Jump to content
Anubis

The 97

Recommended Posts

I think the Bland case is not included on a legal technicality. He was technically still alive and could possibly still have been if his life support wasn't ended, all be it in a vegetative state.

 

There's a precedent case about the withdrawal of life support causing his death. I think it might have proved difficult to show that Duckenfield's negligence caused his death when it's been previously argued in a past case that the removal of life support was the causative factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very happy with the charges as they stand, but I am wondering why there are no charges in respect of West Midlands Police.

 

Scratch that, just read that the CPS will be considering charges separately from SYP and there are still ongoing investigations.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Bland case is not included on a legal technicality. He was technically still alive and could possibly still have been if his life support wasn't ended, all be it in a vegetative state.

 

There's a precedent case about the withdrawal of life support causing his death. I think it might have proved difficult to show that Duckenfield's negligence caused his death when it's been previously argued in a past case that the removal of life support was the causative factor.

 

My heart goes out to Tony Blands family. How come perverts can be prosecuted 20 or 30 years later but because Tony was on life support for 4 years, his family cannot have justice for his death which was caused by the tragedy?

 

The fucking law stinks but at least we're one more step further ahead on the Justice road.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FA are fortunate that they are not facing any further punishment for their role in the disaster. It's been a long time coming for those who have been charged, and now it's a case of making those charges stick.

 

As a slight aside, the current Sheffield Wednesday as a legal entity is not the same as the Sheffield Wednesday legal entity of 1989, so the club cannot face charges for their culpability.

 

Whatever happens from hereonin, never again must criminal negligence be allowed to be covered up by the authorities and the government, with blame reapportioned so cruelly and inaccurately. Whatever side of the political divide you sit on, you MUST see such an act as an affront to basic human decency.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delighted with that charge against Duckenfield. That cowardly lying bastard started the lie to save face. He best not get a cushy sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FA are fortunate that they are not facing any further punishment for their role in the disaster. It's been a long time coming for those who have been charged, and now it's a case of making those charges stick.

 

As a slight aside, the current Sheffield Wednesday as a legal entity is not the same as the Sheffield Wednesday legal entity of 1989, so the club cannot face charges for their culpability.

 

Whatever happens from hereonin, never again must criminal negligence be allowed to be covered up by the authorities and the government, with blame reapportioned so cruelly and inaccurately. Whatever side of the political divide you sit on, you MUST see such an act as an affront to basic human decency.

 

 

Agreed but the early waning signs are there with Grenfell as anyone that wasted half an hour of their lives watching PMQ's today,  May busily muddying the waters at every turn.

 

I suppose the outcome today was as good as could have been expected. As you say the FA were lucky, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that the names of the 2 further suspects under investigation are Mackenzie and Murdoch.

 

 

Sadly not,  Murdoch dying in a cold prison cell would have been karma

As for Mackensie  I would have brought back public executions and then hung his lifeless corpse to rot from one of the Liver birds. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly not,  Murdoch dying in a cold prison cell would have been karma

As for Mackensie  I would have brought back public executions and then hung his lifeless corpse to rot from one of the Liver birds. 

 

 

Would you not consider keeping him alive in stocks and being bummed by buffalo ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made up for those brave, dignified, tenacious and inspirational families and supporters who have fought tooth and nail to reach this latest landmark that people told them they couldn't and the powers that be actively fought to stop them reaching by making every inch of their incredible journey as hard as they could.

 

They really did mess with the wrong city, the wrong families and the wrong football family.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome result and finally justice has been served. Mixed emotions from me as it feels like this has been going on for pretty much all my life. I was born in '82 and can remember one lad a few years above me in school who didn't come back from the game but his dad and brother did. It's been like a constant theme in the background of my life. I'm so glad that finally someone is being held accountable and the justice is done. Hopefully the families feel they can stop fighting now for once and live what's left of their lives with a bit of peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made up they have been charged. Think back to how old you were 28 years ago and too think that in all that time the families have been fighting just to hear this news is unimaginable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be interesting (if that's the right word) to see what pleas are entered.

 

Given the adversarial approach adopted in the inquests, you'd imagine that the police personnel charged will likely plead not guilty. And, obviously, because they're innocent until proven guilty...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive my ignorance, but why is he only being charged for the manslaughter of 95 people?

Because Tony Bland died about 4 years later and on a legal technicality he couldn't be charged with that death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive my ignorance, but why is he only being charged for the manslaughter of 95 people?

Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996.

 

When Tony Bland died, the year and a day rule was still in effect, which stated that the accused could not be held liable for a homicide if the death occured over a year and a day after the conduct which caused that death.

 

That rule was scrapped by the above act, as it was thought that the law/rule didn't reflect modern advances in medicine and technology were people could be kept alive for longer, so it was no longer seen as fair to put time limits on criminal liability for homicide offences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Tony Bland died about 4 years later and on a legal technicality he couldn't be charged with that death.

 

 

Thought it might have been something to do with that. Can't say I agree with that decision though. He died as a result of his injuries in the disaster just like the rest of them did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996.

 

When Tony Bland died, the year and a day rule was still in effect, which stated that the accused could not be held liable for a homicide if the death occured over a year and a day after the conduct which caused that death.

 

That rule was scrapped by the above act, as it was thought that the law/rule didn't reflect modern advances in medicine and technology were people could be kept alive for longer, so it was no longer seen as fair to put time limits on criminal liability for homicide offences.

 

 

Thanks for explaining it to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never thought I would see this day.....

 

Just having a read on this from various sources and one message is coming through. When this goes to court, it would be best to embargo any commentary on it, in case its deemed to prejudice the trial. Those slippery cunts will try anything to get off the hook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×