[Closed] Hillsborough

Crowds are crowds. If you have moving crowds moving through tight spaces, you need to control them. The police lost control. There is blame to be ascribed there, to me it's self evident.

And there's wider blame ascribable to anyone involved in letting the game happen in that ground. It was a deathtrap. Ask Spurs fans from 1981, or Fulham fans from 1975, or any others who had frightening crushes in that end (Here's footage from 1981:
[url]

SYP were the ones with responsibility for crowd control, though, and there was so much more they could and should have done. Instead they were covering their own arses before people had finished dying.

BBC just announced that Thatcher had been briefed that South Yorks police were lying.

I wonder what action she took?

(sorry if I get a bit defensive here, as a football fan I've often despaired at how much the lies and misinformation have stuck with so many people)

Worth pointing out that a similar crush occurred in the 1981 FA semi-final, at the same end of the same ground. That wasn't fatal because the pen was not divided up and people could spread out, the police also allowed the Spurs fans involved out onto the pitch in that instance. The stadium wasn't used for FA cup semi-finals from 82-87 for that reason. Then in 1987 there was a bad crush involving Leeds fans, again in the Leppings Lane end at Hillsborough, in another FA cup semi final. Lessons were learned from this and the 1988 semi-final was policed well to avoid a crush. Unfortunately the commanding officer who had taken charge of the '87 and '88 finals was removed shortly before the 1989 semi-final, and the new officer completely changed the policing plans. The stadium also did not have a valid safety certificate.

I'd say blaming the police for a car crash in which they had no part is not really the right analogy. It's more like blaming the police for a crash if they had organised a coach trip, open to the public, on a bus that they knew had dodgy brakes, and had then putting a learner driver in the driving seat, then that the driver had been talking on his mobile and not looking at the road.

I don't understand how they know 164 police statements were altered or rewritten - statements would have been hand written at the time, so if they were altered, surely the originals would have been destroyed with no record of its existence?

I'm confused, does anyone know where this stat came from and how it is known to be true?

Oh, and to continue the analogy, certain people in this thread are blaming fans for the crash because they climbed onto the coach, thinking it was safe.

Exactly, it's peoples fault, the police were there to try and prevent it but failed. Blaming the police for it happening is like blaming them for a bad car crash, they're supposed to try and prevent them but it's one of the drivers fault, unfortunately the innocent guy in the other car dies as well.

Oh dear.

The most tragic thing i have ever read, that whole period was a dark time for football - there was a well documented and active booze and fighting culture. However, Hillsborough was, and now publically, is a complete cover up which makes me feel sick to the pit of my stomach. I remember the day vividly as I was listening to the game on the radio, then the TV pictures came through and....I dunno. Dusty. Nobody wins.

willber - Member
I don't understand how they know 164 police statements were altered or rewritten - statements would have been hand written at the time, so if they were altered, surely the originals would have been destroyed with no record of its existence?

I'm confused, does anyone know where this stat came from and how it is known to be true?

its all here ...

2.11.1 As discussed in Part 1, statements made by South Yorkshire Police (SYP) officers in the form of handwritten recollections of their experiences on the day of the disaster underwent an unprecedented process of review and alteration before their submission to the official inquiry.

2.11.2 On the authority of the Chief Constable this process was conducted by a small team of officers managed by Chief Superintendent Donald Denton in consultation with Peter Metcalf, a senior partner in the SYP solicitors, Hammond Suddards. Although widely known to those directly involved in the inquiries and investigations, the process only became public knowledge following submissions to the Stuart-Smith Scrutiny and their subsequent analysis.[1]

2.11.3 Focusing on the material disclosed to the Panel, and in response to requests by bereaved families, this chapter revisits the initiation, operation and results of the review and alteration of SYP officers' statements. It also considers the adoption of a similar process by the South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service (SYMAS). The wider consequences of the review and alteration process are discussed in Chapter 6.

http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/report/main-section/part-2/chapter-11/page-1/

as I understand it the hand written statements were kept but the typed up copies for the initial report had been heavily edited, the report website is very detailed and contains some really horrific testimony

I'm confused, does anyone know where this stat came from and how it is known to be true?

It comes from the Scrutiny of Lord Justice Stuart Smith which was presented to the Hillsborough Independent Panel.

The police not only directed fans into the overcrowded pen. They refused to act to release them on to the pitch refused to let ambulances in to treat the injured . Generated a pack of lies to pass the blame on to fans and then conspired to pervert the course of justice by presenting false evidence to the inquest . It's only like blaming them for a bad car crash if the analogy states the negligent driver was a police man and his colleges try and fit up the innocent victim.

it's peoples fault, the police were there to try and prevent it but failed. Blaming the police for it happening is like blaming them for a bad car crash, they're supposed to try and prevent them but it's one of the drivers fault, unfortunately the innocent guy in the other car dies as well.

Its not hard to see that if you have lots of people and you open a gate down a slope into a botttleneck and then a closed pen that you will get a build up of pressure or a crush. I am not quite sure it is a fundamental law of nature but u suspect[ given those circumstances it will happen whether you use football fas, nuns or the Maasai. If I did this with water the same thing would happen but I could not blame the water for filling the vessel. People have to be there to crush people but they did not cause it nor did their behaviour exacerbate it. Sadly the Police actions did and they knew this hence why they covered up.

igm - Member
BBC just announced that Thatcher had been briefed that South Yorks police were lying.
I wonder what action she took?

Among the new documents released on Wednesday was a memo from a senior civil servant to Baroness Thatcher about the interim report into the tragedy by Lord Justice Taylor.
She was told the August 1989 report had found that the chief superintendent in charge at Hillsborough had "behaved in an indecisive fashion" and senior officers had infuriated the judge by seeking to "duck all responsibility when giving evidence" to his inquiry.
The memo made it clear that Mr Hurd thought South Yorkshire Chief Constable Peter Wright would have to resign, adding: "The enormity of the disaster, and the extent to which the inquiry blames the police, demand this."
And it added: "The defensive, and at times close to deceitful, behaviour by the senior officers in South Yorkshire sounds depressingly familiar. Too many senior policemen seem to lack the capacity or character to perceive and admit faults in their organisation."
The report, the memo added, would "sap confidence in the police force" and could encourage aggressive behaviour by fans who would feel "vindicated" by its conclusions.
[b]But in a handwritten note, Mrs Thatcher made it clear that she did not want to give the government's full backing to Lord Taylor's criticisms, only to the way in which he had conducted his inquiry and made recommendations for action.
She wrote: "[u]What do we mean by 'welcoming the broad thrust of the report'? The broad thrust is devastating criticism of the police. Is that for us to welcome? Surely we welcome the thoroughness of the report and its recommendations - M.T.[/u]"[/b]

Brave move suggesting the Liverpool fans might have also contributed to the situation. Didn't the head of Merseyside Police suggest this at the time?

Brave? Why is it brave? Surely it's just wrong, as explained by the report released today?

Blame them for the cover up, fine.
Blame them for not making perfect decisions, fine.
Blame them for other peoples actions?

I think you are utterly wrong about this..

Crowd control is an important and tricky job.. large crowds don't work in quite the same way as queues at the post office, or polite conversations over a glass of milk in the refectory..
There is momentum and dynamism and a heightening of the senses, with the possibility of panic.. It's herd-like and can be dangerous, [i]if not controlled correctly[/i]..

This is a well known phenomenon and there is a whole branch of psychology concerned with making studies to determine what makes the behaviour of the crowd differ from the behaviour of the individuals within it..

The crowd was not controlled correctly, and in fact, this crowd was sent into an extremely dangerous, and indeed, lethal situation..

Saw this Tweet earlier, just located it again, from BBC News;

"RT @danroan: MacKenzie apologised for Sun yrs ago but in '06 said: "I only did that because Murdoch told me to. I wasn't sorry then I'm not sorry now...""

The cover up is unforgivable.

The worse part is

These deficiencies were well known and further overcrowding problems at the turnstiles in 1987 and on the terrace in 1988 were additional indications of the inherent dangers to crowd safety. The risks were known and the crush in 1989 was foreseeable.

Unfortunately it reads like most inquiries into a disaster or accident with countless warning signs ignored in many cases well before the incident. Yes the police should accept blame for their actions and the cover up however the situation that caused it also needs addressing.

As with most the tabloid press will pick headlines based on their own reasons.
Blame Police
Blame Tories
Blame Thatcher
Weasel out of what we previously said

In the end 96 people are still dead.
Football and other events with huge crowds are much safer now.

116 police statements or "recollections" modified out of 116 under the direct instruction of senior officers and advisement of their legal teams.

SW not meeting the required safety standards for ocer 10 years.

Central government being aware of a coverup.

The media now trying to apologise.

Personally the most dispicable parties in all of this are the media. Specifically Kelvin MacKenzie, not only the what he reporte but the way in which for years he refuse to apologise and levied the blame on others and today tries to change his colours.

The police speciaically Donald Denton and his legal team representative peter Metcalf for orchestrating the coverup. Also allowing SW to continue knowing the ground was unsafe. Also for attempting to impugn the dead by trawling through criminal records and blood tests on the decease for alcohol, including the children.

Central government for a succession of failures to see through the smoke and MTFU and let this travesty continue so long.

Money was involved in SW not wanting to upgrade the stands, the police protecting their jobs and politicians keeping theirs also. Greed by a few who could have stood up and been counted but decided to try and sully the names of football fans who died.

There may now be a full and proper enquiry now that the truth is available and we know that whatever these individuals say are lies.

23 years.

I only hope that those responsible are now brought to justice for their personal failings.

Despite what anyone thinks of Liverpool the families have acted with dignity despite the tragedy and lies about their lost loved ones.

There are some people tonight who will sleep better in their beds. And the guilty who won't be sleeping so easily now the levels of lies and deception have been uncovered.

I know very little about footie and the culture surrounding it, despite growing up in Aberdeen and seeing at first hand, some of the worst football related violence on record, as a young lad knocking about the mean streets of the granite city. I suffered at the hands of the ASC and grew up very fast.

But come on. "Pens", "Control", "Herding". These are terms usually applied to sheep. If human beings are behaving like animals, why should we be surprised when tragedy occurs [i]as a direct result of hundreds of humans trying to beat the living daylights out of hundreds of other human beings[/i]?

I'm a passionate person, but I really don't get it. I never will.

My point is, that if violence had never been allowed to become an accepted part, nay, glorified necessity, of the beautiful game, the horrible events which took place that day might never have happened. The middle class dad going to a match with his son feels pride in his 'firm's' achievements and its ability to protect him and his kin - I believe this - I may be mistaken.

The cover up is almost incedental. It's human nature to pass the buck. Yes, it's horrifying and strays into the territory of conspiracy theories, but as many have said ^^^ it's hardly surprising.

Sorry if anything I've said upsets anyone.

wow - user removed.. 😯

I think that maybe you have completely the wrong end of the stick, have you ever heard of the Hillsborough disaster before now.. !?

Do you have any idea of the circumstances surrounding the incident..? Of the nature of the disaster..?

It had nothing to do with hooliganism, no fighting or violence occurred.. at all
This was to do with overcrowding and as written earlier in the thread, it could just as easily have happened to schoolchildren or nuns.. the fact that they were football supporters is completely irrelevant in this case..

Your ignorant and prejudiced remarks are offensive in the extreme

Well after listening to a snippet of the report on the BBC it's hard to understand that in its initial form the inquiry seems to have it so wrong.
I'm unsure what exactly the families and parents of those that suffered really do want after all these years.
.

It had nothing to do with hooliganism, no fighting or violence occurred.. at all

No one event was the cause a series of events conspired to produce this. The events on the day could have gone differently but the history that lead up to it contributed to the police missing the real threat.

It had nothing to do with hooliganism, no fighting or violence occurred.. at all
This was to do with overcrowding and as written earlier in the thread, it could just as easily have happened to schoolchildren or nuns.. the fact that they were football supporters is completely irrelevant in this case..

Your ignorant and prejudiced remarks are offensive in the extreme

Nuns or schoolchildren don't have a history of violent behaviour at football matches. The Police didn't open the gate 'cause they wanted people to die, they wanted the fans inside the ground to watch the football. The cover-up was appalling I agree, but [i]some[/i] blame must go to the late arriving fans.

If you think the comments above are:

ignorant and prejudiced remarks are offensive in the extreme

timc - Member
D0nk = C*nt

Do everyone a favour & read up you little pr!ck

That's not a nun speaking is it?

User removed. This had **** all to do with hooliganism. I suggest you go and read the report, listen to what has been said for so many years by the families and eye witnesses about what happened that day. Then come back and apologise for your ill informed and prejudiced post.
I remember coming back from the old Wembley many times from a range of events from football, music and American football and the push of the crowd to get through the tunnel into the tube station and onto the platform was always bloody scary. When you're on the overcrowded platform and the mass of people moving forward means those at the front are clinging on to not be pushed onto the track it's very easy to see how this sort of thing happens.

It's interesting to note that yesterday provided a very rare example of complete unanimity in Parliament between politicians of all political hues, which was also reflected throughout the media, but here on STW, herberts who of course know better than any expert on an independent investigative panel, want to endlessly argue the toss over this truly tragic event. How predictable 😐

What this thread needs is Lanesra. He'll be out there somewhere giving it his balanced view on things.

[i]I'm unsure what exactly the families and parents of those that suffered really do want after all these years[/i]

They've known for 23 years that a huge coverup had occurred over the death of their loved ones, by people protecting their own backsides (and pensions). What would you want? I'd want to fight and fight and fight.

[i] but some blame must go to the late arriving fans.[/i]

Do you know there were so few turnstiles at the Leppings Lane end that the required entry rate, per turnstile, was 1443 per hour, versus a Green Guide maximum of 750? The crowd had built up long, long before "late"

I mean, seriously, two and a half seconds per person, per turnstile!

Unfortunately for some reason, some people continue to cling to the myths created by the authorities and parts of the media at the time, despite higher authorities, who have nothing to gain from doing so, now acknowledging them to be lies, and part of a huge cover up.

As ormondroyd says, the fans were not "arriving late", the report deals with this. They had arrived long before the game, however the turnstiles were inadequate, and some of the crowd control measures that had been used outside, on the Leppings Lane to moderate the flow of people to the turnstiles the year before were removed, leading to much of the crowd arriving at the turnstiles at the same time, which actually slowed down ingress.

And before someone else who has no idea what they are talking about mentions ticketless fans, the report states that CCTV footage of the time shows that the number of fans at the ground was about the same as the number of tickets sold, and the that the stand was clearly under capacity at the time of the crush, the side pens were still almost empty as all the fans were directed into the central pen. No doubt there were one or two among the tens of thousands who tried to get in without tickets, as at any other football match, but this played no significant part in the tragedy.

its amazing that so many people are regurgitating the falsehoods put out by the police

it just like discussions on here about john charles de memezes jumping the barrier etc

lies put out by the police and allowed to circulate in the media become fact

borris johnson was happy to use them again in his attack on liverpool

even thatcher knew the police had covered it up and wanted it repressed

"What do we mean by 'welcoming the broad thrust of the report'? The broad thrust is devastating criticism of the police. Is that for us to welcome? Surely we welcome the thoroughness of the report and its recommendations - M.T."

again we see the dangers of the press/police/politicians cabal

I'm unsure what exactly the families and parents of those that suffered really do want after all these years

They will hopefully get (some sense of)closure.

Lets not forget why the Liverpool fans made an easy target for the authorities. At a time all fans were considered scum,Heysel had given Liverpool fans an especially bad name,and I have always wondered if this led to changes in the way that the police set out to "manage" the Liverpool fans

Watched it all unfold on large screens in an electrical shop in Sheffield, Mrs Cat was hauled into work to help with the casualties (Nurse at the time), horrific to watch but not surprising in the least.

Also, not at all surprised by Thatcher's response to the original enquiry, the Police were used as her storm troops for almost a decade before in and around South Yorkshire, she would want to protect them.

I was just thinking the same thing last night roger, about Thatchers reaction.

You have to see it in the light of the relationship between the police and working class people (who made up the majority of footie fans) In northern England, at the time

The police, as deployed by Thatcher, during the riots and miners strike were little more than a state militia. Hired thugs on premium overtime. Who viewed most of the public as 'the enemy'.

Thatcher was never going to do anything to upset her troops, whatever they did. And justice, in any of its forms, is an abstract concept to her anyway

Shifter - Member

If you think the comments above are:
ignorant and prejudiced remarks are offensive in the extreme
then I bet you've never been to a football match in your life.

It's a very emotive subject is all, and I admit that I got a bit carried away.. It was this little gem that really got up my nose.. as it seemed that perhaps the fella was commenting on a very sensitive subject that he had absolutely no idea about..

why should we be surprised when tragedy occurs as a direct result of hundreds of humans trying to beat the living daylights out of hundreds of other human beings?

not really relevant to the event in question now is it pal..?

FWIW, my Grandad, without doubt the mildest and kindest man I've met, took me to my first footie match.. Exeter City Vs Millwall in the late 70s early 80s, making me around 6 or 7 years old.. we left before the half time whistle as the atmosphere was too hostile..

Binners, RtCat - my thoughts much as yours again. The piece the BBC had found was a briefing that SYP were being their normal deceitful selves - ie she knew they were lying.
Give her her day in court to explain what she did about a lying constabulary.

Twenty years on I suspect the tensions of Orgreave have died down and the police and community are somewhat closer, but not living in Sheffield I don't really know.

The hooligan issue is a red herring.

Yes fences were put up to 'contain' the problem but in doing so it created another, as the horrible events of that day proved.

Crowd dynamics and pyschology plan a huge part in stadium design these days. The issues that led to Hillsborough didn't appear on the day. They were well known previously and concerns were not acted upon.

The comments about the police's attitude to the working class and football fans at the time is an interesting perspective.

The bottom line is that SYP knew they were at fault. They systematically and delberately covered up their failings. They attempted to blame the deceased and other fans for failings that they knew were theirs.

What do we mean by 'welcoming the broad thrust of the report'? The broad thrust is devastating criticism of the police. Is that for us to welcome? Surely we welcome the thoroughness of the report and its recommendations - M.T."

Surely she was only saying that the failures of the police were not "good news" and therefore one could not welcome them, it was just a matter of precise language.

What she was saying was that she didn't want her government endorsing even the slightest criticism of [s]her private militia[/s] the Police. No matter what it is they were actually guilty of. Even the death of 96 people and subsequent cover up. Anyway... as they were just footie fans, and northern ones at that, in her eyes they were expendable anyway.

We can't be upsetting the storm troopers though, can we ? Not when you've relied on them to keep the proles in line for the last decade, when they start getting uppity and demanding things like rights/jobs/not living in abject squalor etc, etc, etc

Here's a question for everyone to chew on. Now that so many officers have been implicated in lying and falsifying statements, could that have an effect on any other evidence given in there careers?

They have proven a willingness to lie and deceive at a moment when it was of the utmost importance that they stood up and acted with honesty and integrity, now how can any other action taken in their working lives be assumed to be honest and correct.

And remember that duplicity didn't end in 1989.

@Yossarian - no the football violence of the time is pertinent as it was a contributory factor. If the cages/pens had not been necessary to contain the cohorts in tent on violence the crowd would have spilled onto the pitch and the incompetent behaviour shown on the day in controlling the crowd would have had a much smaller effect. It does not remove the fact that the Police failed to deal with the circumstances and environment in place at the time but it cannot be ignored.

@IGM - left in 1983 to go to Uni and the general public had a good relationship with the local Police, since the Miners strike relationships have improved measurably but there is still some residual resentment. You have to remember that the Miners strike and its repercussions destroyed swathes of communities across SY and the ripple effects are still very much in evidence. The relationship was destroyed by the arrival of the Met during the strike, there's plenty of reference in the internet to read if you are interested.

It does not remove the fact that the Police failed to deal with the circumstances and environment in place at the time but it cannot be ignored.

i think maybe we are talking at cross purposes on this. Yes, wthout croud trouble fences would not have been present. No, on the day there was no trouble, so it cannot have been a contributing factor in the police's decisions and behaviour at the scene.

There are still people (on here and other sites) who choose not to read the painstaking results of a long running independent inquiry into the events of that tragic day in sheffield.

They somehow have greater insight into the world and all its machinations than the rest of us, some would probably be suited to a career in the police, thats if they aren't already.

Its interesting to note that after all the enquiries etc there are several people who still think that crowd disorder played a part.

At this game there disorder was not a contributing factor as stated in the latest report despite what the police said. It does howeve recognise that there were isolated incident, these may have been arguments etc, quite normal at a large gathering of people.

Reading some of the documents the briefing officer at the time focusses on Liverpool fans and their propensity for violence. Now thats in his briefing notes the day before. Developing the attitude in his oficers that they are in for a tough time. Now that set the scene of the attitude across the police ranks. After the fact the realisation that they screwed up big time, costing many many lives of innocent people they tried to implicate the dead. They closed ranks and covered up. Fed falsehoods to the media who were so tightly in bed and anti Liverpool that certain media individuals could not wait to print the filth they did.

Now today we have people without a clue, Donk, thisisnotaspoon, user-removed. Catch up with what actually happened before commenting. This incident and the aftermath did not just affect the families and te club biut the city of Liverpool as a whole for many years.

The police attitude was bigotted towards football fans before the event. As has been stated there were a catalogue of errors leading upto the disaster that could have and should have beenn avoided if SW had compied with their responsibilities. In the aftermath there was a systematic coverup at the highest level. There is not a single commentator still blamin the fans apart from a few on here who see them as a contributing factor. There only contribution was being there and their trust in the authorities who we still trust to this day.

There have been many injustices but this is personal to me and no matter how I feel will not get drawn into saying how I feel about some of the comments here I will just suggest you look a little deeper before commenting on something you obviously know very very little about.