Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10840
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5518 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by TheFamilyCat » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:21 pm

South West Claret. wrote:Time for your bedtime you two as your getting a bit tired judging by your posts...good night sleep tight :D
Odd reply (presume it was aimed at me).

You’re clearly angry about this and usually I have a bit of fun when posters get angry (like some of the more mental Brexiteers for example).

But this clearly isn’t a subject for wind ups. Whatever you may feel about it, he has not been found guilty and our judicial system has to be respected.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by dsr » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:22 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Not surprising really.

There should be some punishment somewhere for the lies he told and subsequently admitted to.
There certainly should. The cover-up was an outrage, and if they can do him for that, good. But virtually none of that is relevant to this specific case, because what he is charged with here is relating to what happened on the day and prior.

tim_noone
Posts: 17108
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 4384 times
Has Liked: 15117 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by tim_noone » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:25 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:That's absolutely fine, but tell the families the same....
I was quoting the posters earlier post

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1939 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:53 pm

dsr wrote:There certainly should. The cover-up was an outrage, and if they can do him for that, good. But virtually none of that is relevant to this specific case, because what he is charged with here is relating to what happened on the day and prior.
I know...

PaintYorkClaretnBlue
Posts: 1796
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:42 pm
Been Liked: 660 times
Has Liked: 1219 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by PaintYorkClaretnBlue » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:53 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:or innocent
You were implying that he was guilty because he didn’t give evidence in his defence, no inferences can be made on that fact, it is for the crown to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

Just because the families want “justice” doesn’t mean that somebody HAS to be found guilty. That would appear like they want a scapegoat. If he is found guilty he will be found guilty in a court.
This user liked this post: Middle-agedClaret

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Wokingclaret » Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:09 pm

Was not implying anything except he had a good defence lawyer. He has not been found anything either way. Innocent or Gulity

tim_noone
Posts: 17108
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 4384 times
Has Liked: 15117 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by tim_noone » Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:13 pm

Lynching solves nothing.....

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 9585
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 3146 times
Has Liked: 10202 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by evensteadiereddie » Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:27 pm

Ted Hastings and his team would nail whoever deserved it and make no mistake.
This user liked this post: Wokingclaret

thatdberight
Posts: 3748
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 927 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by thatdberight » Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:28 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:Was not implying anything except he had a good defence lawyer. He has not been found anything either way. Innocent or Gulity
No-one is ever found "innocent" in a UK criminal case. Or "gulity" (sic) either as it happens.

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Wokingclaret » Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:31 pm

Thanks

arise_sir_charge
Posts: 3233
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:36 am
Been Liked: 1768 times
Has Liked: 41 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by arise_sir_charge » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:21 am

Perhaps South West Claret should write to the Justice Secretary and offer to be on the Jury for the retrial. I’m sure they will oblige him to ensure ‘Justice’ is served.

Failing that perhaps he could lend his experience and superior knowledge to the Crown Prosecution Legal team as they were clearly ill prepared.

Or perhaps, all things considered we could just accept that after 30 years in which every single detail has been poured over and a subsequent 3 month trial, there is insufficient evidence to find him guilty of what he is charged with?
This user liked this post: Middle-agedClaret

WestMidsClaret
Posts: 1468
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:55 pm
Been Liked: 534 times
Has Liked: 506 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by WestMidsClaret » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:35 am

I can't remember.l but has there been any legal action brought against the SYP (ie suing them, damages paid out by SYP) ?

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by South West Claret. » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:07 pm

arise_sir_charge wrote:Perhaps South West Claret should write to the Justice Secretary and offer to be on the Jury for the retrial. I’m sure they will oblige him to ensure ‘Justice’ is served.

Failing that perhaps he could lend his experience and superior knowledge to the Crown Prosecution Legal team as they were clearly ill prepared.

Or perhaps, all things considered we could just accept that after 30 years in which every single detail has been poured over and a subsequent 3 month trial, there is insufficient evidence to find him guilty of what he is charged with?
Sarcastic post from ASC alert!

arise_sir_charge
Posts: 3233
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:36 am
Been Liked: 1768 times
Has Liked: 41 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by arise_sir_charge » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:26 pm

South West Claret. wrote:Sarcastic post from ASC alert!
When I read your postings I assumed we were all being sarcastic.
This user liked this post: thatdberight

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by South West Claret. » Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:36 pm

arise_sir_charge wrote:When I read your postings I assumed we were all being sarcastic.
Well all that goes to prove to you is that "never assume anything" isn't a bad saying after all.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Grumps » Thu Apr 04, 2019 6:40 pm

arise_sir_charge wrote:Perhaps South West Claret should write to the Justice Secretary and offer to be on the Jury for the retrial. I’m sure they will oblige him to ensure ‘Justice’ is served.

Failing that perhaps he could lend his experience and superior knowledge to the Crown Prosecution Legal team as they were clearly ill prepared.

Or perhaps, all things considered we could just accept that after 30 years in which every single detail has been poured over and a subsequent 3 month trial, there is insufficient evidence to find him guilty of what he is charged with?
Exactly.
Most people commenting on this thread probably weren't born at the time, and base their views on bias documentries and similar newspaper reports. When people hear the actual evidence they cannot pin blame on any individual, be it supporter or police officer. As I've said previously I know Liverpool fans who were at the game and would point the blame fairly and squarely at fellow fans and drunken late arrivals. Some on this board, who weren't there disagree
This user liked this post: Foreverly Claret

mdd2
Posts: 6012
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 8:47 pm
Been Liked: 1665 times
Has Liked: 700 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by mdd2 » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:24 pm

Like it or lump it the real reason for the crushing of those fans was the fencing that was brought in to try and control the unruly behaviour of fans as season after season once the maximum wage was lifted, there was more dissent from players and that spilled over on to the terraces where violence big time started to develop. That was followed by segregation of fans and as that had little effect with fans spilling on to the pitch-and at a match in Newcastle Rangers fans hurling bricks and God knows what into N/C fans with whom I was standing-we were given the large wire fencing to keep the fans off the pitch. Additionally clubs were given drinking licences that fuelled the idiotic behaviour of fans.
Had fans continued to behave as they did after the war until the mid 60's Hillsborough would not have happened.
For the 97 who perished their families and friends it was a life changing event that few of us can imagine made worse by the apparent lies and cover ups by the authorities and some aspects of the Press.
These 2 users liked this post: Wile E Coyote Quicknick

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Wokingclaret » Mon May 13, 2019 10:38 pm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-48253507" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A joke, what's the point

Quicknick
Posts: 5580
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:25 pm
Been Liked: 1208 times
Has Liked: 7098 times
Location: Chiang Rai, Thailand.

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Quicknick » Tue May 14, 2019 2:37 am

mdd2 wrote:Like it or lump it the real reason for the crushing of those fans was the fencing that was brought in to try and control the unruly behaviour of fans as season after season once the maximum wage was lifted, there was more dissent from players and that spilled over on to the terraces where violence big time started to develop. That was followed by segregation of fans and as that had little effect with fans spilling on to the pitch-and at a match in Newcastle Rangers fans hurling bricks and God knows what into N/C fans with whom I was standing-we were given the large wire fencing to keep the fans off the pitch. Additionally clubs were given drinking licences that fuelled the idiotic behaviour of fans.
Had fans continued to behave as they did after the war until the mid 60's Hillsborough would not have happened.
For the 97 who perished their families and friends it was a life changing event that few of us can imagine made worse by the apparent lies and cover ups by the authorities and some aspects of the Press.
What has the abolition of the maximum wage got to do with hooliganism?

Hipper
Posts: 5681
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:33 pm
Been Liked: 1175 times
Has Liked: 918 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Hipper » Tue May 14, 2019 8:57 am

What mdd2 says seems self explanatory to me, whether you agree with the theory or not.

Foreverly Claret
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 137 times
Has Liked: 160 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Foreverly Claret » Tue May 14, 2019 9:13 am

Clearly we are not privy to the evidence produced at this blokes trial but what I can't understand is that the tragedy was caused by an influx of fans to a terrace that was ALREADY full of ticket-holding fans who presumably had no problem in negotiating their way through the turnstiles...even if there were only 7 open . Why only 7...who knows BUT many fans were late into our game against Arsenal in the Jimmy Mac end because not all the turnstiles were open.

ElectroClaret
Posts: 17773
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:07 pm
Been Liked: 4044 times
Has Liked: 1846 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ElectroClaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:37 am

David Duckenfield to face retrial. (BBC)

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1939 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:57 am

Difficult decision now, I can’t see any realistic chance of securing a conviction so is it worth putting the families through it all again.

I can understand they want justice but what is going to have changed since last time?

fanzone
Posts: 801
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:00 pm
Been Liked: 226 times
Has Liked: 65 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by fanzone » Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:09 am

Absolutely ridiculous, there were more than one man to blame that day, how guilty are the thousands upon thousands that turned up with no tickets.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by martin_p » Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:12 am

fanzone wrote:Absolutely ridiculous, there were more than one man to blame that day, how guilty are the thousands upon thousands that turned up with no tickets.
Not at all. And yes there was more than one person to blame, the ground safety officer has already been convicted.

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:46 am

fanzone wrote:Absolutely ridiculous, there were more than one man to blame that day, how guilty are the thousands upon thousands that turned up with no tickets.
Absolutely ridiculous that someone can still come out with that sort of comment given all the information and evidence of recent years.

ElectroClaret
Posts: 17773
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:07 pm
Been Liked: 4044 times
Has Liked: 1846 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ElectroClaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:52 am

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Difficult decision now, I can’t see any realistic chance of securing a conviction so is it worth putting the families through it all again.
Think I would tend to agree with your view of the chances of a successful conviction, which I also think is unlikely, but I reckon all the families are very keen for this retrial to go ahead, whatever memories it may evoke.

fanzone
Posts: 801
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:00 pm
Been Liked: 226 times
Has Liked: 65 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by fanzone » Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:05 pm

ClaretTony wrote:Absolutely ridiculous that someone can still come out with that sort of comment given all the information and evidence of recent years.
Were there thousands of fans there without tickets that shouldn't have been?

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:28 pm

fanzone wrote:Were there thousands of fans there without tickets that shouldn't have been?
Where were you when the evidence was produced?

fanzone
Posts: 801
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:00 pm
Been Liked: 226 times
Has Liked: 65 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by fanzone » Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:30 pm

Deary me.

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:30 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Difficult decision now, I can’t see any realistic chance of securing a conviction so is it worth putting the families through it all again.

I can understand they want justice but what is going to have changed since last time?
It’s going to be difficult but the retrial has to be the correct decision

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1939 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:36 pm

ClaretTony wrote:It’s going to be difficult but the retrial has to be the correct decision
I’d really like to see the families get justice.

I’m just struggling to see what has changed since the last one to justify this.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by martin_p » Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:01 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:I’d really like to see the families get justice.

I’m just struggling to see what has changed since the last one to justify this.
Likely to be a different jury for a start. I’m not sure how close the last jury came to the 10-2 majority required to give a verdict but if it was close a different jury may get to a decision.

2 Bee Holed
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:37 am
Been Liked: 548 times
Has Liked: 31 times
Location: South Manchester

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by 2 Bee Holed » Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:03 pm

fanzone wrote:Absolutely ridiculous, there were more than one man to blame that day, how guilty are the thousands upon thousands that turned up with no tickets.
You should have gone to Warrington when this inquiry was ongoing.
You could have presented your evidence that there were "thousands upon thousands that turned up without tickets".

What's that you say?...….you haven't got any evidence? :x :x :x
These 2 users liked this post: ClaretTony Sausage

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by dsr » Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:13 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:I’d really like to see the families get justice.

I’m just struggling to see what has changed since the last one to justify this.
But justice would involve everyone who was at fault, getting prosecuted. They can't just point at Duckenfield and say "it was all his fault", because it clearly wasn't.

- Anyone who was involved in the design of the Leppings Lane End, with that tunnel heading straight into a fenced off pen with a tiny capacity.

- Anyone who designed or sanctioned the separation of a large terrace with a large capacity into a set of smaller enclosures but didn't do anything to make sure the capacity was evenly allocated.

- Anyone who was involved in appointing Duckenfield to a job that he made a mess of.

- Anyone who had officiated at these matches in the past and didn't see that Leppings Lane was a death trap.

- Anyone who knew or should have known that Leppings Lane was a death trap but still sanctioned holding the match there.

There is loads of blame to share. Either there should be no prosecution; or else the manslaughter charged should be faced by dozens of people in the dock. Not just one.

2 Bee Holed
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:37 am
Been Liked: 548 times
Has Liked: 31 times
Location: South Manchester

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by 2 Bee Holed » Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:24 pm

dsr wrote:

- Anyone who designed or sanctioned the separation of a large terrace with a large capacity into a set of smaller enclosures but didn't do anything to make sure the capacity was evenly allocated.
I agree with your entire post dsr. I will also add 'Anyone who sanctioned an exit gate being opened and then unforgivably did not shut the tunnel gate first'.

However, regarding your quote above. Isn't this exactly what we are currently doing in the CFS?

4500 into 3 staircase exits is 1500 per staircase exit and 1500 per toilet for the original design.

Are we now to accept that this is 1800/1900 for the Burnley exit?

Can you see why I am alarmed?

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by martin_p » Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:39 pm

dsr wrote:But justice would involve everyone who was at fault, getting prosecuted. They can't just point at Duckenfield and say "it was all his fault", because it clearly wasn't.

- Anyone who was involved in the design of the Leppings Lane End, with that tunnel heading straight into a fenced off pen with a tiny capacity.

- Anyone who designed or sanctioned the separation of a large terrace with a large capacity into a set of smaller enclosures but didn't do anything to make sure the capacity was evenly allocated.

- Anyone who was involved in appointing Duckenfield to a job that he made a mess of.

- Anyone who had officiated at these matches in the past and didn't see that Leppings Lane was a death trap.

- Anyone who knew or should have known that Leppings Lane was a death trap but still sanctioned holding the match there.

There is loads of blame to share. Either there should be no prosecution; or else the manslaughter charged should be faced by dozens of people in the dock. Not just one.
As I’ve posted earlier the ground safety officer has already been found guilty of not carrying out his responsibility to keep people safe, that will cover the majority of your points above.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by dsr » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:10 pm

martin_p wrote:As I’ve posted earlier the ground safety officer has already been found guilty of not carrying out his responsibility to keep people safe, that will cover the majority of your points above.
It won't cover any of my points. I said that there should be many manslaughter charges or none at all; one charge of not carrying out his responsibility isn't the equivalent of loads of manslaughter charges.

Lots of people made wrong decisions that lead to the deaths. It's wrong that only one should be charged with manslaughter.
This user liked this post: fanzone

2 Bee Holed
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:37 am
Been Liked: 548 times
Has Liked: 31 times
Location: South Manchester

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by 2 Bee Holed » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:35 pm

dsr wrote:It won't cover any of my points. I said that there should be many manslaughter charges or none at all; one charge of not carrying out his responsibility isn't the equivalent of loads of manslaughter charges.

Lots of people made wrong decisions that lead to the deaths. It's wrong that only one should be charged with manslaughter.
Charges were brought against 6 people.
Correctly , in my opinion, the person who made the decision to open the exit gate, without first closing the tunnel gate, thereby allowing access to the pens behind the goals, which he could see were already packed to capacity, is facing manslaughter charges.

Can you name or at least tell me the position of the other person(s) you also want charged with manslaughter and why?
Operation Resolve and the IPCC looked at this for 5 years.

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:38 pm

2 Bee Holed wrote:Charges were brought against 6 people.
Correctly , in my opinion, the person who made the decision to open the exit gate, without first closing the tunnel gate, thereby allowing access to the pens behind the goals, which he could see were already packed to capacity, is facing manslaughter charges.

Can you name or at least tell me the position of the other person(s) you also want charged with manslaughter and why?
Operation Resolve and the IPCC looked at this for 5 years.
Spot on 2 Bee Holed

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by dsr » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:49 pm

2 Bee Holed wrote:Can you name or at least tell me the position of the other person(s) you also want charged with manslaughter and why?
Whover appointed Duckenfield would be first on the list. If the man in charge isn't competent to do his job, then the man who appointed him or didn't train him properly is also guilty of not doing his job.

All the stadium designers, and the stadium safety officers. It has been relatively common practice for gates to be opened to let people in in a hurry when there is a crush outside. It happened to Burnley at least once at Halifax. Duckenfield followed common practice and he shouldn't have. The people who didn't tell him not to are at fault. It should have been made clear to him before he took the job that opening the doors was not an option.

And incidentally, I wasn't saying that I wanted people charging with manslaughter. Just that if people are being charged, it shouldn't be just one scapegoat. All the guilty should be there.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 3525
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 651 times
Has Liked: 2879 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Burnley Ace » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:50 pm

2 Bee Holed wrote:You should have gone to Warrington when this inquiry was ongoing.
You could have presented your evidence that there were "thousands upon thousands that turned up without tickets".

What's that you say?...….you haven't got any evidence? :x :x :x
Whilst thousands upon thousands is obvious hyperbole is all the evidence heard at the Taylor inquiry considered null and void?

ClaretTony
Posts: 67422
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32237 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:52 pm

dsr wrote:Whover appointed Duckenfield would be first on the list. If the man in charge isn't competent to do his job, then the man who appointed him or didn't train him properly is also guilty of not doing his job.
Guilty of not doing his job is not manslaughter

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by South West Claret. » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:55 pm

Another dollar another delay, no surprise there then.

arise_sir_charge
Posts: 3233
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:36 am
Been Liked: 1768 times
Has Liked: 41 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by arise_sir_charge » Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:13 pm

The biggest issue with all of this is what is justice in this instance?

If there isn't enough evidence to convict, then what do they do?

It's not justice to convict someone without suitable evidence but I just get a feeling that the families won't rest until Duckenfield's head is on a stick whether that is in fact the right or wrong thing to happen.

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1939 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:25 pm

Still irks me that you can admit lying about something so serious and get away with it without any real sort of punishment.

Ashingtonclaret46
Posts: 3771
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 1828 times
Has Liked: 2613 times
Location: Ashington, Northumberland

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Ashingtonclaret46 » Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:49 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Still irks me that you can admit lying about something so serious and get away with it without any real sort of punishment.
A bit like weapons of mass destruction ----and how many lives did that one cost?

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by dsr » Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:53 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Still irks me that you can admit lying about something so serious and get away with it without any real sort of punishment.
That's a different issue. He should have had every kind of book thrown at him for the later lies. But none of those lies made any difference to the deaths of the victims, which is what this case is about.

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1939 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:46 pm

dsr wrote:That's a different issue. He should have had every kind of book thrown at him for the later lies. But none of those lies made any difference to the deaths of the victims, which is what this case is about.
Very different.

Like I said, still irks me. I’d like to see his police pension withdrawn as a minimum.

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1939 times

Re: Hillsborough 1989 - today's court news

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:49 pm

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:A bit like weapons of mass destruction ----and how many lives did that one cost?
I’ve no doubt they lied about that.

However it would need proving. They’ve not admitted lying like this bloke has.

Post Reply