I came across Liverpool fans at West Ham that season and of course they where all model citizens on the day.

It would depend what it was for, what the evidence was, and what the outcome would be.

It seems she has decided to get out of the firing line at a time when it is open season for everyone to have a go at everyone who has ever had anything to do with SYP.

She would have been put in charge, because she was next in line.

Next in line as opposed to the best person for the job. Bearing in mind the scrutiny on SY police this week it seems strange at best that an officer already under investigation was given the job.

IIRC, it was originally intended that the top 4 divisions would all become all seater, following the Hillsborough disaster, but that was later relaxed.

This just isn't realistically possible at larger matches is it though? You can't make a match which thousands of spectators have turned up to watch 'feel' like the local village club which considers a hundred folk a good turn out!

I've just been watching this video clip (it's quite long) of the huge crowds outside the stadium. I think the safest place to be would definitely have been to remain outside that ground and the further away the better. Ok so you miss a match you've paid money to watch, but at least you are alive. I looked at some of the faces of the people and wondered about those just minutes away from death.

Horrible.

http://hillsborough.independent.gov....a/VID0002.html

Next in line would be in terms of rank. Officers are frequently under some sort of investigation, from within, and without. Decisions based on what they do during that time are made in consideration with all the facts.

There is a public witch hunt going on with regard to this force, and at the moment, no one dare defend any of them in relation to anything, which is totally unfair towards everyone who had nothing to do with this disaster.

Which would be the majority of the force since most would have since left/retired.

Ah the witch hunt defence. Remember that Hillsborough is just one chapter of shame and incompetence from this force over many years.

Sorry, but "the old ground" had to be gone over again, and if you don't understand why then frankly it is useless discussing it with you.

You know darn well that your second "point" has been explained many times throughout this thread. The police were never FORCED to open the gate, Duckenfield alone decided to do it as far as the evidence given proves. The police (in other words Duckenfield) failed miserably to control a situation that wasn't an unknown.

"Many"? Allegations are a constant factor on all Police Forces, and Officers. They're not all true.

I think it is apparent that at the moment this Force is subject to a witch hunt. Anyone who says anything good about any of them is shot down in flames. Even a retired Officers forum hit the headlines when Officers who had done no wrong tried to say they were proud of the good they did in their service.

The CC was suspended for something that would not otherwise have attracted that punishment. No one dare stick their head up, because this verdict has allowed a free for all against anyone in the police, not just those that did wrong.

Hang on DP.

As far as what was reported in the media, I understood that this comment wasn't about the officers "service", but their behaviour at Hillsborough itself?.

As for "witch-hunt" I wonder what anyone associated with SYP or other former officers expect when a senior officer admits that he had lied for years about the deaths of 96 football fans and that people would want to look under a few rocks to see what crawled out?.....

They chose to ? Why did they chose to ?


Correct

Correct again.

I do know that it has been a big earner for the legal profession. The truth was known in 1989

Should they have allowed people to be crushed outside the gates ?


No need to state that they made to effort to block the tunnel. That is self evident.

I've no problem with those that did wrong being vilified, and made to pay for what they did. However, how can it be right to have open season on anyone who has ever worked for SYP?

As for the retired officers, my reading was that it was more general, and that they should be proud of the service they gave. There were individuals at Hillsborough that did a good job too. Even some of the victims have acknowledged that. The blame should be shouldered by those concerned, not everyone.

This is an example of how it is a free for all now. People defending themselves in general terms were silenced.

The way I understand it is that he was suspended for continuing to maintain the cover up during the latest inquest, paying lawyers vast amounts of public money in order to do so.. This was judged also to have lengthened the inquest, and caused the families additional stress. To quote Andy Burnham from the article below ;
"Shamefully, the cover-up continued in this Warrington court room. Millions of pounds of public money were spent retelling discredited lies.
"Lawyers for retired officers threw disgusting slurs; those for today's force tried to establish that others were responsible for the opening of the gate.
"If the police had chosen to maintain its apology, these inquests would have been much shorter."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36154201

,And you dismiss it as "something that would not otherwise have attracted that punishment." I make no comment, people can make up their own minds about your views.

This afternoon a retired South Yorkshire cop has crawled out of the woodwork to repeat the same old story. and you condemn people for tarring all police with the same brush.

If the truth was known in 1989 then why has it taken until 2016 for the deaths to be declared unlawful?
Not sure what you are getting at, is it the cost of the investigations that arouses your disapproval? Are you unhappy with any part of the judgement? Or are you just being obtuse?

What does that have to do with anything?

Do you believe that the tragedy at Hillsborough happened due to rowdy fans or possible hooliganism?

I think everyone knows that Liverpool had/has it's fair share of 'hooligans' - indeed it was rather convenient that they did as it allowed someone's failings and ineptitude go undiscovered for far too long. That's pretty shocking IMO.

I am happy with all the verdicts of unlawful killing.

Do I think that the fans outside the gate were disorderly?...No

Do I think that they were drunk?....No

Do I think that many didn't have tickets?....No

Do I think that the fans were impatient to get in and this resulted in a dangerous crush ?...Yes

You keep saying the truth was known in 89 so are you questioning the latest inquiry?

I thought it was too long and too big. The initial coroner should have had a fuller inquest.

They chose to because they'd failed to control the numbers immediately outside the ground and they didn't have a contingency in place to deal with the congestion. It was cock-up upon cock-up from start to finish.

Of course they shouldn't have allowed people to be crushed outside the gates. The police should never have allowed the congestion outside to get to that level.

I have a vague recollection that the Taylor inquiry asked Duckenfield why he didn't delay the kick-off, but can't remember his answer or even whether he gave one (it's nearly 25 years since I read the Taylor Report). I'm sure it's available online though.

It was too long due to the lawyers representing SY police. Well there are lots of things that should have happened but didn't due to various reasons. This does not mean that they should not have been done now.

The first inquest could not have been fuller because of the cover up. It took years for many of the facts to come out, like some of the people who died still being alive at 3.15.

The latest inquest would have been far shorter if counsel for the various police officers hadn't persisted in trying to cover up the truth.

The official government paperwork will be available in a couple of years or so. We may learn more then as to what decisions were made in the aftermath but then again most of the reports could be retracted to save Tory reputations. This story is not ended.

ITV are showing the seminal documentary drama Hillsborough on Sunday at 10:20pm this Sunday.

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2016-...gh-this-sunday

Will be interesting to see it in light of the more recent revelations that were not known at the time, as even then it was pretty damning indictment on SYP and the authorities.



There could be a lot more yet to come out in relation to the cover up itself, especially if there are criminal charges.

Thanks for the feedback but wrong thread, this is about Hillsborough.