[Closed] Hillsborough - Unlawful Killing.

Sorry Ernie, not responding to your nonsense on this thread.

If ever there was damning proof that you're right, Ernie... (-:

teamhurtmore - Member

Sorry Ernie, not responding to your nonsense on this thread.

Here's a TopTip for you THM, 'cause you keep making the same mistake over and over again : if you want to ignore me then just ignore me. The fact that you respond by telling me that you're not responding kind of undermines your point.

And btw if you want to suggest showing respect how about instead of ranting : [i]"Owen Jones' infantile rants and broken record"[/i] you show a little respect towards people with a different opinion to yours?

Ernie 😀

See what I did ...dont worry the intended did 😉

Happy to debate on a separate thread - not on the Hillsbororugh one - and when you stop the claptrap of stating falsely how other people vote etc. it's your usual tactic of making up something about others so that you can make a false argument.

i save ignoring for those who deserve it.

Bravo cougar!

(anyway dont want to sully a thread on an awful event further)

i save ignoring for those who deserve it

4/10

0/10 for when someone insults me and you notice as that is something you cannot ignore 😉

i save ignoring for those who deserve it.

I don't deserve to be ignored? Jesus, you certainly know how to hurt a guy 🙁

With regards to Hillsborough the fans and the victims on that tragic day were very clearly vilified by the police, the murdoch press, and the Tory government, most fair-minded people accept that.

You however THM have a long forum history of defending Tory politicians and Tory policies, so it doesn't come as any great surprise that you should be unhappy with an article by Owen Jones in which he criticizes the police, media, and the then Tory government over Hillsborough.

That's all I'm saying.

Let's stick with what we know. That is the police ****ed up , went into overdrive on the subsequent cover up, denials and slurs....,and as a result duped the Government,Media and public into believing them

The mudslinging at the Torys is so ingrained on this forum, its almost accepted....but on this occasion, I believe they were just another victim of SYP's lies.

The what, now? Tory victims at Hillsborough, you say?

Well I don't think anyone predicted [i]this[/i] twist.

I doubt it,judging by the line taken by Ingham laterly in 2013 by which time it was unravelling. The cynic in me,and having grown up then, makes me think that a) Thatcher's Government would have known there was a cover up. B) They would be very happy to blame the supporters. A long time coming,but Godspeed to the 96.

[b]"2.44pm: Fans were asked to stop pushing"[/b]

Saw this on various timelines.

Which fans is it referring to: The ones outside where Marshall was or specifically fans inside? Was it over the stadiums PA system, and was there some kind of PA system on the approach to the Stadium where Marshall was?

Should we close this thread now? The enquiry was a waste of time clearly because this ^ independent thinker who has just discovered Google has the right answer.

Rockape63 - Member

Let's stick with what we know.

Yes, good point.

Well we know that the police falsely vilified the fans, also know that Murdoch's newspaper The Sun, and senior Tory politicians and spin doctors played a vital role in this vilification.

So what exactly is the problem with Owen Jones pointing this out, and why has it wound up THM so much?

Its disrespectful

And now you have been disrespectful to him he wont speak to you unless someone insults you because, you know, its all about respect innit.

outofbreath - is this a sick joke?

The mudslinging at the Torys is so ingrained on this forum, its almost accepted....but on this occasion, I believe they were just another victim of SYP's lies.

Given how they colluded over Orgreave (look it up if you don't know) that seems highly unlikely.

The crowd pushing is a red herring. There probably was pushing, in so much as the mass of people were moving towards the front, but only because that is what a crowd does when it gets that packed together. It's not pushing as in specific individuals shoving the people in front of them, but the whole crowd moving as one, inivitably and predictably through the street, turnstiles, tunnel and stands. It's not dehumanising it to consider the crowd as a single entity, and it's behaviour is (generally) predictable, and in the case of this crowd, entirely predictable. So say they were pushing all you like, but they were doing nothing every other crowd entering or leaving a football stadium does, which is why the inquest found that the crowd's behaviour was not a factor.

As to the rest of it, well, there's nothing much to add to what's already been said, but despite not even being a teenager in 1989, there is nonetheless a sense of shame over the way some police officers behaved on and after that day, and I hope they get the punishment they deserve.

they were doing nothing every other crowd entering or leaving a football stadium does, which is why the inquest found that the crowd's behaviour was not a factor.

Yes, that logic has been explained above, seems reasonable.

The reason I asked about tannoys outside was that *if* there had been tannoys in the queue outside (perhaps there were nobody seems to know) or if Marshall, or a fan(s) at the front had set up some kind of 'stop pushing - pass it on' message back through the crowd the gate would never have needed to be opened and the whole thing might never have happened. Easy to say with hindsight.

Conversely, if there was no effective way to communicate with the crowd outside (the other side of the exit gate that Marshall thought had to be opened to prevent deaths outside) it seems to me it doesn't matter whether you tell them "Kick off is delayed" or "People are getting crushed" as your message isn't going to get through anyway.

Have you been outside much?

That is not how crowds are managed. There is no imploring on the collective will of individuals to manage the outcome. Crowd control is a science, it is both well studied and understood. You build infrastructure to manage crowds as crowds, you don't build any old sh1t and hope everyone 'plays nice'.

At this location there was an understood method to manage crowd behaviour and risk (risk = likelihood x consequence). The controlling authorities did not implement this, in fact they put in place procedures that maximised both the likelihood of something going wrong and the consequences of that action.

It's a fair point though- competent/appropriate crowd management could have compensated for the bad infrastructure. It's not as if the police failures here haven't been covered so it all feels like obfuscation... What is the point of all of this, every post seems to be a niggle or trying to create a little doubt.

trying to [s]create[/s] clear up a little doubt.

Yes, exactly that.

Maybe some sort of 2 year long Inquiry looking at all the evidence should be set up to clear up any little doubts

Oh.....hang on...

if there was no effective way to communicate with the crowd outside

no wonder the greatape [ no offence fella] is ashamed we should all be ashamed by that.

WTF do you want cleared up here as I am not seeing it ?

WTF do you want cleared up

I'm sorry, I can't rewrite the questions I asked to be much clearer. However, between Google and STW they've all been answered so I've managed without your help thanks.

Sorry sometimes utterly ill informed confuses me. forgive me.

WTF was not meant to be rude but I had no idea what point you were trying to make

That said happy to reply in the spirit you did 😉

So what exactly is the problem with Owen Jones pointing this out, and why has it wound up THM so much?

I have absolutely no idea how anyone could be offended by that article, seemed pretty innocuous to me.

*if* there had been tannoys in the queue outside (perhaps there were nobody seems to know) or if Marshall, or a fan(s) at the front had set up some kind of 'stop pushing - pass it on' message back through the crowd

Have you ever been in a crowd? That's really not how crowds work. You think the back row would go "oh, terribly sorry old bean, didn't realise" and the entire mass of bodies would magically move back a couple of feet? Even if that happened, by the time the movement had flowed to the front of the pack it would've been too late.

I really don't understand why you are so determined to blame the fans when after 27 years and a two year trial it was concluded conclusively that it [i]wasn't the crowd's fault?[/i]

Are you that arrogant that you think you know better than a number of people who were there and / or have spent two years pouring over all the available evidence and reports because Google? Are you that stubborn that when this has been pointed out time and again on this thread, you can't just admit that you got it wrong?

We all make mistakes, it's understandable that you'd draw the conclusions you did given the scale of the misreporting at the time. But we've moved on. It's really time to go "oh yeah, sorry, I didn't realise." None of us did. That's not a personal failing, it's ok to be misinformed.

I give up.

I really don't understand why you are so determined to blame the fans when after 27 years and a two year trial it was concluded conclusively that it wasn't the crowd's fault?

Pfft, all those professionals considering the evidence for 100s of witnesses in great detail! Bet they didn't once use Google.....

I really don't understand why you are so determined to blame the fans when after 27 years and a two year trial it was concluded conclusively that it wasn't the crowd's fault?
Are you that arrogant that you think you know better than a number of people who were there and / or have spent two years pouring over all the available evidence and reports because Google? Are you that stubborn that when this has been pointed out time and again on this thread, you can't just admit that you got it wrong?
We all make mistakes, it's understandable that you'd draw the conclusions you did given the scale of the misreporting at the time. But we've moved on. It's really time to go "oh yeah, sorry, I didn't realise." None of us did. That's not a personal failing, it's ok to be misinformed.
I give up.

I can't relate any of this to anything I've written.

Your lack of insight is consistent

I can't relate any of this to anything I've written.

Your very first post on this thread:

I just don't get how zero blame can be allocated to the crowd itself. How can someone at the front be crushed if the people behind aren't pushing? If nobody pushed anyone the stand would just fill up until nobody else could get in.
How can you get crushed if everyone behind you is standing upright giving you space?

Your very first post on this thread: I just don't get how zero blame can be allocated to the crowd itself. How can someone at the front be crushed if the people behind aren't pushing? If nobody pushed anyone the stand would just fill up until nobody else could get in.
How can you get crushed if everyone behind you is standing upright giving you space?

The logic behind the zero blame and the fact there was pushing has already been explained in this thread.

AFAIK neither questions nor answers contradict the inquest in any way.

Your lack of insight is consistent

None taken JY.

The logic behind the zero blame and the fact there was pushing has already been explained

To death. To you.

in this thread.

You've tried to apportion some of the blame to the crowd, to pushing, to lack of tannoys, to anything you've fancied really in a particularly poor tasting trolling. I realise that your Google-fu and seemingly more informed knowledge than a jury and two years of facts have convinced you that there is some doubt. And you know, I wouldn't feel too bad about it. A cursory glance through Twitter and Facebook this week shows that you are far from being alone. There are plenty more who agree with you. If you really want to be in their club, then fire away. They mostly seem like really nice folk.

Outofbreath = lanesra?

You've tried to apportion some of the blame to the crowd

No I haven't. The reasons for the crowd being 100pc blameless have been explained at least twice in this thread and are as far as I can see beyond debate. Also far as I can see (I haven't read every post) nobody has disputed the logic behind that judgement in this thread.

I just don't get how zero blame can be allocated to the crowd itself.

It is not saying the crowd are 100% blameless

Lansera- possibly not sure but struggling to see how anyone can be actually doing this and not just trolling tbh

Cheers greatape one of those we should all feel ashamed of it. To some degree the copper was out of his depth and just ****ed up. Perhaps he could have been forgiven for this as it was heat of f the monet stiff. however what happened afterwards was a shameful and indefensible and harmed the attitude many folk have towards the police At least this seems to be contained to contempt for this forces actions and not generalised - which is if course the correct approach

This is still your first post on this thread
It is not saying the crowd are 100% blameless

Neither is it allocating blame to fans which is the contention under dispute.

[img] [/img]

Neither is it allocating blame to fans which is the contention under dispute.

Ah, semantics...one of the last refuges...

No, I get you. Look, you thought the final Taylor report was the "last word" till this week. You thought there was no subsequent cover-up. You thought Duckenfield could be tried for perjury after giving evidence to an enquiry that took none under oath. I'd suggest you knew cock-all about the evidence given during the Taylor report, yet you still contested that it was the "last word". Each time, you thought incorrectly.

And today, you're asking about a tannoy after you googled something. What phrase did you google btw?

As Northwind questioned earlier, you appear to be trying to introduce doubt with each tack. Is there a reason for this?

Lanesra? Nah, not a chance...he had the decency to be honest about his hatred and never lasted this long trolling a thread.

What do you think the cutoff for insight in threads is? Like, has anyone ever said anything smart, useful or funny after about page 8?

You thought Duckenfield could be tried for perjury after giving evidence to an enquiry that took none under oath.

This one's true, I really didn't know Taylor was not under oath, and I did suggest perjury as a possible charge against him on that basis. (Assuming he met the other criteria.)

Well, that was hard to watch. Should be on iplayer now, I suggest everybody watches it.

Since the guilty verdict was announced.

Does that mean the police force is now guilty of murder? The lot of them on duty that day?

I think I heard the news said that the ambulance or emergency service on that day, being slow to response, was also guilty. Guilty of murder?

Since the guilty verdict should the police and emergency personnel spend the remaining of their lives behind bars?

Who should pay for the compensation?