Jury Reterns Unlawfully Killed

[right-then-petal]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/neUnws/uk-england-36138337

[cee-dee]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36138337

Petal's link doesn't work. He's got a "U" in it.

[right-then-petal]

Thanks

[cee-dee]

I think the verdict should have been "Misadventure".

Awful tragedy but if anyone's to blame, blame the people doing the pushing.

They're gonna try and blame whoever opened the gates or ordered the opening.

[fallen-archie]

I don't believe anyone set out at the beginning of that fateful day to harm anyone, fan, ambulance or police.
I hope this marks the end but I suspect it will go further for some time.

[cee-dee]

They're "Considering criminal proceedings"....

[suzieseaside]

That's not surprising after a verdict of unlawful killing.

No doubt the relatives of the deceased will expect someone to be punished after they have waited 27 years for this verdict

[cee-dee]

It seems a bit of a poor do, only seven jurors deciding such a momentous decision?

[suzieseaside]

Yes, 7 out of 9 I think it was ?

Probably a number of 'errors' led to the tragedy, perhaps some bad decisions and negligence, and others where blame was more difficult to apportion.  I don't know.

The jurers were 318 days on this case so there must have been a great deal to take in and weigh up.

[cee-dee]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing?

I don't think anyone involved with any decision-making could have forseen any of the resulting cumulative effects. Cause?

In the end, the result was clearly those "at the back" pushing those "at the front". Cause and effect?

[upthecreekyetagain]

Question number 7 that the jury were directed to answer:-

7. Behaviour of the supporters: Was there any behaviour on the part of the football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
Jury's answer: No

[cee-dee]

Two thought differently.

[aernethril]

But that's the whole point of this inquest - that all the evidence could come out and the pushing by the fans was not the whole issue by a long shot.

There were serious failings even before the day that contributed to the situation and even more importantly the police lied about what happened and who they were blaming and that is why the relatives and friends pushed and pushed for so long to get this inquest.

This verdict needs to be read in conjunction with the other reports on the policing of that event because to my mind it was an appalling failure at best of senior officers at that time, and the subsequent cover up should, IMHO justify criminal proceedings.

[cee-dee]

If you weigh in all the shortcomings of those now about to be "blamed" but take out the one thing, the pushing from behind, the 96 would still be alive.

It was obvious from the beginning that the shortcomings were about to be "blamed" and seeing the prepared banners, again, it was a foregone conclusion and quite honestly it was all an expensive farce.

I've often wondered if any of those "at the back" (who know full well they were pushing) have felt any responsiblity for the death of those in front of them?

[fallen-archie]

I remember going to a semi final game at Villa Park many years ago, I stood on the terrace behind the goal with thousands of others, there were a few crush barriers but they did little to prevent you getting picked up and moved back and forth in a sea of people.
You only have to look at attendance figures back then to see what was acceptable.
Hillsborough and other tragedies changed all that and today all seater stadiums, state of the art control centres with cctv and club stewards help to keep things safe.
In this instance evidence has proved that there was an attempt to influence the outcome of an inquiry, those responsible should face charges for that deception.
Not sure the Ambulance service were deliberately negligent and the question remains, why did so many supporters go to the ground without a valid ticket?
I also wonder if 21 years is a long enough sentence for both families and the accused.
I also wonder what is meant by the term closure.

[suzieseaside]

Duckenfield was aware of the likely consequences of opening the gate.

Two pieces of evidence suggested that Duckenfield had the knowledge to foretell precisely how disastrous his actions might be. The first was an obscure item from Lord Justice Taylor’s 1990 Hillsborough report, at which Duckenfield declared he had attended a match when Millwall visited the ground which had produced the same cramming in the central pens where Liverpool’s fans died. The second turned up the fine detail of a Duckenfield letter to his own Chief Constable, suggesting he had also experienced the same crush in 1979.

He knew, Greaney put it to him. There could be no sanctity or shared responsibility in the idea that he ought to have been helped to be better prepared for that day. There could only be an acceptance that he had been in a complete state of panic and had frozen. Duckenfield’s world diminished during the extraordinary 90-minute exchange.

“Mr Duckenfield, you know what was in your mind, and I will ask you just one last time: will you accept that, in fact, you froze?” asked Greaney.

“Yes, sir,” replied Duckenfield.

From that moment on, the prospect of the match commander being found to have unlawfully killed the 96 – the hugely anticipated sixth question of the 14 the jury was asked to consider and the only one on which they were not unanimous - was suddenly a possibility. The jury had to be satisfied that Duckenfield knew there was a risk of death when he fatefully opened exit gate C. Greaney established that.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hillsborough-inquest-david-duckenfield-admitted-to-de...

Highly likely that he will be prosecuted I would think

[joe_bloggs*]

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Two thought differently.

---

No - the jury was unanimous on that question - the only one that was decided by a majority verdict was the question as to whether the 96 were unlawfully killed.

[artful_dodgings]

The families of the Hillsborough casualties have fought tooth and nail for 27 long years with tenacity - and it has to be said with great dignity - under circumstances that must have been horrendous to endure. Their everyday lives have been tainted by the spectre hanging over them, so to see their joy and jubilation at the end of it all, was a pure pleasure.

A litany of negligence, incompetence and complete failures, mostly by the police who were in charge of the whole thing, so the onus lies with them. Whether or not the CPS do manage to drag Duckenfield to the dock, is something I hope will happen. Not least of all for his deceitful and dishonest cover ups. The man should be thoroughly ashamed of himself.

fallen_archie wrote:

'Not sure the Ambulance service were deliberately negligent and the question remains, why did so many supporters go to the ground without a valid ticket'?

According to one news bulletin, that instead of entering the pitch, the ambulances were sitting lined up outside the Stadium. Not sure about this, but I think only a couple were in situ on the pitch. The reason for this however may have been police instructions. This wasn't made clear.

I understand that an Inspector went around the Stadium at a later date, and found 17 things that were not only wrong, but were patently and blatantly obviously wrong. So they don't come out of this whiter than white.

[fallen-archie]

On your last point concerning the ambulance service, The scene would have been under police control so the movement of Ambulances would have been governed by the police. What is clear is that they arrived in numbers but as you say only two made it onto the pitch. I think it would be quite wrong to attache blame to a group of people who spend their working lives caring for people and doing their very best regardless of circumstances.