Hillsborough Disaster

[scaramanga]

I think Duckenfield will have a very hard time given his testimony, showing that he failed to foresee what could happen in the event of failing crowd control. You have crowd control because you envisage what can happen if you don't so that would be to foresee the danger. That is the whole point of crowd control or you would just leave people to get on with it. They had measures ready to be put in place because they could see the danger of not having any in place and that is what ended up happening because proper measures that had been discussed, used in previous years, were not implemented.

Then it is to discuss why they were not implemented. Was it because he was inexperienced? If so, why was the previous years Match commander moved weeks before the event? All very valid questions that should be answered.

It's a bit of a stretch for me. You might find that if the scousers are still shouting loudly enough (an almost certainty) there might be prison sentences for the cover up, as it's a cheap vote winner. I just can't see it for Duckenfield.

I see a fair bit of case law in this regard due to being a member of a few professional bodies for directors and employers and I've yet to see a jail term given out for something like this where someone acted with everyone's safety in mind but just got it wrong. Prison-worthy negligence would have been more like "fudge this, I'm off on holiday. Let the troops on the ground deal with it".

 

[scaramanga]

It's a difficult situation for the police, but as I said previously, I believe you are more likely to illicit a more positive response out of people by engaging with people. If you are aggressive from the outset, chances are the hooligan element will take it upon themselves to react aggressively. If the situation calls for it, then the police have to take a firmer stance, but from experience attending football matches, the fans are more likely to cooperate if the police if they don't treat them like thugs.

By that point it's too late. In order for the police to know for certain someone will be violent, that person has to have already been violent. That means a policeman, bystander or innocent fans has been hurt and has risked worse - that's not acceptable.

 

[Libero]

It's a bit of a stretch for me. You might find that if the scousers are still shouting loudly enough (an almost certainty) there might be prison sentences for the cover up, as it's a cheap vote winner. I just can't see it for Duckenfield.

I see a fair bit of case law in this regard due to being a member of a few professional bodies for directors and employers and I've yet to see a jail term given out for something like this where someone acted with everyone's safety in mind but just got it wrong. Prison-worthy negligence would have been more like "fudge this, I'm off on holiday. Let the troops on the ground deal with it".

I think by freezing that is almost what he did as he actually did nothing and then lied instantly about it. He will have this on his conscience for the rest of his life and it isn't for me to decide he should face prison but he should certainly be held accountable in some form for his part and he probably wouldn't disagree if you asked him to his face.

 

[spitshine]

Can we at least change the Liverpool thread title back from being "Victimpool" please?
I think that title in itself sullies this site; by all means moan about Liverpool and their fans, but that title shows full disrespect for the 96 given what has happened this week.
Any arguments about Hillsborough, Heysel etc can be kept here imo

There were more. Liverpool fans caused a crush at the 1984 European cup final - Rome and hundreds of ticketless fans trying to get into the 2007 Champions league final too.

 

[parklane1]

The behaviour of the police was excellent during the miners' strike. Far more restrained than it could or probably should have been.

gonads, you are talking rubbish again. I do agree with a lot of what you are saying about the supporters and their actions but the bit about the miners is wrong.

 

[scaramanga]

cobblers, you are talking rubbish again. I do agree with a lot of what you are saying about the supporters and their actions but the bit about the miners is wrong.

They were trying to stop people from doing the jobs they were too [greedy/lazy - delete as applicable] to do with force. Failing them just standing aside and going home, and faced with violence, the police took the only option available.

 

[scaramanga]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36159195

Anyone even a little bit surprised?

Kudos to those families that have said they're not interested in a civil suit.

 

[parklane1]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36159195

Anyone even a little bit surprised?

Kudos to those families that have said they're not interested in a civil suit.

Not in the slightest, I said to my old lady before the verdict came in that found in the familys favour that will not be the end of it. Despite getting the result they wanted and the fans cleared of wrong doing they still can not put it to bed.

 

[StephenH]

Any sympathy I have in these situation disappears totally with mention off the words finatial compensation!

 

[mudshark]

There is evidence - that's what this enquiry was about.

There is now, yes, but only because the families refused to sit down, shut up and accept the original findings. If not for the publicity that grew out of their campaign, nothing other than the official version would ever have seen the light of day, and your ‘move on’ narrative would be all there was, but I suspect you know that.

 

[milo]

There is now, yes, but only because the families refused to sit down, shut up and accept the original findings. If not for the publicity that grew out of their campaign, nothing other than the official version would ever have seen the light of day, and your ‘move on’ narrative would be all there was, but I suspect you know that.

You are right that there would never have been another inquest unless the families had kept up the pressure and maintained a high profile. If anything so terrible ever happened to a member of my family, I hope that I would have the courage and stamina to do the same.

 

[scaramanga]

There is now, yes, but only because the families refused to sit down, shut up and accept the original findings. If not for the publicity that grew out of their campaign, nothing other than the official version would ever have seen the light of day, and your ‘move on’ narrative would be all there was, but I suspect you know that.

That evidence was always there, that's how evidence works. It may have been ignored or not found but it was always there.

There's simply no excuse for acting the way the shoutier scousers have done. There's plenty of families who got what they wanted by staying away from the cameras and didn't go around waving tacoty scarves every 5 minutes.

As a side note, I wonder if there's a correlation between time in front of cameras over the last 30 years and saddling up to ride their ambulance chasers into court. It certainly wouldn't surprise me.

 

[mudshark]

That evidence was always there, that's how evidence works. It may have been ignored or not found but it was always there.

There's simply no excuse for acting the way the shoutier scousers have done. There's plenty of families who got what they wanted by staying away from the cameras and didn't go around waving tacoty scarves every 5 minutes.

As a side note, I wonder if there's a correlation between time in front of cameras over the last 30 years and saddling up to ride into court with ambulance chasers. It certainly wouldn't surprise me.

As you surely well know, evidence being "there" and said evidence being made available are not at all the same thing, so no, it's not necessarily how it "works". I have to say, I find your stance over this whole thing rather bizarre (actually, verging on the pathological), so I think I'll just leave it at that.

 

[thfcsteff]

The idea that someone looking for money or prestige would join the police force at any level


The behaviour of the police was excellent during the miners' strike. Far more restrained than it could or probably should have been.

I cannot begin to say how much this post aggravates me. There again, it comes down to one word - Thatcher - and one's opinion on it.

 

[thfcsteff]

Thats an utterly garbage comment, just because I don't agree with who should shoulder the blame

I have total sympathy towards the families because one fact in all this is people lost their lives and people lost their loved ones. That is not open for dispute.

But I repeat, the statement "did fans contribute to the deaths - no" is crap, I am sorry but that us my view.

What I also have issue with is people totally ignoring the facts of football beyond this, if you took Hillsborough out of history and looked at Liverpool fans of the 70s and 80s its a known fact that they were some of the nastiest in Europe and as Englands sole representatives in Europe for much of it they spread that "love" around. Now add Hillsborough back into history and those facts don't change, thats not a vendetta against Liverpool because I feel the same way about West Hams ICF. Its just the white elephant in the room when you discuss Liverpool, Liverpool fans and Hillsborough at the same time.

Were you there? Did you go in the 70s and 80s? I did. a lot.Many times to Anfield and never any bother - some banter? Absolutely, but not bother. I have no doubt they had hooligans -every club did- but no, they were not 'some of the nastiest in Europe' that is just not true mate. Man Utd, Chelsea, West Ham, Birmingham and Leeds were all MUCH worse...as for European representation, firms used to join up to go and fight in Europe. In fact, we were the only club I remember that did not have Chelsea or West Ham showing up, and that is because they flat-out fudging hated us (still do)...we should not cheat Millwall of their due either...so there's no 'white elephant' whatsoever.

 

[Mr_B]

this is a very difficult topic to address, as others have pointed out, football was in a different world in 1989, It was purely a working man's sport, being in a good "firm" was almost as important as what your team did on the pitch, the OB (old bill) were who you went for if you couldn't get to the rival fans, I was a teenager at the time and this version of anarchy appealed to my younger self.

In todays sanitized version of the beautiful game, all of this seems unthinkable, this ruling obviously placates the dead and I commend that, but having lived through these sort of matches back then, the police had an impossible job, this was an accident waiting to happen, its almost surprising this didn't happen at another venue before. The ruling in today's day age is understandable but honestly, its out of context, there were a lot of people at fault back in 1989, not just the south yorkshire police.

 

[thfcsteff]

What I don't get and in no way shape or form is this sarcastic, what I don't get and if someone can shed light on it please do...

If you go to a game without a ticket, break into the ground and as a result cause overcrowding surely by definition, breaking the law...to start the domino effect which resulted in the deaths, you have to be considered part of the blame, surely? If you turn up without a ticket you know its wrong to go into the game, some will say thats a very simple view but is that not correct? 30 year old men who should know better not? Or is it a case of people saying "well that was the done thing, it was the 80's" I mean its equally a cynical view to say "well thats how it was then" because the counter argument would be "well policing was like that back then"

Thats why I believe there is elements of blame on a number of heads....

How many tens of thousands of events have gone ahead 'over-full' without death, let alone 96 of them?

You do know that the problem was fans being channelled into already over-crowded 'pens' by stupid, ignorant, negligent tossers who were supposed to be doing their jobs right? Are you seriously going to tell me that the ONLY reason this occurred was some ticketless fans trying to get in at the last? Then I have to respond mate, how is it that a practice (the rights and wrongs of which are not up for debate - of course you shouldn't, but people did!) that occurred MANY times in the late 70s through the 80s did not result in deaths before Hillsborough? I think the truth is that some people just will not accept that Liverpool supporters refused to 'let it go' and furthermore, that large crimes of negligence, and subsequent 'blame', were perpetrated upon them. I mean, FFS, to try and prove this 'stampeding drunks' theory they were breathalyzing the corpse of a 10 year old. If that had been my kid, you can fudging bet I wouldn't have 'let it go' mate.

 

[thfcsteff]

this is a very difficult topic to address, as others have pointed out, football was in a different world in 1989, It was purely a working man's sport, being in a good "firm" was almost as important as what your team did on the pitch, the OB (old bill) were who you went for if you couldn't get to the rival fans, I was a teenager at the time and this version of anarchy appealed to my younger self.

In todays sanitized version of the beautiful game, all of this seems unthinkable, this ruling obviously placates the dead and I commend that, but having lived through these sort of matches back then, the police had an impossible job, this was an accident waiting to happen, its almost surprising this didn't happen at another venue before. The ruling in today's day age is understandable but honestly, its out of context, there were a lot of people at fault back in 1989, not just the south yorkshire police.

Indeed...I'd wager we were at a fair few of the same games...it could be seen that Hillborough was the culmination of years and years of increasing aggravations

Overcrowding by nature would suggest that the numbers were enough to cause the deaths? Otherwise it would not have happened surely?

Mate,

With the greatest of respects, read this...it will give you a thumbnail insight into the major issues being discussed about the day. LIES were told, suggestions IGNORED and on-the-ground management of the situation non-existent. People died because they over-filled pens that were already at capacity, and not one of these fudgewits in charge managed to shut access off to them, let alone divert people to other pens. They also did not open fence gates in the pens which were suffering the overcrowding. There is really no argument. This was a series of epic fudge-ups, and officials and authorities tried to LIE their way out of it, in the process smearing vast tracts of supporters with NO EVIDENCE.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-31850599

 

[thfcsteff]

You are right that there would never have been another inquest unless the families had kept up the pressure and maintained a high profile. If anything so terrible ever happened to a member of my family, I hope that I would have the courage and stamina to do the same.

absolutely, furthermore I'd shout at every fudging camera I could. Decorum in grief? What a load of old knackers eh?!!!!

As soon as they drop the victim culture, I'll change the title.

Your obsession with Liverpool is absolutely bizarre to me, it really is.

 

[thfcsteff]

There is evidence - that's what this enquiry was about.

Yes. Evidence the police and other authorities fudged it up and lied about it. That's why they've been found guilty.