[Closed] Hillsborough - Unlawful Killing.

You can't argue with the verdict, but the question I ask myself, would it have happened if the fans had formed an orderly queue?

Or just stayed at home and not gone to a football match.

🙄

There are some thick people on here.

Jesus

it was sadly a tragedy waiting to happen
BOLLOCKS AND LIES

Sorry, but it's true.

Crushes were happening all over the country. I was in several around that time, at St James Park, and even at Reading's old ground Elm Park one night when a gate that was supposed to be opened at the end of a game wasn't, and a stream of fans kept coming down a walkway towards it. Probably minor in comparison, but it was happening.

Just because other grounds weren't seeing the same disastrous consequences - whether by luck, or because better decisions were being made by commanders at those games, or what - I don't know - the conditions were there at many grounds. The fact is that this time poor decisions were made that had such terrible consequences.

That's not an excuse for the mistakes made.

It's like black ice on a blind corner. The risk is there. A good driver will identify it and deal with it. A bad driver will not, and will skid and crash. A bad but lucky driver will go into a hedge the other side. A bad but 'unlucky' driver will go into a bus stop and kill people. I don't know if the match commanders at the games I got scared at were good drivers, or went into a hedge. But these guys hit a bus stop. And then blamed the black ice and passengers for being there, and covered it up for 27 ****ing years.

But these guys hit a bus stop. And then blamed the black ice and passengers for being there, and covered it up for 27 **** years.

for your analogy to work they hit a bus stop, because they were driving far too recklessly despite knowing all about the black ice, and not caring anyway, and then blamed the people at the bus stop and covering it up.

Whatever happened at other football stadium, and what ever the behaviour of some "fans" back in the day, those [u]were not[/u] factors at Hillsborough. There was a crush because of the actions the cops took, solely and simply. they opened the barrier, they caused the crush that anyone with half a brain could've foreseen, and then delayed calling for help. It really is that simple

For those still hard of thinking above, you will do well to listen to this:

http://talksport.com/football/listen-adrian-durhams-touching-tribute-victims-hillsborough-tragedy-after-verdict-unlawful

Sorry, but it's true.

THe unlawful killing was not inevitable it required, as the inquest noted, serious failings on the part of the police
Had the lead officer been half way competent [ or halfway honest afterwards] we would not even need to have this conversation

Even after the verdict that hard of thinking are still needing to have it explained to them whose fault it was and who caused it

You can't argue with the verdict, but the question I ask myself, would it have happened if the fans had formed an orderly queue?

[i]I doubt i'm the only one, many of us must have felt similarly.[/i]

+1

I was watching it on telly (my FIL was a big footie fan), and then went out when the game was stopped - at the time I remember remarking that it was just the usual football fan 'trouble', ie fighting amongst themselves.

[i]You've never seen Leppings Lane, have you? 10,000+ fans funnelling down one single street and then through 7 turnstiles. An orderly queue would have stretched half way to Grenoside. Plus, it really is the police's job to sort that anyway, as the inquest found. [/i]

But here I'm uncomfortable, it wasn't the Police's fault that the access was badly designed and 'not fit for purpose' - so we do have to remember the 'times'. Nor was it the Police's fault that grounds were mainly standing.

it wasn't the Police's fault that the access was badly designed and 'not fit for purpose' - so we do have to remember the 'times'. Nor was it the Police's fault that grounds were mainly standing.

But here I'm uncomfortable, it wasn't the Police's fault that the access was badly designed and 'not fit for purpose' - so we do have to remember the 'times'. Nor was it the Police's fault that grounds were mainly standing.

Which is why the FA (ground choice) & engineers which signed off too-high capacity figures have also been criticised. Incidentally, something which also didn't happen in the final Taylor Report.

"Crowd problems" is kinda like these "dead cats" that we hear so much more about these days. It doesn't matter what facts are placed in front of people. Once the dead cat's been thrown on the table, the smell of it lingers on, in this case, for up to 27 years.

Junkie; I still dispute that. If it hadn't happened at Hillsborough, it would have happened somewhere else eventually. I think other games were being badly managed too, but maybe not to the same extent, or maybe they were being brought back from the brink by better responsiveness.... but it was at risk of happening almost every week.

If it wasn't; why would the Taylor report needed to have recommended such vast changes to stadia.

@ nickc. I see what you're saying but I disagree. May be splitting hairs but I don't think they thought 'Ooh, black ice, let's have a spin, it'll be fun!' They just didn't realise it was there, despite being enough warnings, and then weren't competent to save it once they span, and then finally got unlucky that there was a bus stop the other side.

I don't think they wilfully opened the gates [u]knowing[/u] it would lead to deaths, they didn't realise the consequence of their actions.

One thing seems depressingly apparent from reading this thread

South Yorkshire Polices orchestrated approach of misinformation and lies has worked an absolute treat!

They're still employing it right now, to this day, despite the damning verdicts disproving every word of their lies and deceit .

They publicly apologise, and admit error, shedding crocodile tears - while behind the scenes, they carry on insidiously whispering that it was the fans fault really. They were all drunk, and forced the gate.

And incredibly - people still believe it!

Very, very stupid, terminally gullible, totally uncurious people, obviously. But as this thread demonstrates, they're hardly in short supply

I don't think they wilfully opened the gates knowing it would lead to deaths, they didn't realise the consequence of their actions.

ah right, I see what you're getting at.

My understanding is different, I thought the police were already aware of the difficulties at Leppings lane, and the previous commander to Duckenfield offered to help, and was turned down, and Duckenfield didn't recce the ground himself to get a feel for the place. I think with the previous commander present there may well have been a different outcome. While I think you're right; and I don't think that anyone thinks Duckenfield went there with the intent to kill people, his lack of preparedness certainly killed people

So "institutionally" the police knew about crowds at Leppings, however the man on site didn't.

Yes, we're sort of splitting hairs, but it's an important hair I think.

..
[i]One thing seems depressingly apparent from reading this thread...[/i]

Is that these people making excuses for the police need to actually watch the sequence of events before making daft comments!

But here I'm uncomfortable, it wasn't the Police's fault that the access was badly designed and 'not fit for purpose' - so we do have to remember the 'times'. Nor was it the Police's fault that grounds were mainly standing.

Answer me this though. Whose fault was it that they blamed the fans for a quarter of a century?

Indeed binners. And on the SY section of the website for retired bizzies, they were told to "be proud" of the work they've done.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/26/hillsborough-disaster-deadly-mistakes-and-lies-that-lasted-decades ]This Guardian article by David Conn[/url] has been repeatedly linked too on this thread. It describes in painstaking and hard-to-read detail the catastrophic sequence of cock-ups that led up to the disaster, the callous victim-blaming treatment of the families in the aftermath, then the carefully co-ordinated and shameful cover up that followed, for 27 whole years!

To prevent yourself coming across as an ill-informed idiot, you might want to give it a read before commenting further.

Just sayin'

I don't think they wilfully opened the gates knowing it would lead to deaths

so we do have to remember the 'times'

My understanding is different, I thought the police were already aware of the difficulties at Leppings lane, and the previous commander to Duckenfield offered to help, and was turned down, and Duckenfield didn't recce the ground himself to get a feel for the place. I think with the previous commander present there may well have been a different outcome. While I think you're right; and I don't think that anyone thinks Duckenfield went there with the intent to kill people, his lack of preparedness certainly killed people

Ignorance is no defence. It was their job to know the difficulties and the variables and maintain the safety of the crowd. Not only did they not do this, but they exacerbated the situation by taking actions that directly led to the deaths of innocent supporters and deliberately delayed access for the emergency services and then proceeded to cover up their ineptitude for over a quarter of a century. All this whilst dragging the reputations of the deceased and those present on that day through the mud.

One thing seems depressingly apparent from reading this thread

who are "disgusted" that the fans were completely exhonerated

Why?

I still dispute that

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-35473732

5 myths that folk are still repeating and follow Binners advice

This Guardian article by David Conn has been repeatedly linked too on this thread. It describes in painstaking and hard-to-read detail the catastrophic sequence of cock-ups that led up to the disaster, the callous victim-blaming treatment of the families in the aftermath, then the carefully co-ordinated and shameful cover up that followed, for 27 whole years!

To prevent yourself coming across as an ill-informed idiot, you might want to give it a read before commenting further.

Just sayin'

footflaps - Member

Why?

Same reason as everyone else, some people want to believe the worst of people. Or need to. Draw your own conclusions why...

Same reason as everyone else, some people want to believe the worst of people. Or need to. Draw your own conclusions why...

Completely lost on me. Unless you were involved in it directly, I can't really understand why you'd have any strong emotions either way....

That's the big question. We avoided the area and went over to Crystal Peaks for the day, then watched the events unfold on TV at my Aunt's house in Tinsley, then went home later in the evening. No-one in my family was anywhere near Hillsborough from about 9am until about 7pm, and yet somehow they're all certain that drunken, ticketless fans broke down the gate and caused the deaths.

South Yorkshire Police could have taught Lynton Crosby everything he knows:

Repeat something often enough and it becomes true

They're still repeating it today, after 27 years.

No-one in my family was anywhere near Hillsborough from about 9am until about 7pm, and yet somehow they're all certain that drunken, ticketless fans broke down the gate and caused the deaths.

Very odd, to have such strong feeling about something 27 years ago which didn't affect you in the slightest.....

I am a football fan who has probably been to around 300 matches, though the vast majority were since hillsborough. By sheer coincidence the only time I have ever stood on a terrace at a football match was on the day of hillsborough. I remember listening to the news coming out on the radio at 4.50 as me and my dad walked back to the car. I detest the police and have no problem accepting the verdict yesterday. I have no doubt that the basic truth is that it was the fault of the police and the authorities.

I cannot, however, help but feel that nothing this big can happen without the truth being rather complex and nuanced, and that the disgraceful lies and cover-up, and the inevitable simplistic* attempts to challenge the disgraceful lies and cover-up, mean that some lessons that could have been learnt have not been learnt, and all liverpool fans have been portrayed as innocent victims / angels, when the truth is you do not have a 100% angel rate in a crowd of thousands. never.

Out of interest - because I did not follow the inquest in detail - did the inquest look into how many liverpool fans were in the vicinity of the stadium compared to the number of tickets sold in the liverpool sections of the ground? If the numbers were not equal did the inquest consider whether this was a contributory factor?

To be clear - obviously - liverpool fans clearly have a right to be in the vicinity of the stadium without a ticket for the liverpool end, and even if they didn't that wouldn't mean they should be treated like animals.

* Challenging a cover-up is never going to be about trying to discover every aspect of the potentilly nuanced truth, it is going to focus on the key issues - the lies and the fact that it was ultimately the fault of the police.

[i]Answer me this though. Whose fault was it that they blamed the fans for a quarter of a century? [/i]

tbh I've not paid any attention to the story since it occurred, but just posted up my feelings on the actual day - and you've got to also remember the almost weekly trouble caused by football fans through the 70's and 80's.

and you've got to also remember the almost weekly trouble caused by A MINORITY OF football fans through the 70's and 80's.

FTFY

You've got a point though. They probably deserved it

BR - if she was still alive I'd have Thatcher up before the beak for contributing to the manslaughter - her demonisation of football fans I'm sure helped scumbag police justify showing no concern for fan safety before and after the tragedy.

when the truth is you do not have a 100% angel rate in a crowd of thousands. never

Out of interest - because I did not follow the inquest in detail - did the inquest look into how many liverpool fans were in the vicinity of the stadium compared to the number of tickets sold in the liverpool sections of the ground? If the numbers were not equal did the inquest consider whether this was a contributory factor?

Respectfully can folk stop telling us how ****ing ignorant they are on the issue and ask a really basic question/ make a factually incorrect statement , that even a cursory glance of the verdict, would answer for them 🙄

THE FANS WERE BLAMELESS

FFS read up instead of just wallowing in and sharing your ignorance

One thing that's been troubling me, but I didn't want to post about it on the day of the verdict for fear of appearing insensitive, is the situation with the pensions of those involved who are guilty of offences. I'm not very knowledgeable about such things, so maybe others could help.

I understand that a pension such as that which all police officers are entitled to, is given on condition of a satisfactory execution of duty; ie, that an officer would have to fulfil all requirements concerning conduct and upholding law and order etc. Given that we now know that many officers failed in their duties, yet conspired to cover up their failings, no doubt with consideration given to protecting their pensions, were/are those pensions now being given/taken due to fraudulent means? Had the officers actually admitted their failings at the time, many would surely have been sacked and forfeited their pensions, surely? So if guilty personnel have taken pension money, have they not somehow been obtaining money through false pretences or something? And if this is the case, is there a legal mechanism to take back that money obtained in such a manner? Because surely, by acting as they did, those guilty personnel forfeited their right to that money.

It troubles me deeply, that there are individuals who are enjoying their retirements at public expense, while the families they helped obstruct in their pursuit of justice, who they lied to and deceived, and who they failed in carrying out their duties as expected in law and by society, have had to endure more than quarter of a century of pain and anguish. Is there any chance of suitable redress here?

An orderly queue would have stretched half way to Grenosidde

Which seems a pretty minor inconvenience if it prevents crushing 96 people to death.

Thanks for your contribution yet again outofbreath. Its been as incisive, thoughtful, considered and invaluable as ever. Obviously a comment you've made after witnessing the quiet orderly queuing that takes place at every large scale public event involving tens of thousands of people.

Seriously... thanks

Just one thing though. Would it be a single file queue? Or would you let people stand next to each other? And who would marshall your orderly queuing system as it snaked its way for mile after mile through the city streets? The South Yorkshire Police?

Which seems a pretty minor inconvenience if it prevents crushing 96 people to death

well, let's look at that, seeing as it's the police role to manage crowds....

[i]"Supt Roger Marshall, put in charge outside, was new to the role. In his evidence, [b]he accepted the police had no plan to filter people’s entry into the Leppings Lane bottleneck[/b], using police horses or cordons, beyond “some random ticket checking and … some checks for drunkenness”. Repeatedly played footage of the mass congestion that developed, Marshall admitted that it was a problem starting at 2.15pm, with thousands more people still arriving, and [b]by 2.35pm, police had “completely lost control”. [/b]

[b]Marshall conceded he did not make any decisions of his own to alleviate the developing crisis,[/b] or give orders to his officers, who he agreed [b]became “inoperative” and “ineffective”[/b] at the turnstiles, despite doing their best. He was seen forlornly asking people in his sight, with thousands behind them, to move back. Challenged that he failed to deal with the situation, Marshall said: “Well not really, because I was active in the middle of the crowd … [b]waving my arms about.”[/b]

Asked if he should have called for a delay to the 3pm kickoff, to relieve the pressure of people anxious to be in for the start, Marshall said: “That is one of the most profound regrets … that I did not do so.”[/i]

so, there you have it, the Police man who's job it was to manage the queue admits that he failed singularly to do that.

Junkyard -

"Sorry what shitty insinuation am I meant to draw from the fact that humans being are not all perfect?"

You are not meant to draw a shitty insinuation. I was merely stating my opinion which is that whilst the tragedy was undoubtedly the fault of the police (who I detest) and the authorities, it is a real shame that 27 years of lies lead us to a point where truth has been presented as a nuance-free contradiction of the lies.

One of the guys in the guardian (Adrian Tempany) talked about turning up in liverpool colours intending to sit with his brother in the forest end, and being forced into the liverpool end. Attributing blame for 96 deaths I would go 100% police (partly for forcing him into an area where he didn;t have a ticket) and 0% on him for turning up with a ticket for the wrong end in colours. But the lies for 27 years have lead us to a point where people seem to be afraid to say things like "it is a ****ing good idea if you are planning to turn up at a football ground that you turn up with a ticket for the end of the team you support. If you insist on turning up at the wrong end then don't wear colours. Tragedies like hillsborough might be 100% down to disgustingly incompetant and nasty policing, but as individuals and as grup of supporters we should be learning lessons too, however minor in comparison to the lessons the police need to learn."

"Respectfully can folk stop telling us how **** ignorant they are on the issue and ask a really basic question/ make a factually incorrect statement , that even a cursory glance of the verdict, would answer for them "

Respectfully, a cursory glance at the verdict makes it clear that the jury determined that the fans were blameless. I get that.

A cursory glance at the judgemnet does nto however answer my very specific question, which is why I asked it (I don't have the time to go through everything, but maybe someone on here has). Did the inquiry look into this very specific question - how many liverpool fans were in the vicinity of the ground compared to how many tickets had been sold in the liverpool sections of the ground?

Do you not understand that something can be 100% the fault of one party, whilst the other party might still benefit from reflecting on their actions.

[img] [/img]

Do you not understand that something can be 100% the fault of one party, whilst the other party might still benefit from reflecting on their actions.

You just come across as someone determined to blame the fans no matter what...

They've just had the longest and most expensive inquest in UK history and somehow you think that in ignorance of all the facts, you have somehow thought of something which they missed? Give over!

A cursory glance at the judgemnet does nto however answer my very specific question

I guess that was not clear enough for you

The jury also answered 'No' to the question "Was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?",

So no that[false] allegations you make, masquerading, as a question is not true and did not contribute.

Do you not understand that something can be 100% the fault of one party, whilst the other party might still benefit from reflecting on their actions.

You mean like a woman dressing like that in that part of town" was asking to be raped"...that sort of thing? Yes they should reflect on it 100% not being their fault 😕

Please stop the victims were not to blame

this is not hard to grasp

how many liverpool fans were in the vicinity of the ground compared to how many tickets had been sold in the liverpool sections of the ground?

I think the non-inflamatory answer to that is that it probably didn't matter. The were a crowd, they acted like a crowd, and ultimately whether they had tickets or not probably had no bearing on the outcome

I am not ignoring evidence or exonerating the police, SWFC, the local authority, the ambulance service, the politicians, the papers....... in any way shape or form. Sorry if it seems like that, and if I appear an idiot as a result I don't mean to.

I am saying that the circumstances surrounding the Hillsborough disaster - the poor stadia, the cages, the antagonist attitude of police forces to the fans - they were common to many grounds. Nothing the fans did on that day contributed to the outcome, they behaved exactly as millions of other fans, myself included, were behaving on similar saturdays at that time.

So why didn't the same disaster happen at other grounds? That's my point - I believe it had potential to almost every week. Call it luck, having better informed / capable match commanders who did their jobs better, all are possible.

I stick by my belief - if it hadn't happened at Hillsborough, it would have eventually happened somewhere else. That doesn't mean that the police aren't entirely at fault that it was at Hillsborough on that day, their actions clearly, unequivocably led to the outcome. But the circumstances had to be there as well and those circumstances were not entirely unique to Hillsborough.

If any good comes of it - it's that it caused the changes to stadia that we see now.

Junkie; I don't know why you seem to take such issue. I'm not ignorant of the facts, you just seem unwilling to actually read what I am saying. So in simple words.

The fans were blameless.

The police's actions directly caused the loss of life.

The stadium was unsafe and should not have been authorised for use.

The subsequent actions, on the day and in the intervening 27 years were disgraceful and people should be held to account.

Many other football grounds of that era were also inherently unsafe, and there for the grace of god go I.

"it is a **** good idea if you are planning to turn up at a football ground that you turn up with a ticket for the end of the team you support. If you insist on turning up at the wrong end then don't wear colours

One person trying to get into the end where the crush DIDN'T happen had no impact on the crush.

It's like telling a bloke who's been run over by a drink driver while waiting at a bus stop (to take an example mentioned earlier in the thread) that he could "learn a lesson" by eating more fruit and veg. Yeah, it's not bad advice, but it's totally irrelevant to the problem.

So why didn't the same disaster happen at other grounds? That's my point - I believe it had potential to almost every week. Call it luck, [b]having better informed / capable match commanders who did their jobs better[/b], all are possible.

Bad decisions in a safe stadium probably aren't fatal. Safe decisions (as the previous SYP match commander had made dozens of times at Hillsborough) at a dangerous ground might not be fatal.

witnessing the quiet orderly queuing that takes place at every large scale public event involving tens of thousands of people.

I've been to stadium around the country where this does happen, but they were rugby matches, so the police don't have to worry about trying to stop rival fans getting to each other.