressure was applied. Cost saving ? Most people I talk to round here are heartily sick of all the coverage of the Scouse ' victim culture' on the NW TV news. But we're 30 miles away so it hasn't hit us as badly. Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Thu 29 Jun 17 22:54   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - rtj70

>> Ironically, had everyone been honest open and truthful at all stages afterwards, none of this stuff would now be happening And the suffering of relatives would not have gone on for 28 years. They are looking for 'justice' but I fear they are about to suffer even more from another 6 potential trials. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 11:50   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Mapmaker

People need to get over things that happened decades ago, I'm afraid. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 12:45   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - tyrednemotional

I have every sympathy with the grieving relatives, and can probably understand the motivation of (at least some of) them, but this is a juggernaut/bandwagon which has rolled too far. Any charges concerned with judgement/culpability will now be brought in a completely different atmosphere to that which prevailed at the time, both generally in wider life and specifically in football. If they were to be validly brought, it should have been shortly after the event, but of course, they weren't, at least partially because they were originally considered in a contemporaneous light, and the idea dismissed. There is, however, another factor playing on the edge of that, and that is the alleged re-writing of the truth. (The "cover-up"). Even at this later stage, should the evidence now be there to proceed with charges, then this patently should be pursued; perjury/conspiracy to pervert..., etc. are absolute crimes irrespective of the prevailing Zeitgeist. In reality, I'm not sure how much traction the later enquiries would have achieved without further evidence of malpractice in this particular respect. Though I long ago became disillusioned with professional football, I've spent many occasions in crushes (up to a point not long before Hillsborough) that were considered fairly normal at the time, but wouldn't have required much change in crowd dynamic to make them b***** dangerous.This includes a good few spells at Hillsborough itself, on both the Kop and Leppings Lane ends (and no, I'm not a Wednesday supporter, but have a good few friends who are/were). The reality is that, until it all went t*ts-up, it was probably "just another day at the office" for those concerned, and then it rapidly turned into "a bad day at the office". I think, however, the factor that concerns me most is the one already alluded to by some above, that the bandwagon has not only largely exonerated all the fans, and in particular the Liverpool ones, but it appears almost to have beatified them. Given the history, including Heysel, I find that both perplexing and an insult to the intelligence. As I've said, I know a fair few people in Sheffield, and had family that lived at the time in the shadow of Hillsborough. Contemporaneous reports (second, but not third hand, from people I believed and trusted) was that the behaviour of many fans before the match was appalling. Drunken brawling, urinating in shop doorways and front gardens, etc.... I was certainly told that numbers of shops in the Wadsley Bridge area had to close their doors. Large numbers were certainly late to arrive at the ground, many of them reputedly through maximising their time in the pubs. There is no doubt that this late arrival, innocent or not, played a significant role that day (and in hindsight, I've also little doubt that those controlling the match wish they had agreed to postpone kick-off time). It has, however, in face of the bandwagon, become "unfashionable" if not dangerous to share such views (a bit like being shouted down after the referendum for voting Remain), and it certainly seemed to me that the later enquiries skated over this somewhat. I'm not at all sure that, this far down the line, any great number of people will be able to be located to fill in such a background, or that they could be *rsed ti if the were. (water under the bridge;no skin off my nose;not a fashionable view, etc). So, IMO the culpability issues will probably, somewhat unsatisfactorily, result in the conviction of scapegoat(s). (I wouldn't like to be on the jury for that one). The issues of falsification of evidence, however, are probably safe to pursue even at this late stage, reaching a satisfactory conclusion either way based on irrefutable evidence. Reply to this message | Report message       5

New Fri 30 Jun 17 13:05   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Fullchat

Well put Tyred. " I'm not at all sure that, this far down the line, any great number of people will be able to be located to fill in such a background, or that they could be *rsed ti if the were. (water under the bridge;no skin off my nose;not a fashionable view, etc)." And probably wouldn't be overly popular in the Liverpool area either if they stuck their head over the parapet. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Fri 30 Jun 17 13:33   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

Excellent post TnE. No further comment necessary. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 13:54   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - rtj70

It is indeed an excellent post. I personally think pursuit of those who perverted the course of justice is right and convictions possible and probably right. We could have been at the point of knowing the truth 27 years ago. Not sure about the other charges though - they would not have opened those gates had they known what would happen. The same as switching panels on a block of flats to save £300k was not seen as a risk although it probably should have been. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 30 Jun 17 14:19   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Roger.

To me, prosecuting plain incompetence is just wrong, particularly so many years after the event. I d not think anyone is suggesting that the failings, on the day, were deliberate. Not everyone IS competent: how many of us have never failed at something? The covering up, afterwards, is another matter - but what should the charges be? Unless perjury under oath is concerned, what criminal charge can possibly be made? Revenge, as they say, is being served cold here. Similarly, with the recent tower block fire - the activist's (possibly with other axes to grind) noise is so great that it will be politically expedient to "make someone pay". The lawyers will do well - it's an ill wind.......................... Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:03   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-50592077 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 9 Aug 17 08:37   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Duncan

Six charged. Five to appear in court in Warrington. tinyurl.com/ycfrfa5b Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 11 Apr 19 14:22   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - tyrednemotional

...it's interesting to revisit this in the light of the recent inability of the jury to come to a verdict (an Duckenfield at least). Given the jury rules of English law, I doubt we'll ever clearly know the basis of that inability to agree, but I suspect there must have been a little bit of common sense applied by at least 3 of the jury members for it to end that way. I think it must be the best that Duckenfield could have hoped for, and I do hope it sees the end of the matter, and the juggernaut doesn't continue rolling. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 11 Apr 19 15:15   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - zippy

In 1989 football was very different to how it is now. Hooliganism was a feature and good practice procedures have changed dramatically since then. It is hard to see how someone can get a fair trial for decisions made so long ago, in the heat of the moment. I totally understand the victims' families wanting answers and for someone to answer for the deaths of their loved ones, but perhaps after all this time they should accept that it is likely to be very difficult to achieve. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 11 Apr 19 16:26   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

>> I think it must be the best that Duckenfield could have hoped for, and I >> do hope it sees the end of the matter, and the juggernaut doesn't continue rolling. Alas it wont. The baying mob need to blame someone to deflect them from any share of responsibility for the events that day. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:02   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

>> Alas it wont. The baying mob need to blame someone to deflect them from any >> share of responsibility for the events that day. The baying mob have been thwarted www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50592077 Expect howls of outrage from the L1 postcodes. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:08   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/david-duckenfield-not-guilty-breaking-17332585 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:03   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

Hillsborough police chief cleared of manslaughter www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-50592077 Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:23   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

Clear verdict this time. Upset amongst victims families is entirely understandable particularly given delay. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:46   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Robin O'Reliant

The responsibility for the deaths rests mainly with those fans who were at the back having arrived late and were trying to push their way forward. That is what caused the crush at the front of the terraces. Anyone who has attended a major football match before all seater stadiums will have experienced similar instances, fortunately without consequences in most cases. It is frightening at the time and with hindsight you realise that it only needed one person to trip for a Hillsborough to have happened elsewhere. The correct verdict, IMO. Reply to this message | Report message       3

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:53   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

It is the insistence of the fans and their families of their own total innocence which grates with me. Sometimes s*** happens. Usually one can learn from that s***, but the obsession with trying to find someone to blame goes too far. Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Fri 29 Nov 19 12:58   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> The responsibility for the deaths rests mainly with those fans who were at the back >> having arrived late and were trying to push their way forward. That is what caused >> the crush at the front of the terraces. You and others keep saying this but repetition does not make it true. Sheffield Wednesday’s H&S officer, Graham Mackrell was convicted of offences regarding failure to make adequate arrangements for safe management of the spectators arriving at Leppings Lane. Of 23 turnstiles only seven were opened, compared with 13 (albeit for a higher expected attendance) in 1988 when same teams met for same quarter final. Seven gates were utterly inadequate. Guidance, referenced by the judge in sentencing, was that each turnstile could expect to process 750 people an hour. By 2:30 the entrance was overwhelmed and there were already crush injuries occurring. In my very limited experience of attending top class football and more extensive observation when living near a ground (Vicarage Road) most people turn up later than 30 minutes before kick off. That, plus possibility of a cohort maximising drinking time and arriving very close to KO, should have been a given with appropriate provision to get spectators in. That provision was not there. I’ve experienced crowd crushes at non-football public events and on the underground. It doesn’t need any serious pushing; the volume of people is enough. Judge’s sentencing remarks are here: www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Sentence-Mackrell.pdf Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 15:38   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

>> You and others keep saying this but repetition does not make it true. But it is true. David Duckenfield wasnt at the back of that crowd pushing them in was he. >> I’ve experienced crowd crushes at non-football public events Ah non football. You have no e***** idea then what Div1 1970s -80s football grounds and crowds were like. Not an inkling. Tens of thousands of people were responsible for that disaster. The crowd, the attitude, the football league, the stadium owners, the police, Everyone. Sorry scousers you aint gonna blame it on one man let all the others go Scot free and shirk your own responsibility. Last edited by: Zero on Fri 29 Nov 19 at 15:39 Reply to this message | Report message       4

New Fri 29 Nov 19 15:39   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

Yup. That. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 16:35   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> But it is true. David Duckenfield wasnt at the back of that crowd pushing them >> in was he. It doesn't need pushing; the seething mass of people is enough. The point that's crystal clear from judge's remarks when sentencing Mackrell is that the inadequacy of the turnstiles meant a crush was inevitable. >> Tens of thousands of people were responsible for >> that disaster. The crowd, the attitude, the football league, the stadium owners, the police, Everyone. I'd agree with most of that, it's the 'fans as primary cause' bit I'm contesting. Hillsborough wasn't fit for purpose. As Manatee points out there had been enough warnings and near misses, one of which amounted to a dress rehearsal for 1989. I suspect a mindset in Police and elsewhere that fans were 'animals' and that there was a bit of a 'show them who is boss' mentality. Same mindset in government. >> Sorry scousers you aint gonna blame it on one man let all the others go >> Scot free and shirk your own responsibility. Duckinfield is last probably last man standing but he shouldn't be scapegoat. A lot of other people who made key decisions are dead. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 16:37   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

>>Same mindset in government. Conservative Government, was it? Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 16:43   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> Conservative Government, was it? Are you saying there was no such mindset? Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 16:58   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

No. But I am 100% saying that had it been a Labour Government you most certainly wouldn't have mentioned it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:00   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

We're talking spring 1989. Third Tory term and with landslide majority of >100. Isn't it a bit academic to worry about 'if Labour had been in power? Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:10   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

I wasn't worried about whether or not Labour were in power. Unlike you, it's not something that controls my opinions or what I say. My point is simply that had Labour been in power then you would not have mentioned the Government attitude. Your bias is remarkable. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:21   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> My point is simply that had Labour been in power then you would not have >> mentioned the Government attitude. It's an unprovable point since, as reported, we were in Tory Town at time. >> Your bias is remarkable. Lots of people on this site display remarkable bias. As I said in another thread; world viewed through a rolled up copy of the Telegraph. If you think somebody is biased then adjust for it and don't whine. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 1 Dec 19 at 20:21 Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:35   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

>>Lots of people on this site display remarkable bias How is that relevant? Don't you normally call that Whataboutery"? >> If you think somebody is biased then adjust for it and don't whine. I'm not whining. just pointing out out for any unwary readers to help them interpret the comments. If it bothers you, then either stop or learn to live with it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:51   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> I'm not whining. just pointing out out for any unwary readers to help them interpret >> the comments. If it bothers you, then either stop or learn to live with it. I seriously doubt that anybody here, even 'James Loveless', is unwary when it comes to decoding my politics. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 21:23   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Haywain

" As I said in another thread; world viewed through a rolled up copy of the Telegraph. " ........ as opposed to a rolled-up copy of the Grauniad, no doubt. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:25   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

>> We're talking spring 1989. Third Tory term and with landslide majority of >100. The "animals" attitude prevalent at the times was entirely a result of Heysel, A mere 4 years earlier. Political attitude? nope. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 20:53   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> The "animals" attitude prevalent at the times was entirely a result of Heysel, A mere >> 4 years earlier. Political attitude? nope. I think there were plenty of other "animals". Followers of Leeds United were one example. The 'Inter City Firm' were another. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 21:29   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

>> >> The "animals" attitude prevalent at the times was entirely a result of Heysel, A >> mere >> >> 4 years earlier. Political attitude? nope. >> >> I think there were plenty of other "animals". >> >> Followers of Leeds United were one example. The 'Inter City Firm' were another. There you go then, answered your own question, FA to do with the party in power. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 1 Dec 19 21:31   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

>> There you go then, answered your own question, FA to do with the party in >> power. I may be getting confused but I don't think it was me who made that an issue. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:51   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Zero

>> Clear verdict this time. >> >> Upset amongst victims families is entirely understandable Upset that one bloke didnt get blamed is not. Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Thu 28 Nov 19 16:54   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - No FM2R

>>Upset that one bloke didnt get blamed is not. Exactly. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 17:24   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - R.P.

They seemed upset at everyone on the news earlier. All very sad, but maybe this brings some closure. Taken too long to resolve - should have been a proper enquiry at the time. Time sometimes is not a healer. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 18:12   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - tyrednemotional

>> Time sometimes is not a healer.......... >> ...it's a poor beautician as well.... (Given my two posts further up the thread, a little bit of my faith in British Justice has been restored, along with an element of surprise that they found 12 jurors with some integrity and common sense, and not people simply used to watching X-factor, etc. Not an easy case to be one of the 12, I would suggest.) Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 28 Nov 19 19:00   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - R.P.

You're absolutely right. One of my close friends was on jury service not so long ago. He has a Masters' in International Politics so is far from dumb. He told me that the standard of attention and basic "understanding" was pretty grim amongst Jurors. More than a few seemed to be suffering from withdrawal from their phones. Last edited by: R.P. on Thu 28 Nov 19 at 19:04 Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Fri 29 Nov 19 12:54   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Bromptonaut

I can see how difficult it must be for families to see Duckenfield acquitted. The conclusion of the inquest which found gross negligence manslaughter, a decision made to criminal and not civil standard of proof (as some media reports have said) must have made it seem like an open and shut case. Duckenfield gave evidence at the inquest and seemed close to admitting gross negligence and fact he'd lied about how/why gates were opened. AIUI at Criminal trial he declined, as of course is his right, to give evidence. There's a controversy brewing over extent to which his Counsel in making submissions went behind the inquest conclusion that fans were not to blame and re-hashed a load of stuff about their behaviour and way in which Judge allowed that to happen. The Judge's summing up is also being criticised. As a long term observer of the operations of the courts and as somebody with no skin in the game can see how that can happen. It must though look to families as if process has been manipulated and he has 'got off'. Will be interesting to see what happens next and in particular if allegations of misdirection by judge are pursued. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 15:26   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Manatee

Not to say whether he was blameworthy or not, but Duckenfield was given that job only 19 days before the match. Consider that in the light of the earlier history of previous near-disasters at Hillsborough - www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/latest-news/the-dreadful-day-when-leeds-united-fans-escaped-their-own-hillsborough-disaster-1-7880063 That article doesn't even mention of at least two further matches between 1981 and the fateful one in 1989 where crushing was a problem. Given the history, a lot of people must share the blame it seems to me. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 29 Nov 19 16:28   Hillsborough manslaughter charge - Robin O'Reliant

Whilst I have every sympathy for the relatives of those who died at Hillsborough I have little time for the general "Hard done by" attitude of Scousers in general in this case. Hillsborough is marked religiously every year amid calls for various public officials to be crucified for making honest mistakes (And that is exactly what the were, whatever they led to) yet the anniversary of Heysel passes by unnoticed with no enquiries ever called for. To remind everyone, 39 Italians died directly as a result of a mass attack by Liverpool supporters on that night. Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Fri 29 Nov 19 at 16:29 Reply to this message | Report message       3

New Thu 27 May 21 09:43   Hillsborough PCoJ Charge - Bromptonaut

Following yesterday's directed acquittal the Judge's ruling has been published: www.judiciary.uk/judgments/r-v-metcalf-denton-foster/ Busy today so no time to read. Reply to this message | Report message