Hillsborough "The Search For Truth" 10.25pm

[Scooby Dudek]

Hillsborough: New inquest announcement expected

The families of Hillsborough victims have campaigned to have the accidental verdict overturned Continue reading the main story

Hillsborough papersChief apologises over statement

Thatcher row over police cover-up

Key excerpts

Key findings

The Attorney General is expected to apply to have the original verdicts in the inquest into the 96 deaths at Hillsborough stadium quashed.

 

Dominic Grieve QC will have to apply to the High Court to have the accidental verdicts overturned before a new inquest can be held.

 

He is set to make an announcement in Parliament later.

 

It follows a report by the Hillsborough Independent Panel which revealed 41 fans could have been saved.

 

Prime Minister David Cameron said Mr Grieve would review the report published on 12 September in order to decide whether to apply to quash the original inquest.

 

Mr Grieve will also answer questions in the Commons and provide a written statement to MPs "on his consideration of the issue", a spokeswoman for his office said.

 

The Attorney General has already said it was clear there were "significant issues over the original inquest".

 

Challenged verdict

 

The panel spent 18 months looking through more than 450,000 pages of documents relating to the fatal crush at the Hillsborough stadium during Liverpool's FA Cup semi-final match against Nottingham Forest on 15 April 1989.

 

It found the lives of 41 of the victims could potentially have been saved if the response of the emergency services had been swifter.

 

The victims' families have always challenged the original inquest, which concluded all the victims had suffered "irrevocable brain damage" by 15:15 on the day.

 

The Attorney General's expected announcement follows confirmation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and the Director of Public Prosecutions that the biggest ever independent investigation into police wrongdoing is to be carried out into the disaster.

 

From the BBC;

 

Hopefully a massive step forwards

[magicrat]

It says everything when some stupid Twitter bollocks dominates forum discussion over a far more worthy story.

I totally agree.

[xerxes]

A new, full inquest is the right answer.

 

The mood amongst those associated with the era is not predominantly for revengeon those who were involved in the day, mistakes were made. Those who colluded in the cover-up though should be brought to book.

 

What is important is that the record is set straight.

[Reckoner]

Torres: Liverpool still a main part of my life - Goal.com

 

Torres: Liverpool still a main part of my life

The Chelsea centre forward reaffirms his fondness for his former club and the city as a whole in the wake of recent developments surrounding the Hillsborough tragedy

 

Fernando Torres has lost none of his affection for former club Liverpool, despite his move to Premier League rivals Chelsea meaning that he is no longer the icon that he once was.

 

The striker spoke of his love for the team and city in the wake of recent and ongoing revelations regarding the Hillsborough tragedy and its subsequent cover-up, an ordeal that has greatly affected the city of Liverpool over the past 23 years.

 

"When I heard about Hillsborough I got excited, as I have known a lot of people who lived that, who cried with that ... somehow, I made it mine," Torres told El Pais.

 

Speaking about football matters, Torres reiterated his appreciation for the time that he spent at Liverpool, singling out the club's fans and former manager Rafa Benitez for specific praise. The striker also hinted that the "truth" surrounding the circumstances of his departure is still not a matter of public

He added: "I owe very much to Liverpool, their fans, Benitez ... Liverpool is a main part of my life. I know I'm not well-considered now but I'm sure that will change in the future.

 

"Finally, I decided to leave because it was a step in my career. It was not the best way of leaving but it was not the way they sold it. Someday people will know the truth."

 

Torres' performances since leaving for the Blues have attracted plenty of criticism – the 28-year-old having only managed 18 goals in 79 competitive appearances for the club so far – but the Spaniard also spoke of how he has learnt to pay little attention to his detractors.

 

"The scars hurt in the beginning," he revealed,"but then you learn you're not alone on this. Social networks show you how people follow and support you. But yes, there is a moment you tend to protect yourself.

 

"I learnt the critics couldn't hurt me, I just had to know how to take advantage of them. You're the only one who can say: 'You're getting wrong; you have to react'.

 

"I'm not the same who left Madrid some years ago but I still keep the values I learnt there. I've been lucky as I started very young. One can think he knows everything but you don't."

[magicrat]

A new, full inquest is the right answer.

 

The mood amongst those associated with the era is not predominantly for revengeon those who were involved in the day, mistakes were made. Those who colluded in the cover-up though should be brought to book.

 

What is important is that the record is set straight.

 

What is important is you refrain from setting the agenda. Leave that to the victims families. Let's have new inquests and see what emerges.

[ternando_forres]

I wonder what he means by "someday people will know the truth" , maybe it's something to do with FSG's plans?

[Barney_Rubble]

The striker spoke of his love for the team and city in the wake of recent and ongoing revelations regarding the Hillsborough tragedy and its subsequent cover-up, an ordeal that has greatly affected the city of Liverpool over the past 23 years.

Aye, the cynic in me says that we are due to play the ruskis fairly soon and the shit-haired judas is feeling a bit twitchy about the kind of reception he is going to get.

 

If I was in Agger's shoes right now, I'll be staying late at every opportunity for extra training sessions so that when the time comes to be able to give him the welcome he deserves - Anfield Iron style.

[BCM]

 

 

 

Jimmy White MBE Jimmy White MBE ‏@jimmywhite147

 

I may be chelsea but me and ronnie have huge respect for the @LFC fans. @glen_johnson @robbie9fowler @philthompson4 pic.twitter.com/slqn4NFk

[BCM]

I wonder what he means by "someday people will know the truth" , maybe it's something to do with FSG's plans?

 

 

There's definetly more to his transfer i reckon, im sure it will come out eventually. We have enough to worry about anyway.

[Faustus]

Interview with the Reverend James Jones from the Guardian website:

 

Hillsborough panel chairman: 'This is what the church should be doing' | Football | guardian.co.uk

 

Hillsborough panel chairman: 'This is what the church should be doing'

 

Interview: Right Rev James Jones, bishop of Liverpool, says he knew what he was taking on and wasn't shocked by the findings

 

The Right Rev James Jones sits in the ample study of the stately residence he occupies as the bishop of Liverpool, and explains why he agreed to chair the independent panel that examined the horrors of Hillsborough. It was, he acknowledges, a much meatier undertaking than the common routines of Church of England business, which Jones laments as too often parochial, wrapped up in "interminably long debates" and lacking engagement with society.

 

He knew what he was taking on, Jones says. He was inducted into Hillsborough, and the bereaved families' campaign against what they complained was a grievous injustice and a South Yorkshire police cover-up, in his early days as Liverpool's bishop. In 1999, a year into his post, the Hillsborough Family Support Group asked him to preside at the memorial service for the disaster's 10th anniversary, and they explained their continuing agonies.

 

So he knew the panel would be examining the actions of the police and other powerful people and organisations, none of whom had been held legally accountable, taken responsibility or at that stage apologised for the failings that caused 96 people to die. The panel's report removed 23 years' distortion of the truth about what happened on 15 April 1989 at Liverpool's FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest.

 

"I was aware," he tells the Guardian, in his first major interview since the panel reported, "that MPs, the police, the media, the judiciary, possibly the government of the day, were in the frame. People might think we in the church are naive; we're not. We know exactly what we are engaging with."

 

Though John Sentamu, now archbishop of York, then of Stepney, was a member of the Macpherson inquiry team that reported in 1999 on the murder of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence, it is unusual for a church figure in Britain to chair such a process. "The church sometimes colludes with a very parochial approach, that it should not stray outside its walls," says Jones. "It takes us away from engagement with society which I believe is our calling. I absolutely believe the church should take an active role in helping to frame a just society."

 

When he was considering whether to accept the invitation to chair the panel, made by the then Labour government's home secretary, Alan Johnson, in 2009, Jones consulted the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, among others. "To paraphrase, Rowan said this is exactly what the church should be doing."

 

The result of the panel's work, an examination of 450,000 documents held by the police and other organisations responsible for Hillsborough, was the 395-page report released first to the families and then to the public at Liverpool's Anglican cathedral on 12 September.

 

The panel's terms of reference were phrased by the government in carefully neutral terms: to "illustrate how the information disclosed adds to public understanding of the tragedy and its aftermath". Jones, throughout a long interview, sticks steadfastly to that, not expressing his opinion, insisting that his job as chairman is to allow the report to speak for itself. He acknowledges, however, in his calm, pastoral voice, that its impact was "explosive".

 

The report blew away as false the case made relentlessly by South Yorkshire police that drunk or misbehaving Liverpool fans had somehow been responsible. Prof Phil Scraton, of Queens University, Belfast, who substantially authored the report unanimously approved by the eight-person panel of experts, told the families at the cathedral that the disaster had been "foreseeable".

 

Sheffield Wednesday's Hillsborough ground, chosen by the FA, had been "unsafe" in 1981, then made "dangerous" by modifications to the Leppings Lane terrace through the 1980s. South Yorkshire police were found culpable not only for mismanagement on the day but for the cruel subsequent effort to cover up their own failures and systematically blame the fans. Orchestrated and sanctioned from the top by the then chief constable, Peter Wright, senior police officers briefed Whites news agency in Sheffield about foul and untrue stories of misbehaviour by supporters, which were published most infamously by the Sun under the then editor Kelvin Mackenzie's headline: The Truth.

 

The panel found the emergency response, including by the ambulance service, to have been gravely botched. Most devastating for the families, the panel's public health expert, Dr Bill Kirkup, said 41 of the 96 victims might have been saved had the response been competent. The ambulance service was found, like South Yorkshire police, to have altered officers' statements to present a favourable account to the official inquiry by Lord Justice Taylor and other legal processes.

 

In rapid response, the Independent Police Complaints Commission has announced an investigation into possible police misconduct including manslaughter, perverting the course of justice and perjury. The director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, is investigating possible criminal culpability. On Tuesday the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, announced he would apply to the high court to quash the 1991 inquest, against whose rulings, procedures and verdict of accidental death the families battled for 21 years.

 

Of the real truth, which his panel reported, Jones says calmly: "I wasn't shocked." Explaining why, he adds: "I had already taken seriously the families' sense of injustice. So when documents emerged that vindicated their questions, I wasn't shocked."

 

The report's publication was preceded by the "profound" apology made in parliament by David Cameron, which removed any doubt that it would be incontrovertibly accepted. Jones briefed the prime minister on the report the day before the apology.

 

Jones pays tribute to Andy Burnham and other Merseyside MPs, including Steve Rotheram, Maria Eagle, Derek Twigg and Alison McGovern, who supported the families in their quest for the truth. "MPs, politicians, come in for a lot of stick," Jones says. "But these MPs' advocacy of the families has been outstanding. If a politician has to represent, they have represented their people fearlessly."

 

Those who worked with Jones over almost three testing years testify to his range of skills, including as a chairman, negotiator – and politician. He lobbied hard to secure the continuation of the panel's work and civil service support when the Cameron government took over in 2010, and, like others involved, praises the contribution of the home secretary, Theresa May. "She gave her commitment and she has seen it through," he says.

 

When he met the prime minister, Jones says, Cameron was receptive: "He was very clear about the issues. And he himself came out with the phrase 'double injustice'." That was the landmark description of the families' experience: first the injustice of losing their loved ones, then "the denigration of the deceased, compounded by an attempt to blame the victims".

 

In the well of the cathedral where the families gathered on 12 September, Jones opened the proceedings with a brief speech. "I was trying to create an atmosphere of welcome," he explains. "To prepare them for what they were about to hear." He told the families their "dignified determination" had shaped the panel's work: "When you were bereaved of your loved ones 23 years ago, none of you imagined that the night of sorrow was to last so long. None of you anticipated the frustration that would obstruct the natural and just desire to get to the truth."

 

As Scraton and Kirkup, outlined the panel's findings, three people fainted at revelations. When the presentation ended, the families gave the panel a standing ovation. Of that reaction, Jones observes: "There was a euphoria, because for them it was vindication. But it was bittersweet. And my heart goes out to the families."

 

He says the families' loss, many of them parents whose children died, remains raw: "As a pastor, I could see the symptoms of grief there, in the demeanour of the people." When the press conferences were over, he took himself to the cathedral's chapel. "I went to remember the 96, and to pray for truth and justice to prevail in God's world." He adds: "I strayed from my brief as chairman in that moment – but it was the end of the day."

 

From the chair in his study, Jones talks gently, mostly about his Christian beliefs and ministering to people's grief. But when he reflects on how Liverpool itself was defamed, portrayed as unjustifiably whingeing when the city always expressed solidarity with the families, he reveals a glint of steel. "There has been that phrase 'self-pity city'. I think people will think twice before they say that again," he says sternly. "The report has allowed Liverpool people to say: 'This is the truth about us.'"

 

Then, quietly, he concludes: "And truth must now lead to justice."

[zigackly]

It says everything when some stupid Twitter bollocks dominates forum discussion over a far more worthy story.

 

The Duncan Jenkins rubbish is of more interest to the vast majority because it’s more “proof” of how shit the club is being run, and people love bad news and to have something to moan about. Maybe if Duncan could have shut his mouth for a few days then it wouldn’t have hijacked this important news. Social media has a lot to answer for. A lot of good, but a whole lot of bad.

 

I will try my best to refrain from flinging insults on this thread, but I think that is an entirely pompous and self righteous point to make, and to judge people's commitment to the cause based on whether or not they choose to talk about their feelings on an internet discussion board is well out of line, not to mention trying to use Hillsborough to score points over a silly little spat. You both ought to be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves.

 

I can't speak for everyone else, but personally I find it surreal that the wheels of justice are now turning in the way we've hoped they would and fought for, for twenty three years, and I find it incredibly difficult to put my feelings into words. I certainly don't feel "excited" like Torres.

 

If anything, this all brings home again just how much was lost, and how vicious the regime at the time and the one after were to deny any closure or recompense.

[Trumo]

If you think I said it to score some points on an internet forum, or that I am somehow judging 'people's commitment to the cause', you are more misguided than I thought. I don't want to fling around insults either so I'll just leave it there. If that's OK with you.

 

Moving on to the interview with Bishop Jones, it's good to hear his take on things away from the immediate media glare following the panel's report.

[zigackly]

If you think I said it to score some points on an internet forum, or that I am somehow judging 'people's commitment to the cause', you are more misguided than I thought.

 

Why don't you explain what your point was then, because it looks to me as if you were being critical of people who chose to comment on the other thread but not on this one. If I've spectacularly missed your point somehow, then please explain it to me, because right now you've got my blood boiling.

[Trumo]

Why don't you explain what your point was then, because it looks to me as if you were being critical of people who chose to comment on the other thread but not on this one. If I've spectacularly missed your point somehow, then please explain it to me, because right now you've got my blood boiling.

 

I accept that I could have worded it slightly differently, to take any accusatory suggestions out of it, but the point was that people were working themselves into a frenzy over a rather trivial Twitter story (disregarding for the moment any ramifications that story might have for the club and/or the fans) and the news about the IPCC investigation was somewhat overlooked.

 

I was the one who posted the link to the IPCC story on this thread, and I know there isn't really an awful lot it can generate in terms of discussion, but my comment wasn't some 'look at me' statement, more about merely pointing out that people on the other thread were almost at loggerheads because of something that happened with a Twitter user.

 

I can't speak for JohnnyH or his comment that you've highlighted, but can you add more about why I've apparently got your blood boiling?

[zigackly]

I accept that I could have worded it slightly differently, to take any accusatory suggestions out of it, but the point was that people were working themselves into a frenzy over a rather trivial Twitter story (disregarding for the moment any ramifications that story might have for the club and/or the fans) and the news about the IPCC investigation was somewhat overlooked.

 

I was the one who posted the link to the IPCC story on this thread, and I know there isn't really an awful lot it can generate in terms of discussion, but my comment wasn't some 'look at me' statement, more about merely pointing out that people on the other thread were almost at loggerheads because of something that happened with a Twitter user.

 

I can't speak for JohnnyH or his comment that you've highlighted, but can you add more about why I've apparently got your blood boiling?

 

I've tried to explain something of my emotions above. Without getting into any personal detail, it's something I've felt extremely strongly about for very many years. I can't accidentally see the number 96 in any innocent context without biting back my feelings, and the 15th of April is hard every year.

 

That's been compounded over the years by a sense of vast injustice which was ignored or even ridiculed by the majority in this country, by the politicians, and by newspapers which are now oh so keen to talk about it.

 

When the results of the Hillsborough panel's investigation came out, the emotion I felt most strongly was anger. And then numbness. And the more I see things happening now that should have happened in the weeks and months following Hillsborough, the more angry and numb I feel.

 

I have opened this thread and begun to type something a few times, but it all seems a bit futile. I don't really know what I can say. When there was a fight for justice it was obvious; we demand answers and keep repeating our truth.

 

Now the process of justice is finally happening, words don't quite seem adequate. If I feel like this, then I have no idea how the close families of the 96 feel, or those who survived the tragedy.

 

But I notice that not a lot of people are commenting on these threads, and I don't wonder at it, because I'm somewhat struck dumb myself.

 

To feel then that someone is criticising my inability and reluctance to express my feelings and by extension others does make me angry. Should I apologise for that?

 

I still don't understand what your point was really or why the hell some other thread has anything to do with this, but I'm prepared to accept your word that you didn't mean it the way it came across.

Edited October 18, 2012 by zigackly

[Trumo]

To feel then that someone is criticising my inability and reluctance to express my feelings and by extension others over this does make me angry. Should I apologise for that?

 

I still don't understand what your point was really or why the hell some other thread has anything to do with this, but I'm prepared to accept your word that you didn't mean it the way it came across.

 

To put your views into context based on what you've said above, then no there is no need to apologise. There are probably others that feel exactly the same way. I can see your point of view, and you've accepted that I meant no malice with my comments, so that's where we are I guess.

 

I've commented many times on Hillsborough and the ongoing fight for justice. I joined this site just before the 20th anniversary and some of my earliest posts were about Hillsborough and what happened afterwards. Even though I wasn't directed affected by what happened - I was neither there that day, nor do I personally know anyone that was - I fully empathise with the families and have backed them all the way and will continue to do so. In the same way, I empathise with anybody who has struggled in some way since then, because it affected more people than those who were there that day. The public at large have since learned the truth that the whole thing was completely avoidable, and now know what the families and the people of Merseyside have been left to cope with. As you point out, little reminders are everywhere and that's all it needs to trigger whatever emotional response you might have to them.

[Guest davelfc]

Justice for the 96? Why has the FA not been brought to book?

 

19 Oct 2012 22:30

It has taken a long, long time for a lot of organisations to face up to what they did in 1989, says Kenny Dalglish in his latest column, and now it’s the Football Association’s turn

 

In the last few weeks, many welcome advances have been made in finally proving the truth of what happened at Hillsborough.

 

Even though they were not in power at the time, our current government has picked up the baton and handled the issue superbly.

 

What I want to know now is when is the FA going to face up to its responsibilities, too?

 

I’m not talking about the apology it made last month - an apology that was a long time coming and which took them two attempts to produce properly.

 

I’m talking about issues like why we have never had a full explanation of why the FA insisted the game should be played at Hillsborough.

 

They knew there had been problems there in the past, but still they insisted on their semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest being staged there that year.

 

They knew that Old Trafford was available, but they would not consent to the game being played there instead.

 

And they knew that Hillsborough did not have a safety certificate and yet they were still adamant the game had to be played at the stadium.

 

If they had not insisted that the game was played there, who knows what would have happened?

 

Well, the fans that died would still be alive for one thing.

 

That’s why I find it strange that there has not been any talk of the FA being liable to pay some form of financial penalty to the families of the dead.

 

And that’s why I find it strange that there has been no talk of the FA being punished for its actions.

 

I am not talking about punishing the people in power at the moment.

 

But surely, as the game’s governing body, they have to take responsibility for the way their organisation acted in the past.

 

It has taken a long, long time for a lot of organisations to face up to what they did in 1989 and now it’s the FA’s turn as well.

 

What has happened to Graham Kelly, for instance? Is there no one who can go and talk to him about why the FA acted as they did?

 

Kelly had become chief *executive of the FA in 1989. It would be helpful to hear his *explanations for the organisation’s actions.

 

There has, quite rightly, been a lot of talk about the accountability of the police over the tragedy. Why has nobody really mentioned the FA?

 

It would be very interesting for someone to sit down with Mr Kelly and make sure the FA are not involved in a big cover-up here as well. Once again, they have to face up to their responsibilities for taking the decision they took.

 

An apology is a beginning but the way they have behaved, they appear to think that is enough.

 

It isn’t.

 

Maybe a proper inquiry into the actions of the FA would exonerate them from blame.

 

Maybe it wouldn’t.

 

But it’s important for people to know why the FA insisted on playing an FA Cup semi-final at a stadium that did not have a safety certificate.

 

I believe that there will be a House of Commons debate about Hillsborough on Monday.

 

I am told that the role of the FA will be under scrutiny.

 

It is only right that it should be.

Kenny Dalglish column on Hillsborough and why the FA must be punished - Kenny Dalglish - Mirror Online

[lifetime fan]

Justice for the 96? Why has the FA not been brought to book?

 

19 Oct 2012 22:30

It has taken a long, long time for a lot of organisations to face up to what they did in 1989, says Kenny Dalglish in his latest column, and now it’s the Football Association’s turn

 

In the last few weeks, many welcome advances have been made in finally proving the truth of what happened at Hillsborough.

 

Even though they were not in power at the time, our current government has picked up the baton and handled the issue superbly.

 

What I want to know now is when is the FA going to face up to its responsibilities, too?

 

I’m not talking about the apology it made last month - an apology that was a long time coming and which took them two attempts to produce properly.

 

I’m talking about issues like why we have never had a full explanation of why the FA insisted the game should be played at Hillsborough.

 

They knew there had been problems there in the past, but still they insisted on their semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest being staged there that year.

 

They knew that Old Trafford was available, but they would not consent to the game being played there instead.

 

And they knew that Hillsborough did not have a safety certificate and yet they were still adamant the game had to be played at the stadium.

 

If they had not insisted that the game was played there, who knows what would have happened?

 

Well, the fans that died would still be alive for one thing.

 

That’s why I find it strange that there has not been any talk of the FA being liable to pay some form of financial penalty to the families of the dead.

 

And that’s why I find it strange that there has been no talk of the FA being punished for its actions.

 

I am not talking about punishing the people in power at the moment.

 

But surely, as the game’s governing body, they have to take responsibility for the way their organisation acted in the past.

 

It has taken a long, long time for a lot of organisations to face up to what they did in 1989 and now it’s the FA’s turn as well.

 

What has happened to Graham Kelly, for instance? Is there no one who can go and talk to him about why the FA acted as they did?

 

Kelly had become chief *executive of the FA in 1989. It would be helpful to hear his *explanations for the organisation’s actions.

 

There has, quite rightly, been a lot of talk about the accountability of the police over the tragedy. Why has nobody really mentioned the FA?

 

It would be very interesting for someone to sit down with Mr Kelly and make sure the FA are not involved in a big cover-up here as well. Once again, they have to face up to their responsibilities for taking the decision they took.

 

An apology is a beginning but the way they have behaved, they appear to think that is enough.

 

It isn’t.

 

Maybe a proper inquiry into the actions of the FA would exonerate them from blame.

 

Maybe it wouldn’t.

 

But it’s important for people to know why the FA insisted on playing an FA Cup semi-final at a stadium that did not have a safety certificate.

 

I believe that there will be a House of Commons debate about Hillsborough on Monday.

 

I am told that the role of the FA will be under scrutiny.

 

It is only right that it should be.

Kenny Dalglish column on Hillsborough and why the FA must be punished - Kenny Dalglish - Mirror Online

 

 

Who then went on to finacially gain from Hillsborough. Bent cunt.

[boots123]

Dalglish says that the fa need to be investigated over h/boro, now highlighted more than ever, the fa and ref's have a definate on pitch agenda against lpool and Suarez, in particular, who was given an 8 match suspension without proof only hearsay, j/t only 4 games with proof, could this on pitch agenda be a smokescreen in the hope to keep liverpools interests otherwise occupied, as in possible relegation fears, might seem far fetched, but so were their responses to hillsborough.

[lifetime fan]

Miners strike: MP calls for Orgreave police inquiry

 

 

A Nottinghamshire MP is to call for an inquiry into alleged manipulation of evidence by South Yorkshire Police during the miners' strike.

 

John Mann, Labour MP for Bassetlaw, said claims made in a BBC Inside Out programme relating to the so-called Battle of Orgreave must be examined.

 

The claims, that junior officers were told what to write in their statements, were "very convincing", said Mr Mann.

 

South Yorkshire Police said it would consider whether a review was needed.

 

Mr Mann is due to make the call later during a Commons debate into the Hillsborough disaster.

 

In September, the Hillsborough Independent Panel revealed that 164 South Yorkshire Police statements had been altered after the disaster in April 1989 in which 96 Liverpool fans died.

 

Mr Mann said this seemed "similar in process" to allegations that police statements were manipulated after clashes between police and pickets at British Steel's Orgreave coking plant in June 1984.

 

"We need to ensure that no wrongdoing has taken place and, if there has been wrongdoing, those responsible need to be brought to account," he said.

 

In the Inside Out programme, to be broadcast at 19:30 BST on BBC One, Vera Baird, Solicitor General during the last Labour government, said police officers at Orgreave were asked by South Yorkshire Police detectives to describe in their statements "scenes they'd simply never seen".

 

A barrister at the time, Ms Baird first heard the claims while defending a number of the 93 Orgreave pickets during their trial in Sheffield in 1985.

 

The trial collapsed after 16 weeks when it became clear police evidence was unreliable. One officer admitted that much of his statement had been narrated to him.

 

"You can see in a way that they were merely trying to set the scenario, but actually what they were doing was 'teeing up', perverting the course of justice," said Ms Baird.

 

A South Yorkshire Police spokesman has told the BBC that the force was "not aware of any adverse comments about statements made during the trial".

 

"If concerns existed then normal practice would have been for the judge to raise them at the time," he said.

 

About 100 statements by police officers who were at Orgreave, which have been obtained by the BBC, have been examined by Sheffield barrister Mark George QC.

 

The documents revealed "several dozen" examples of officers using exactly the same phrases, signifying "widespread collusion", said Mr George.

 

"You can't get statements in the way they have been done here - by police officers from different forces involved in different arrests - and find such a degree of similarity between those statements without there being some degree of collusion."

 

The "clear plan" by senior officers was to make the charges faced by pickets as serious as possible, said Ms Baird.

 

While pickets found guilty of a public order offence would most likely have to pay a fine, those who faced the more serious charge of riot could be jailed for life.

 

Norman Taylor, a detective with the Northumbria force who was on duty at Orgreave, said he was told by a plain clothes policeman what to write as part of his witness statement.

 

"He was reading from some paper, a paragraph or so, and he asked people to use that as their starting paragraph," said Mr Taylor.

 

However, Bob Bird, a former officer from the West Midlands force who was also on duty at Orgreave that day, told the BBC he was "not dictated to".

 

Mr Mann said all these claims should be properly examined as "the reputation of police in South Yorkshire needs to be protected".

[don]

Statement by the Home Secretary on BBC News 24 now.

[Coro]

Incredible speech from Andy Burnham.

[kalasoma]

Just catching up with the BBC Democracy Live debate and they said that an investigation into the FA is within the scope of the Crown Prosecution Service. Did anyone else hear that?

[kalasoma]

I misheard. The DPP will be able to review the FA and their role in Hillsborough.

[zigackly]

I misheard. The DPP will be able to review the FA and their role in Hillsborough.

 

Let's hope he goes after them; there's blood on their hands.