Hillsborough "The Search For Truth" 10.25pm

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Tricky that.

At that time, in the 80s, SOME (a handful) of morons would throw coins. 'Raining coins down' would be bullshit, but a tossed coin? possible.

Had it not been a disaster that day, there would have been some arrests, a couple of drunks, a couple of coin throwers, some hell bent of provoking the police, some hell bent on a scrap... as it would have been for any other game between any other teams. Sadly, the media used that to hype up the public perception of hooliganism, and made out it was just 'one more example' of it.

 

Once Taylor investigated... he cut past the crap and told it how it was... 'it was just another semi-final, with all the usual trappings that would entail'... it had no bearing on the disaster itself, and was wholly wrong for anybody to claim it did.

 

There would have been fans sticking two fingers up at the opposition as others were dying (because many fans didn't KNOW what was happening). It only takes one reporter to say "fans carried on taunting whilst fans died" and it makes it look so very bad.

 

The BBC had cameras there and also there was radio reporters there reporting live.

 

If any of them allergations happend , you can bet your last pound that evidence would of emerged.

[lifetime fan]

No, I appreciate that, but they originated from one source somewhere. Surely somebody can shed some light on that? Without that source then there was no story.

 

Was it Duckenfield or the Government?

 

 

The suspicion is that is was Bernard Ingham in cohorts with Thatcher and senior police.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

The suspicion is that is was Bernard Ingham in cohorts with Thatcher and senior police.

Inghham is a cunt of the highest order tory scumbag.

[lifetime fan]

All they need is ONE person to say "they were pissing in the stands" (which actually wasn't that unusual at games).... then another to say something as stupid as "probably on the police" ... and there you have it... the press will use it. And of course, it wasn't beyond them to just make crap up.

 

They still do it to this day.

 

 

If they had been any kind of evidence whatsoever of that they would have gone to town a million times worse than they did.

[FanchesterCity]

Got to say fanchester has taken some stick on here the past few months, but big credit for his knowledge on this, if only this was the case throughout the uk and the world.

 

Still don't understand why duckenfield wasn't charged or found guilty of manslaughter, his decision lead to the deaths of 96 innocent fans.

 

It wasn't purely his decision though, there were a number of decisions, and some made for seemingly sensible reasons (like the opening of the side gate to 'ease' congestion, which in the end made it worse - in part due to poor signage at Leppings Lane, so the fans all went through the tunnel... fatally.

 

There were also failings in closing off the pens, and the sheer size of the pens contributed.

 

All in all, 4 or 5 factors all conspired. Duckenfield's biggest mistake was not coming out and being honest from the start. Yes, he'd have looked bad, but not half as bad as he does now. But they could never prove their was a conspiracy to cover things up. It was all put down to the 'confusion' shortly after the event.

 

It's a while since I read the Taylor report, but I seem to recall he'd not been in charge of a match before (or very few) - would need to verify that.

 

Manslaughter would have been technically tricky to convict... it's not THAT obvious his actions would likely result in disaster (versus had he not opened the gate).

It's what he (probably) did after the fact that is so shockingly wrong.

[FanchesterCity]

If they had been any kind of evidence whatsoever of that they would have gone to town a million times worse than they did.

 

They did go to town. And it's hard to see how much worse they could have been!

 

It wasn't JUST the S*n either (although they were the instigators)

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

It wasn't purely his decision though, there were a number of decisions, and some made for seemingly sensible reasons (like the opening of the side gate to 'ease' congestion, which in the end made it worse - in part due to poor signage at Leppings Lane, so the fans all went through the tunnel... fatally.

 

There were also failings in closing off the pens, and the sheer size of the pens contributed.

 

All in all, 4 or 5 factors all conspired. Duckenfield's biggest mistake was not coming out and being honest from the start. Yes, he'd have looked bad, but not half as bad as he does now. But they could never prove their was a conspiracy to cover things up. It was all put down to the 'confusion' shortly after the event.

 

It's a while since I read the Taylor report, but I seem to recall he'd not been in charge of a match before (or very few) - would need to verify that.

 

Manslaughter would have been technically tricky to convict... it's not THAT obvious his actions would likely result in disaster (versus had he not opened the gate).

It's what he (probably) did after the fact that is so shockingly wrong.

Again Duckenfield was in the control room and could see clearly the middle pens were already overcrowded.

 

To then order the opening of the gate without securing the enterance(tunnel) into those pens is staggering.

 

Yes I think it might of been his first game or his first major game.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

They did go to town. And it's hard to see how much worse they could have been!

 

It wasn't JUST the S*n either (although they were the instigators)

Because it wasnt reported by any radio station live that them things were going on and no cameras from the BBC did either.

 

If they were captured it backs up what was reported by the media.

 

It would also of shown what the police were up against,that is why 100% there lies.

[FanchesterCity]

Thatcher just had an excuse to clamp down on 'hooligans'. She had no interest in the facts of the matter - her goal was political and to pander to the common view that hooliganism was out of control.

 

That's one of the awful tragedies of Hillsborough that conspired against the fans. It WAS a time of hooliganism, and Liverpool's reputation was poor (at best). It was all too easy to believe it was just another example. One she exploited (probably still in the belief it was true!).

 

And don't forget the FA in all of this. They'd been advised (by the police) that it might not be the best venue, and certainly the arrangement for who sat at which end wasn't optimal either. The FA couldn't give a toss and carried on regardless.

Oh, and Hillsborough had already been criticised for a lack of safety (and I 'think' had a lapsed safety cert) <-- need to verify that.

[FanchesterCity]

Again Duckenfield was in the control room and could see clearly the middle pens were already overcrowded.

 

To then order the opening of the gate without securing the enterance(tunnel) into those pens is staggering.

 

Yes I think it might of been his first game or his first major game.

 

Don't get me wrong.. I'm not defending the fucker!... but what he didn't appreciate was that in opening the side gate, the fans enter to the sides... they all went down the middle (tunnel)... that was exacerbated by crap signage too.

 

It was all just a sorry mess, and probably going to happen to someone eventually... it seemed a matter of time (in retrospect).

I just can't forgive what he opted to do in blaming the fans so soon after. I find that the hardest.

 

Proving he did so knowingly - that's the problem.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Thatcher just had an excuse to clamp down on 'hooligans'. She had no interest in the facts of the matter - her goal was political and to pander to the common view that hooliganism was out of control.

 

That's one of the awful tragedies of Hillsborough that conspired against the fans. It WAS a time of hooliganism, and Liverpool's reputation was poor (at best). It was all too easy to believe it was just another example. One she exploited (probably still in the belief it was true!).

 

And don't forget the FA in all of this. They'd been advised (by the police) that it might not be the best venue, and certainly the arrangement for who sat at which end wasn't optimal either. The FA couldn't give a toss and carried on regardless.

Oh, and Hillsborough had already been criticised for a lack of safety (and I 'think' had a lapsed safety cert) <-- need to verify that.

Yes they had no safety cert to be hosting the match.

 

Another thing that isnt mentioned much is the roadworks that were going on.

 

That held up a vast number of fans getting to the ground early.

 

The game should never of been allowed to start at 3pm.

[lifetime fan]

They did go to town. And it's hard to see how much worse they could have been!

 

It wasn't JUST the S*n either (although they were the instigators)

 

 

My point was they went to town with no evidence, it would have been a million times worse if there was any scrap of evidence this went on.

 

Several papers went with that angle but they later apologised and changed tact. that rag didn't.

[lifetime fan]

Thatcher just had an excuse to clamp down on 'hooligans'. She had no interest in the facts of the matter - her goal was political and to pander to the common view that hooliganism was out of control.

 

That's one of the awful tragedies of Hillsborough that conspired against the fans. It WAS a time of hooliganism, and Liverpool's reputation was poor (at best). It was all too easy to believe it was just another example. One she exploited (probably still in the belief it was true!).

 

And don't forget the FA in all of this. They'd been advised (by the police) that it might not be the best venue, and certainly the arrangement for who sat at which end wasn't optimal either. The FA couldn't give a toss and carried on regardless.

Oh, and Hillsborough had already been criticised for a lack of safety (and I 'think' had a lapsed safety cert)

 

We complained about the arrangements, I don't remember the police doing so.

 

You're right they didn't have a current valid safety certificate.

[xerxes]

I have commented before on how difficult it is to replicate the mindset of 1989, even for those of us who were there, and were match-goers in that era.

 

Some ask “ why Duckenfield wasn't charged or found guilty of manslaughter? His decision lead to the deaths of 96 innocent fans.” The reason is that in key respects the criteria needed to deliver a guilty verdict would be difficult to prove.

 

This is quite a useful guide to the relevant legislation:

 

In English law, gross negligence is the test for manslaughter. The crime was defined in R v Bateman as 'to show such disregard for life and the safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving of punishment.[20] In R v Adomako the House of Lords affirmed R v Bateman, and set out the five elements required for negligence:

• A duty of care owed by the defendant to the victim.

• A breach of that duty.

• A risk that the defendant's conduct could cause death.[21]

• Evidence that the breach of duty caused the victim's death.

• The defendant fell so far below the standards of the reasonable man in that situation that he should be labelled grossly negligent and deserving of criminal punishment.

 

It is for the jury to decide what constitutes 'grossly negligent behaviour'.

 

On the face of it, the first four tests look arguable. However the start point is that SWP were undoubtedly faced with a judgement of Solomon when they opened the gates. The dilemma was to open the gates and prevent the very high likelihood that people would be seriously injured or crushed to death outside the gates, or solve the immediate problem, with the possibility that the problem could be transferred inside.

 

“The Boys From the Mersey” by Nicky Ault remains the definitive statement of our fan culture from that era. We did sometimes steam the gates at big games, as did the fans of other clubs at big games. The interpretation that this was a steam, when it was not, although you will always get people who will chance their arm, was reasonable at the time.

 

By today’s standards the failure to organise stewarding to deal with the opened gates would probably meet “grossly negligent behaviour”- then it happened quite regularly with no ill effect, so the equation that an open gate equalled dozens crushed to death in the middle pens would be impossible to prove. Desirable yes- essential, no? Clubs had got away with it dozens of times before.

 

Once inside there was a choice, I know people who made for the wing pens. Our culture at the time was to get as close to the middle behind the goal as you could. Normally, grounds had become so empty that you could do so at 3pm, and you could still safely get in- this time you could not. I personally remember getting to the Paxton Lane End late for one game at Spurs and being faced with a wall of people preventing me and my mates from getting on the terracing, we just waited for a bit of excitement on a Reds attack, pushed and caused a surge – and we were on. We did it regularly. I know people who to this day can still not come to terms with the consequences of those actions at Hillsborough. It wasn’t the latecomers who were crushed to death- it was the ones who had arrived in good time. The direct grossly negligent link between the reasonable opening of the gate, and the deaths in the two central pens would be impossible to prove. A consequence yes, grossly negligent? I doubt that it would justify a conviction.

 

And this is where the story has become distorted over the years. The circumstances leading up to the disaster are the stuff of disaster, everything goes wrong simultaneously – it’s why they don’t happen all the time. The charge sheet by no means has SWP at the top. It certainly is not exclusive to them.

 

What was inexcusable was the cover-up after. No ifs, no buts, wrong, and criminally wrong. However the circumstances pre disaster invariably get lumped in with those post disaster and confusion reigns.

 

I agree with those who say that “the truth” is probably not as comfortable as some assume and that the resistance to disclosure has been as powerful from the FA, league, local authorities, licensing authorities and clubs as it was from the SYP of the time.

 

I don’t think that there is any shock disclosure, or smoking gun still to emerge. Crucially, all the lessons were not only learned, but acted upon- which is why we have such a superb safety record at English grounds post Hillsborough.

[lifetime fan]

Lets see the FA come out wth the truth about all seater stadia finding its way in to the Taylor Report.

[Guest LFD]

For those that missed it:

 

BBC Hillsborough - Searching for Truth - Video Dailymotion

[FanchesterCity]

We complained about the arrangements, I don't remember the police doing so.

 

You're right they didn't have a current valid safety certificate.

 

I think the police questioned it (and the year before) but by the second time, the FA simply said "it was fine last time, we'll do the same again"

 

Yes, the roadworks didn't help, but the police already anticipated a surge just prior to 3.00... it was a sunny day and folks hung around outside... and yeah, many were in pubs (which the police tried to use to their advantage), but that was all 'normal' activity, and was supposedly already planned for.

 

This is where the police played a silly game... they did state some facts:

 

Fans arrived in a short space of time.

Some fans had been in pubs.

Some fans come without tickets.

etc etc.

 

However, they made those issues out to be significant factors, and 'been in a pub' is a cunning way to imply 'drunk' etc.

 

All of that stuff was normal behavour as would have happened at any game, let alone a cup semi-final. The fans without tickets weren't in any major numbers (as there's already been warnings turning up).

 

If there was a disaster at City next week, they'd say "many fans had been in the pub", or they made matters worse by not arriving in good time etc, and I'm pretty sure if you managed to find 2 drunk fans, they'd say "some fans were intoxicated'... it very naughty.

 

But still, all of this is an aside to the fundamental issue....

 

At what point did Duckenfield and others realise their decision making had been the root cause - and what did they do once they realised that. Did they avoid disclosure, actively cover it up, or hold their hands up as soon as possible?

 

They certainly didn't hold their hands up...

 

And if key members of the police (because I don't believe for a moment that ALL coppers were in on this) covered things up, did they hide that from the government, or did the government collude in matters too?

 

I (personally) believe it was the police burying their heads in the sand, and trying to push every possible fan transgression to the fore, and minimising any aspect of their own decision making. The government and public sucked it all up (because it fitted with the general perception of hooliganism).

By the time the government realised the fans were blameless, they'd already backed the wrong horse to the hilt, and didn't want to face looking stupid (and wrong). So they wanted it all 'put in the past' too.

 

I don't believe anybody falsified things, or set about burying evidence (although it's widely known that some testimonies underwent a number of revisions that removed 'over zealous' reports of the lack of command/communication!), I just believe a succession of governments hoped it would eventually go away, and none of them wanted to say "bloody hell, S. Yorks Police botched it" and face the consequences of that.

 

23 years on, we have families longing for details that just weren't noted. Precise times of death (for instance), specific attempts to resuscitate, failure of equipment, the gymnasium / mortuary 'process' (a source of much pain). etc. I just don't think there's going to be more detail to unearth (sadly).

 

You know... I'll say this now...

Even today... 'the system' would rather press ahead with a specific kick off time, than consider the fans.

Only last season we saw ludicrous FA cup semi final arrangements being made, that had a disaster happened - we'd all say "how on earth were such decisions made".

 

We've improved a lot, but we still make some shocking decisions, and manage to get away with it (for the time being).

[seamus o'lunacy]

the police didnt question the ground being selected. Liverpool questioned the ground being selected. First time cos we were allocated the smaller end. The 2nd time cos of what happened the first time round - fans were injured and suffered crush injuries The police said they'd only police the game if the arrangements were the same. i.e us in the leppings lane.

 

Manchester city and manchester united both offered to host the game at their grounds but the fa completely ignored our complaint, completely ignored alternative venues, and reselected Hillsborough.

[FanchesterCity]

the police didnt question the ground being selected. Liverpool questioned the ground being selected. First time cos we were allocated the smaller end. The 2nd time cos of what happened the first time round - fans were injured and suffered crush injuries The police said they'd only police the game if the arrangements were the same. i.e us in the leppings lane.

 

Manchester city and manchester united both offered to host the game at their grounds but the fa completely ignored our complaint' date=' completely ignored alternative venues, and reselected Hillsborough.[/quote']

 

That's correct - just verified that in the Taylor report. The police's objection was to swapping ends (with some logic - that they wanted to avoid fans having to cross paths, given their likely approach routes).

 

All the obvious issues - Liverpool's larger fan base, and the proximity of Sheffield to Nottingham didn't seem to matter much (still happens today!)

[cloggypop]

Any NZB of this anywhere please ?

[FanchesterCity]

I'm setting up a link as soon as I can for folks to download (after which, mirrors would be MOST welcome!)

[cloggypop]

I'm setting up a link as soon as I can for folks to download (after which, mirrors would be MOST welcome!)

 

Nice one . Will stick up NZB myself if there is not one by then .

[cloggypop]

BBC Hillsborough - Searching for Truth - Video Dailymotion

 

From Harinder on RAWK .

[FanchesterCity]

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1bd4eo1ovqw89dw/x3xQJ9z4ms

 

I'm uploading it now (BBC iPlayer - DRM removed).

 

It should take about 1 hour to upload (I'm off to bed now) once it appears, please mirror. Ignore the BBC Philharmonic stuff (that's for another LFC fan)

[lifetime fan]

I think the police questioned it (and the year before) but by the second time, the FA simply said "it was fine last time, we'll do the same again"

 

Yes, the roadworks didn't help, but the police already anticipated a surge just prior to 3.00... it was a sunny day and folks hung around outside... and yeah, many were in pubs (which the police tried to use to their advantage), but that was all 'normal' activity, and was supposedly already planned for.

 

This is where the police played a silly game... they did state some facts:

 

Fans arrived in a short space of time.

Some fans had been in pubs.

Some fans come without tickets.

etc etc.

 

However, they made those issues out to be significant factors, and 'been in a pub' is a cunning way to imply 'drunk' etc.

 

All of that stuff was normal behavour as would have happened at any game, let alone a cup semi-final. The fans without tickets weren't in any major numbers (as there's already been warnings turning up).

 

If there was a disaster at City next week, they'd say "many fans had been in the pub", or they made matters worse by not arriving in good time etc, and I'm pretty sure if you managed to find 2 drunk fans, they'd say "some fans were intoxicated'... it very naughty.

 

But still, all of this is an aside to the fundamental issue....

 

At what point did Duckenfield and others realise their decision making had been the root cause - and what did they do once they realised that. Did they avoid disclosure, actively cover it up, or hold their hands up as soon as possible?

 

They certainly didn't hold their hands up...

 

And if key members of the police (because I don't believe for a moment that ALL coppers were in on this) covered things up, did they hide that from the government, or did the government collude in matters too?

 

I (personally) believe it was the police burying their heads in the sand, and trying to push every possible fan transgression to the fore, and minimising any aspect of their own decision making. The government and public sucked it all up (because it fitted with the general perception of hooliganism).

By the time the government realised the fans were blameless, they'd already backed the wrong horse to the hilt, and didn't want to face looking stupid (and wrong). So they wanted it all 'put in the past' too.

 

I don't believe anybody falsified things, or set about burying evidence (although it's widely known that some testimonies underwent a number of revisions that removed 'over zealous' reports of the lack of command/communication!), I just believe a succession of governments hoped it would eventually go away, and none of them wanted to say "bloody hell, S. Yorks Police botched it" and face the consequences of that.

 

23 years on, we have families longing for details that just weren't noted. Precise times of death (for instance), specific attempts to resuscitate, failure of equipment, the gymnasium / mortuary 'process' (a source of much pain). etc. I just don't think there's going to be more detail to unearth (sadly).

 

You know... I'll say this now...

Even today... 'the system' would rather press ahead with a specific kick off time, than consider the fans.

Only last season we saw ludicrous FA cup semi final arrangements being made, that had a disaster happened - we'd all say "how on earth were such decisions made".

 

We've improved a lot, but we still make some shocking decisions, and manage to get away with it (for the time being).

 

 

And yet the number of people who went on the leppings lane terraces that day was less than the capacity.