DS Forums

 
 

Hillsborouģh


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26-04-2016, 13:20
academia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 16,299
Must add that it's quite telling that it wasn't a unanimous verdict.
It was 7-2 in only one of the 14 questions. That's telling too. And it doesn't alter the admiration due to the families for thrir determination.
academia is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 26-04-2016, 13:23
Elvisfan4eva
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,777
what does it telll you?
It tells me that after two years, two whole years of hearing all the evidence day in and day out, not all the jury was convinced they were unlawfully killed.
Elvisfan4eva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:23
An Thropologist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16,124
Ok I'm wrong,
My opinion is irrelevant in the end
No you are not wrong. Nobody could have foreseen that on that day those events would have collided to cause tragedy. But these events usually are a perfect storm of a number of unlikely things coming together and causing tragedy.

I think Bradford raised the flag about the risk associated with penning in spectators. Any risk assessor would have that at the top of thier assessment. I think the reason it wasn't had a lt to do with how football was perceived back then by the vast majority.
An Thropologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:25
Aurora13
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,592
They didn't have to foresee anything. For negligent manslaughter there are four requirements: that a duty of care is owed, that the duty was breached, that the breach caused death and that the negligence that led to the breach was gross (a blatant disregard to the life and safety of others to such a degree that it requires punishment).

To me the first three criteria are very obviously fulfilled, the fourth I can understand some doubt but for me it is fulfilled also.
I agree. It was clearly the 4th criteria that 2 of the jurors didn't believe had been met. I can understand that. The fact that it was a majority verdict does demonstrate that this wasn't as clear cut as some believe. Blatent disregard for the life and safety of others is a very high bar.
Aurora13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:26
Duke-of-URL
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 231
Me too. Yes, the police made mistakes but those fans weren't unlawfully killed in my opinion.
Compare it to any kind of industrial fatality where negligence or carelessness is a factor and the outcome will most likely be manslaughter, or unlawful death. This is no different really if the actions of the police contributed needlessly to the chain of events that caused lives to be lost.
Duke-of-URL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:27
seacam
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,305
Is overdue justice -- justice?
seacam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:29
Osusana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,390
No you are not wrong. Nobody could have foreseen that on that day those events would have collided to cause tragedy. But these events usually are a perfect storm of a number of unlikely things coming together and causing tragedy.

I think Bradford raised the flag about the risk associated with penning in spectators. Any risk assessor would have that at the top of thier assessment. I think the reason it wasn't had a lt to do with how football was perceived back then by the vast majority.
I would just like to think that if it happened to me, I would not be pursuing prosecutions of people who did not deliberately mean any harm to my loved one.
An eye for an eye is not always justice in my world
Osusana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:31
ClarkF1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 5,859
Justice at last.
ClarkF1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:32
marjangles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,773
I would just like to think that if it happened to me, I would not be pursuing prosecutions of people who did not deliberately mean any harm to my loved one.
An eye for an eye is not always justice in my world
I would hope that you would feel the need however to pursue justice for your dead loved one.

Nobody's asking for an eye for an eye either, nobody wants Duckenfield to be crushed to death. What they want is the truth and for justice to be served. If that involves prosecutions then so be it.

If I hit someone with a car accidentally I don't mean them any harm but harm has been caused and it is likely that I will have to answer for causing that harm.
marjangles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:32
Landis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,751
I'd agree with that even though i'm not a football fan. I could never understand the mentality behind crowds packed on to terraces standing behind metal bars, yet peculiarly for some that was what they wanted. Perhaps some footie fans from bygone days can explain the 'attraction' of that as i'm afraid i never could understand it.
That is correct.
If the Taylor report was written today the conclusions would be exactly the same, and the outcome - all seater stadiums - would be exactly the same.
Taylor would not be suggesting "safe standing" areas to placate individuals who want to stand next to a numbered seat which is bolted in the upright position to create 3% more "atmosphere". We are fortunate that Taylor had much more on his mind than any trivial priorities.
Landis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:32
Hobbit Feet
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mole Bothering
Posts: 13,944
I would just like to think that if it happened to me, I would not be pursuing prosecutions of people who did not deliberately mean any harm to my loved one.
An eye for an eye is not always justice in my world
perhaps you wouldn't

but then if your 'loved one' was painted as something that you knew they weren't, and the authorities were lying and then lying some more to cover their arses, you might not have quite the same attitude
Hobbit Feet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:33
19carlymarie88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 65
Let's be honest, the result was only going to come back one way regardless. Could you imagine the public response had the jury delivered a different verdict? Hardly the fairest, most objective of trials, was it?
1 - It wasn't a trial
2 - So is it fair that 96 innocent lives were lost due to failings on the security of that day, ran by the police?
3 - Is it fair that that red top scum falsified the goings on of the incident to make the fans look like it was their fault?
4 - Is it fair that the families of those 96 have had to wait 25 years for justice?

I could go on but I think the story and all that evidence speaks for itself.
19carlymarie88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:33
SaturnV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,623
I would just like to think that if it happened to me, I would not be pursuing prosecutions of people who did not deliberately mean any harm to my loved one.
An eye for an eye is not always justice in my world
The families may well have thought like you at the time but if you read up on the subject you'll see that what happened afterwards changed the issue altogether.
SaturnV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:36
Eater Sundae
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,674
I think after Bradford it was very obvious indeed that penning spectators in was an accident (of some sort) waiting to happen.
...but no discussion as to why they were being penned in in the first place. Fences didn't just suddenly appear as if by magic.
Eater Sundae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:37
Osusana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,390
The families may well have thought like you at the time but if you read up on the subject you'll see that what happened afterwards changed the issue altogether.
But that bitterness has ruined many of their relationships/lives and turned them into people they would never have become.
Who is to say that would not have happened anyway - but to many it became a one-eyed obsession and a lost life of their own
That's the real tragedy for me
Osusana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:38
anais32
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,409
I would just like to think that if it happened to me, I would not be pursuing prosecutions of people who did not deliberately mean any harm to my loved one.
An eye for an eye is not always justice in my world
It's not just that the police actions may have caused it; there appears to have been a deliberate attempt to not only cover up potential criminal conduct; but an attempt to place the blame on the victims. They collaborated with their mates in the scum press to do this.

And a drunk driver doesn't deliberately mean any harm.
anais32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:41
19carlymarie88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 65
I will never believe that anyone could foresee what would happen as result of their actions on that day, therefore I will never believe that people were "killed".
I'm with the 2 out of 9 on that one.
What I believe is not important in the great scheme of things
I agree that maybe they weren't expecting what happened to have happened.
But surely if you see the pen was already full then opening a bigger gate to let more people in would be trouble.

Its not just that but its the aftermath that made it worse. People were literally begging authorities for help through those gates and there pleas were ignored. Had they been listened to....96 may have been less. And to have people cover all sorts of errors up to cover their own backsides is unreal. The list of issues in the aftermath is endless so it is understandable the families wanted justice.

All those families wanted was justice, to have their loved ones not painted as mindless thugs, to have authorities admit they lied, lied and lied some more
19carlymarie88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:44
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
Agree with the findings,but some of the boozed up ticketless fans that arrived late should have been added to the list.
Pathetic comment.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:44
Duke-of-URL
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 231
It doesn't take a genius to work out that if you try and fill something that is already full with no relief, something will eventually give. Even the police, often not the sharpest tools in the box, ought to have known this.
Duke-of-URL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:46
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
I will never believe that anyone could foresee what would happen as result of their actions on that day, therefore I will never believe that people were "killed".
I'm with the 2 out of 9 on that one.
What I believe is not important in the great scheme of things
The jurors listened to 2 years of evidence, a lot of which has not been made public.

So frankly your opinion is completely worthless.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:47
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
Yawn!! Yawn! Now the relatives have got what they wanted, they should move on and there should absolutely be no prosecutions. It won't bring the 96 back. Most of the country is sick to the back teeth of hearing the H word.
Yes, we should just let those people responsible for the deaths of 96 people continue their lives shouldn't we?
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:48
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
Me too. Yes, the police made mistakes but those fans weren't unlawfully killed in my opinion.
What reasons have you got for beleiving that?
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:48
Heavenly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30,890
From the David Conn article in The Guardian. This was a tragedy just waiting to happen.



Duckenfield failed to do basic preparation for the semi-final. He did not study relevant paperwork, including the force’s major incident procedure, and signed off the operational plan two days after taking over, before he had even visited the ground.

He turned up to command the semi-final, he admitted, knowing very little about Hillsborough’s safety history: about the crushes at the 1981 and 1988 semi-finals, or that the approach to the Leppings Lane end was a “natural geographical bottleneck” to which Mole carefully managed supporters’ entry.

Duckenfield admitted he had not familiarised himself in any detail with the ground’s layout or capacities of its different sections. He did not know the seven turnstiles, through which 10,100 Liverpool supporters with standing tickets had to be funnelled to gain access to the Leppings Lane terrace, opened opposite a large tunnel leading straight to the central pens, three and four

He did not even know that the police were responsible for monitoring overcrowding, nor that the police had a tactic, named after a superintendent, John Freeman, of closing the tunnel when the central pens were full, and directing supporters to the sides. He admitted his focus before the match had been on dealing with misbehaviour, and he had not considered the need to protect people from overcrowding or crushing.
Heavenly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:49
Landis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,751
When a man has to look at next days Daily Mirror (or Sun) and realise that the whole of the front page and back page is a freaking huge image of his 2 daughters - in a cage - as they take the final few breaths of their lives......as they have the air squeezed out of them by the weight that no human can survive.....then I say that he gets to decide when enough time has passed to remember or to forget.

25 years? Long enough? He gets to decide. Not you. Or me.
50 years? He gets to decide.
Landis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2016, 13:50
tiacat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,229
Walterwhite:
“Why the hell have you brought the behaviour of fans and holliganism into a thread on Hillsborough?”

You: it is relevant though
I would agree it is relevant too, for all the reasons that have been cited. The context at the time was one in which fans were blamed for being fans. This lie could remain in place because of the behaviour of other fans at the time, it made it easy for some people to believe. It made it easy for the police to blame them and get away with blaming them.
tiacat is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:23.