Oaks Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I guess people are a little afraid to pipe up now for fear of being tarred with some name or abuse, but the report has changed some of my view, but not all of it, the facts remain that when those gates opened, it wasnt coppers, it wasnt the media, it wasnt journalists, it was liverpool fc supporters that flooded in. If you had a ticket for the game, and couldn't get in in time for kick off due to there not being enough turnstiles would you have not gone though thoughs doors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 But lets face it those on the day had to make split second decisions - now 23 years later, and with mucho hindsight - yeah they may have got it wrong. I am pretty sure in those circumstances they made. what they thought were the right decisions. Why do you say this stuff about hindsight, and people having to make split-second decisions, as though it was some unforeseen situation sprung upon them at the last minute, with no previous experience or knowledge to guide them? Have you tried to find out even the most basic information about it? Have you read the report? 27. The confined outer concourse area serving the Leppings Lane turnstiles accommodated the entire Liverpool crowd, heading towards three discrete areas within the stadium (North Stand; West Stand; Leppings Lane terrace). It was a well-documented bottleneck and at matches with capacity attendance presented a predictable and foreseeable risk of crushing and injury. 28. From statements provided to the Panel, at previous FA Cup semi-finals SYP managed congestion in the outer concourse area and its approaches by filtering the crowd and checking tickets on the roads leading to the ground. This did not happen in 1989. The former SYP match commander, Chief Superintendent Brian Mole, denied that filtering the crowd’s approach to the turnstiles had been previously adopted as police practice. 29. SYP proposed that preventing ticketless fans from approaching the turnstiles was not possible because no offence had been committed. This was contested and criticised by Counsel to the Taylor Inquiry. 30. In their 1989 statements some SYP officers referred to crushing in the outer concourse area at the 1988 FA Cup Semi-Final. They were asked by the SYP solicitors, Hammond Suddards, to reconsider and qualify their statements. 31. Concerning the distribution of the crowd on the standing terraces inside the stadium, Chief Superintendent Mole stated that officers on the perimeter track and in the Control Box estimated when full capacity of each pen was reached ‘based on experience’. 32. SYP officers with extensive experience of policing Hillsborough, including Chief Superintendent Mole, stated that the fans’ distribution between the Leppings Lane terrace pens was based on an informal practice that allowed fans to ‘find their own level’. In the aftermath of the 1989 disaster, SYP claimed that ‘find their own level’ was a flawed practice ‘devised’ by the safety engineers and SWFC. 33. From the SYP statements disclosed to the Panel it is evident that SWFC stewards and SYP officers with experience of managing the crowd on the Leppings Lane terrace had adopted the practice of redirecting fans to side pens when the central pens were estimated to be full. At semi-final matches in 1987 and in 1988 the gates at the entrance to the tunnel opposite the turnstiles and leading into the central pens were closed temporarily by police officers who redirected fans to the side pens. In 1988 many fans in the central pens experienced crushing and minor injuries. Neither the gate closures nor the crushing were recorded in debriefing notes. 34. Although an established practice, the use of the tunnel entrance gates as a means of regulating access to the central pens was not included in the Operational Order for capacity crowd matches. 35. The disclosed documents reveal persistent ambiguity throughout the 1980s about SYP’s and SWFC’s responsibilities for crowd management. The SYP position, exemplified by Chief Superintendent Mole’s statements, was that while safety was a concern for SYP the ‘prevention of hooliganism’ and ‘public disorder’ was the main priority. The custom and practice that had evolved within SYP for packing the pens was concerned primarily with controlling the crowd. 36. In the view of Chief Superintendent Mole’s successor, Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield, crowd distribution between the Leppings Lane terrace pens was the responsibility of SWFC stewards but police officers, particularly those on the perimeter track, were expected to react to overcrowding in the pens. 37. In its post-disaster assessment the West Midlands Police investigators concluded that the failure to anticipate that unregulated entry of fans through exit Gate C and down the tunnel would lead to a sustained crush in already full central pens had a ‘direct bearing on the disaster’. 38. SYP officers with experience of the inner concourse and terrace access stated that previously they had controlled access to the tunnel once the central pens appeared to be full, particularly in 1988. The disclosed documents reveal that this information was deleted from some officers’ statements. Several officers declined a further invitation by SYP solicitors to reconsider their statements regarding SYP responsibility for monitoring the pens. 39. Senior SYP officers denied knowledge of tunnel closures at previous semi-finals, particularly 1988. They placed responsibility for that information not being given at debriefings on the officers responsible for the closures. Yet SYP officers responsible for closing the tunnel access in 1988 claimed that they had acted under instructions from senior officers. 40. Whatever their personal knowledge of the 1988 tunnel closure, both Chief Superintendent Mole and Chief Superintendent Duckenfield admitted their awareness of the practice of occasionally restricting access to the tunnel to prevent overcrowding in the central pens. Why are you saying this bizarre stuff, in flagrant contradiction of what the report says and what the police now admit? They knew about the dangers beforehand. They knew what to do to limit the danger, and had previously adopted these approaches. On this occasion, they failed to do so. Don't you understand that? Or don't you want to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I just saw on another thread a pic of an everton own goal from the 70's again Liverpoool. The crowd surge that happened when they scored was frightening when you consider now the facilities and the state of everything. I remember watching Villa at the old Wigan ground, and the terracing was nothing more than a very wet and sludgy bank. It's actually scandalous when you think of it the conditions that fans had to endure I'm sorry to dip my little fly into your ointment, but was it not Mrs Thatcher who put that all right for us... and for those who have forgotten, she did win 3 elections, pretty easily as it happens. Are you on drugs or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 @ Smetrov Arranging a FA cup semi final is never a 'split second decision', though is it? If the necessary steps been taken before the day of the game, this would never have happened. That's the whole point. How can 96 people have contributed to their own deaths? As far as the crowd is concerned, being a fan attending games in that day, you'll have been aware of what the conditions were like. When you're stuck in a crowd, there is nothing you can do, you go with it. It was something that happened, and people accepted it as part of the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I guess people are a little afraid to pipe up now for fear of being tarred with some name or abuse, but the report has changed some of my view, but not all of it, the facts remain that when those gates opened, it wasnt coppers, it wasnt the media, it wasnt journalists, it was liverpool fc supporters that flooded in. If you had a ticket for the game, and couldn't get in in time for kick off due to there not being enough turnstiles would you have not gone though thoughs doors? You'd have had little to no choice. And plus, as I understand, it wasn't too out of the ordinary for fans to be squashed in together at games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 What surprises me how little blame has been attached to SWFC. Admittedly, I'm only a 100 odd pages through the independent report, but there's loads of evidence presented that SWFC should be ashamed of, and played a part in the events of the day. I'm thinking primarily of the turnstiles being antiquated, and not sufficient to handle that volume of people; secondly, to the lack of signage directed supporters, who would be unfamiliar with Hillsborough, where to go. What make it worse, for me, is that the crush in 89 wasn't the first time it had happened, and it was only by the grace of god that it had not happened earlier in 81, 87 or 88, where exactly the same problems had occurred, with out the tragic consequences. If the facilities weren't up to scratch then it is the FA's fault for choosing the ground to host such a big game. I believe VP was used for the other semi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted September 14, 2012 Moderator Share Posted September 14, 2012 This thread has run it's course. The evidence is out there. There's too much idiocy in some posts to leave it open and the subject is wandering off into Thatcher and just repeating comments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Surprised no thread already, but the officer in charge of policing the game yesterday admitted lying about Liverpool fans forcing open gates at HillsboroughThe match commander on the day of the Hillsborough disaster has admitted he lied about fans forcing an exit gate open to enter the ground. Relatives of the 96 fans who died gasped as David Duckenfield told the new inquests: "I apologise unreservedly to the families." He said: "Everybody knew the truth, the fans and police knew the truth that we'd opened the gates." Mr Duckenfield, 70, said he would regret the lie "to his dying day". He was in charge of policing at Sheffield Wednesday's stadium on 15 April 1989 when a fatal crush developed in terraced pens allocated to Liverpool fans. The court heard that on the day Mr Duckenfield told Graham Kelly, of the FA, that some fans had got in themselves through gate C, when the truth was that he had ordered the gate to be opened. Christina Lambert QC, counsel for the inquests, said some witnesses have spoken of having a "clear recollection" that Mr Duckenfield "made reference to gates having been stormed". He said he does not recall being as "dramatic" as that.http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-31821211 (article cropped) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted March 12, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 12, 2015 This is a stunning story. I am glad that David Duckenfield has helped to clarify the truth of that tragic day. I rarely read Hillsborough-related threads and comments -- I did this one as it's on VT -- because it almost always makes me feel bad about the moral condition of the human race and particularly of British people. I hate to hear the moaning about moaning, the stupid point-scoring, the predictable devolution into comments about LFC (and I have no love of them myself), all the usual nonsense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Yes when I sometimes read on here people blaming the Liverpool fans for what happened, I find it quite upsetting. When David Duckenfield admitted the truth and apologised to all the families that suffered that sounded very genuine. its a pity it took so long though! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) It's just tragic that it's taken this long for people to start accepting the truth. It's also alarming. The size of the cover up is frighting. It makes you wonder exactly how far up it goes? Edited January 25, 2016 by dAVe80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 12, 2015 Moderator Share Posted March 12, 2015 Surprised no thread already.. There was. It got locked due to the exact reasons StN says below. (also it subsequently got date order messed up when the site shifted to the new format, which makes it impossible to follow - the last page is on the first page etc.). But just maybe some of the people who posted some massively ignorant garbage in that thread might be a bit wiser now. This is a stunning story. I am glad that David Duckenfield has helped to clarify the truth of that tragic day. I rarely read Hillsborough-related threads and comments -- I did this one as it's on VT -- because it almost always makes me feel bad about the moral condition of the human race and particularly of British people. I hate to hear the moaning about moaning, the stupid point-scoring, the predictable devolution into comments about LFC (and I have no love of them myself), all the usual nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 well is despicable for all these years liverpool fans were blamed when its not being proven it was all a sick cover up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Lack of leadership, no accountability, kind of sums up the politics of power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) When David Duckenfield admitted the truth and apologised to all the families that suffered that sounded very genuine. its a pity it took so long though! It's the apology for lying, as opposed to apologising for getting things wrong or withholding the truth, that's changed. He's long accepted doing what he did: Q. So you accept you did not tell him the truth at that stage, that the gate had been opened as a result of your instruction? - A. Yes, sir. And you knew perfectly well that it was not the influx of fans as a result of that opening which had caused the problem, did not you? - A. Yes. that was not the major opening. I am asking you publicly to exonerate the fans for the overcrowding in Pens 3 and 4 which caused 95 deaths? - A. Yes, I publicly apologise sir for the inference that people caused those deaths. All from his evidence to Lord Taylor's 1989 inquiry. Edited March 12, 2015 by ml1dch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Wonder what smetrov has to say about this following his **** atrocious comments in the pitch invaders thread the other day. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Wonder what smetrov has to say about this following his **** atrocious comments in the pitch invaders thread the other day. That one in particular shocked me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 13, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 13, 2015 But just maybe some of the people who posted some massively ignorant garbage in that thread might be a bit wiser now. Judging by the pitch invasion thread the other day, certainly not everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Bump not for a second expecting it to happen, but there is the potential for duckenfield to be blamed with manslaughter and gross misconduct Quote The jury at the inquests into how 96 people died in the lethal crush at Hillsborough in 1989 will be asked to consider whether the South Yorkshire police chief superintendent David Duckenfield, who was in charge of the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, caused the deaths by gross negligence manslaughter. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/25/hillsborough-disaster-coroner-inquest-david-duckenfield Edit - not that I think he should be blamed solely, the whole event was a perfect storm which had the potential to happen at any ground in the country and he played a part in it. Edited January 25, 2016 by Jimzk5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 (edited) From the Grauniad article linked in Jim's post above: Quote The coroner, Sir John Goldring, told the jury of seven women and three men at the start of his summing up of 267 days of evidence that they would be asked to consider a verdict of unlawful killing, based on their assessment of Duckenfield’s preparation for the match and conduct of it on the day. In order to answer yes to the question about whether those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed, Goldring said: “You would have to be sure that David Duckenfield, the match commander, was responsible for the manslaughter by gross negligence of these 96 people. When answering this question, we are looking at Mr Duckenfield’s conduct and his responsibility.” Hillsborough disaster: Fans unlawfully killed Quote Ninety-six football fans who died as a result of a crush in the Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the inquests have concluded. and live reporting: Quote QUESTION 6: Determination on unlawful killing issue Posted at 11:13 Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed? Yes or no. Yes Edited April 26, 2016 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts