Duckinfield not guilty

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Chobulous
Posts: 1454
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:27 am
Been Liked: 608 times
Has Liked: 4 times

Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Chobulous » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:45 pm

Verdict just in

Bosscat
Posts: 7613
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:51 am
Been Liked: 2278 times
Has Liked: 6093 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Bosscat » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:47 pm

:oops:
Last edited by Bosscat on Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mdd2
Posts: 3860
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 8:47 pm
Been Liked: 1140 times
Has Liked: 510 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by mdd2 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:50 pm

What an ordeal for all concerned. Not surprised at that given the previous verdict.
I suppose now we may have private prosecutions. Isn't that where presumed guilt is on the balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable
doubt?
Apparently this was a private prosecution so it should now finally be put to bed officially but not for the bereaved
Last edited by mdd2 on Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1353
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 271 times
Has Liked: 1285 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Burnley Ace » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:54 pm

Best of 3?
These 2 users liked this post: Sausage Funkydrummer

Steve1956
Posts: 8367
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:57 pm
Been Liked: 2690 times
Has Liked: 1339 times
Location: Fife

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Steve1956 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:55 pm

Burnley Ace wrote:Best of 3?
They will get him eventually. ;)

Grumps
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 230 times
Has Liked: 111 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Grumps » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:56 pm

Only real verdict there could be, it might have been a bad decision to open the gates, but it might have been the only one avaible, it wasn't done in bad faith. Any cover ups after the events were disgraceful, but that wasn't what was on trial here.
These 8 users liked this post: mdd2 JohnMac elwaclaret MRG Heathclaret Colburn_Claret bobinho COBBLE

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1353
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 271 times
Has Liked: 1285 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Burnley Ace » Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:57 pm

mdd2 wrote:What an ordeal for all concerned. Not surprised at that given the previous verdict.
I suppose now we may have private prosecutions. Isn't that where presumed guilt is on the balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable
doubt?
There may be a civil case (suing him) but it’s not a private prosecution. autrefois acquit
This user liked this post: Marty Dobson

mdd2
Posts: 3860
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 8:47 pm
Been Liked: 1140 times
Has Liked: 510 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by mdd2 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:02 pm

How does that work Burnley ace ie getting compensation when no crime was committed given this result?

Hibsclaret
Posts: 2141
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:00 pm
Been Liked: 623 times
Has Liked: 372 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Hibsclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:13 pm

There is only one guaranteed winner in this sorry mess....

I give you....

Lawyers
This user liked this post: boatshed bill

Rick_Muller
Posts: 4786
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:53 am
Been Liked: 2123 times
Has Liked: 5185 times
Location: -90.000000, 0.000000

Hillsborough police chief David Duckenfield cleared of manslaughter

Post by Rick_Muller » Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:52 pm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50592077" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

as per title

apologies, I didn't see the previous post. http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... =2&t=43443" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

basil6345789
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
Been Liked: 274 times
Has Liked: 1119 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by basil6345789 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:10 pm

Steve1956 wrote:They will get him eventually. ;)
And also those who went without tickets to a venue already sold out to it's safe capacity? What were they thinking?

yTib
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
Been Liked: 319 times
Has Liked: 242 times
Location: Château d'If

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by yTib » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:17 pm

basil6345789 wrote:And also those who went without tickets to a venue already sold out to it's safe capacity? What were they thinking?
it's sickening that folk still hold this view after all this time.

a crowd doesn't think with a single mind; it is dynamic and unpredictable.

it needs somebody competent to direct and manage such an entity.

this man failed and people died. how many decades should it take to find out why your family died at a football match?

JohnMac
Posts: 4690
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:11 pm
Been Liked: 1568 times
Has Liked: 2439 times
Location: Padiham

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by JohnMac » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:18 pm

Hillsborough was a horrible disaster, one that could have happened at any semi final there over previous years. I really do feel sorry for the victims and their families but Duckinfield would be nothing more than a scapegoat if found guilty. In my honest opinion obviously.
These 8 users liked this post: basil6345789 Firthy tim_noone k90bfc Gerry Hattrick Heathclaret COBBLE Ashingtonclaret46

basil6345789
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
Been Liked: 274 times
Has Liked: 1119 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by basil6345789 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:22 pm

yTib wrote:it's sickening that folk still hold this view after all this time.

a crowd doesn't think with a single mind; it is dynamic and unpredictable.

it needs somebody competent to direct and manage such an entity.

this man failed and people died. how many decades should it take to find out why your family died at a football match?
Don't understand the point you're trying to make.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 3539
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 1502 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:27 pm

basil6345789 wrote:Don't understand the point you're trying to make.
Says more about you tbh.

yTib
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
Been Liked: 319 times
Has Liked: 242 times
Location: Château d'If

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by yTib » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:30 pm

basil6345789 wrote:Don't understand the point you're trying to make.
that is because you are stupid.

you are attempting to conflate collective blame with individual actions.

you are essentially saying that anyone showing up to a large gathering of people should a) have some sort of prescience of others doing so and b) read the minds of others to organise collectively.

that is not how crowds work. your viewpoint is naive in the extreme.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:44 pm

basil6345789 wrote:Don't understand the point you're trying to make.
The point he’s making is in regard to your idiotic, shameful, libellous and appalling suggestion of people turning up without tickets. Did you not take any note of the enquiry or inquests?
This user liked this post: JohnDearyMe

elwaclaret
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 608 times
Has Liked: 1195 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by elwaclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:45 pm

Sometimes people do all the right things for the right reasons, but at the wrong time.

I think this verdict is a victory for rationalism over emotion. Hopefully it shows that society is finally moving away from blame culture.... not before time.

It would be nice to have a discussion where argument and reason, not gut feeling and instinct returns to the limelight.
This user liked this post: Firthy

boatshed bill
Posts: 5276
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 1119 times
Has Liked: 2483 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by boatshed bill » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:49 pm

yTib wrote:it's sickening that folk still hold this view after all this time.

a crowd doesn't think with a single mind; it is dynamic and unpredictable.

it needs somebody competent to direct and manage such an entity.

this man failed and people died. how many decades should it take to find out why your family died at a football match?
But he's apologised, which makes everything allright. ;)

Firthy
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
Been Liked: 861 times
Has Liked: 162 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Firthy » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:54 pm

elwaclaret wrote:Sometimes people do all the right things for the right reasons, but at the wrong time.

I think this verdict is a victory for rationalism over emotion. Hopefully it shows that society is finally moving away from blame culture.... not before time.

It would be nice to have a discussion where argument and reason, not gut feeling and instinct returns to the limelight.
Spot on. Blame culture has gone too far. There is no longer such a thing as an accident these days. People always want someone to blame or financial compensation.

Let's hope it has finally put an end to it. Maybe the man did make errors of judgement but you can only imagine what pressure he was under at the time, trying to make him a scapegoat is scandalous IMO.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:57 pm

Firthy wrote:Spot on. Blame culture has gone too far. There is no longer such a thing as an accident these days. People always want someone to blame or financial compensation.

Let's hope it has finally put an end to it. Maybe the man did make errors of judgement but you can only imagine what pressure he was under at the time, trying to make him a scapegoat is scandalous IMO.
The courts determined those who died were killed unlawfully. That is not an accident.
These 4 users liked this post: boatshed bill Hibsclaret JohnDearyMe paulatky

Terrier
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:50 pm
Been Liked: 71 times
Has Liked: 62 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Terrier » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:01 pm

Can not help but think that if this had happened at ascot with the top hat brigade things would have been sorted many years ago!

Grumps
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 230 times
Has Liked: 111 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Grumps » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:01 pm

Firthy wrote:Spot on. Blame culture has gone too far. There is no longer such a thing as an accident these days. People always want someone to blame or financial compensation.

Let's hope it has finally put an end to it. Maybe the man did make errors of judgement but you can only imagine what pressure he was under at the time, trying to make him a scapegoat is scandalous IMO.
Exactly, I wonder what other decision he could have made, other than to open the gates, imagine the outcry if fans had died outside because he refused to open the gates, he was in an difficult position, and it could have been that people died whichever decision he made.

Hibsclaret
Posts: 2141
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:00 pm
Been Liked: 623 times
Has Liked: 372 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Hibsclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:02 pm

Make no mistake this will not put an end to blame culture...

As for South Yorkshire police there are any number of people that could be put away for perverting the course of justice given what happened with them covering their backsides.

The whole sorry episode is beyond shameful

basil6345789
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
Been Liked: 274 times
Has Liked: 1119 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by basil6345789 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:04 pm

ClaretTony wrote:The point he’s making is in regard to your idiotic, shameful, libellous and appalling suggestion of people turning up without tickets. Did you not take any note of the enquiry or inquests?
The enquiry determined that the fans outside were neither drunk nor hooliganous, quite right. However, a pint does not fit into a quart pot. Your choice of adjectives is astonishing and out of order.

tarkys_ears
Posts: 937
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
Been Liked: 220 times
Has Liked: 213 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by tarkys_ears » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:06 pm

Terrier wrote:Can not help but think that if this had happened at ascot with the top hat brigade things would have been sorted many years ago!
Hmm, I wonder what you'll be voting in this election.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 3539
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 1502 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:07 pm

Grumps wrote:Exactly, I wonder what other decision he could have made, other than to open the gates, imagine the outcry if fans had died outside because he refused to open the gates, he was in an difficult position, and it could have been that people died whichever decision he made.
It's been proven people died because they were continuously funnelled into the one pen, instead of them being redirected to the others which had plenty of room for fans.
If he'd done his job correctly then no one would've died.

He was not fit for the job in the first place, the ground wasn't fit for purpose re the safety certificate and the match should've been played elsewhere.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 3539
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 1502 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:08 pm

basil6345789 wrote:The enquiry determined that the fans outside were neither drunk nor hooliganous, quite right. However, a pint does not fit into a quart pot. Your choice of adjectives is astonishing and out of order.
Your ignorance is even worse.
These 2 users liked this post: ClaretTony Greenmile

Firthy
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
Been Liked: 861 times
Has Liked: 162 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Firthy » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:26 pm

ClaretTony wrote:The courts determined those who died were killed unlawfully. That is not an accident.
I disagree with that decision and IMO was a tragic accident.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:27 pm

Firthy wrote:I disagree with that decision and IMO was a tragic accident.
No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.

MRG
Posts: 975
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 am
Been Liked: 271 times
Has Liked: 127 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by MRG » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:29 pm

I am pretty sure that nothing was done that day maliciously however terribly the whole thing was managed. Let their poor souls rest in peace

yTib
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
Been Liked: 319 times
Has Liked: 242 times
Location: Château d'If

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by yTib » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:31 pm

MRG wrote:I am pretty sure that nothing was done that day maliciously however terribly the whole thing was managed. Let their poor souls rest in peace
yeah i'm not sure you'd be so magnanimous if it was your wife/son etc who died at a football match.

especially after 30 years of lies and poison.

Terrier
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:50 pm
Been Liked: 71 times
Has Liked: 62 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Terrier » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:38 pm

Tarky's,....not sure what your question has to do with this subject but for your info i'm from a mining family brought up around stoops so it all points one way but for the first time ever I will vote tory ( my grandads will turn in their grave ).

tarkys_ears
Posts: 937
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
Been Liked: 220 times
Has Liked: 213 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by tarkys_ears » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:39 pm

Terrier wrote:Tarky's,....not sure what your question has to do with this subject but for your info i'm from a mining family brought up around stoops so it all points one way but for the first time ever I will vote tory ( my grandads will turn in their grave ).
Probably your immediate descent into class warfare. Honestly, I couldn't have thought something more pathetic than you put if I'd tried.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 3539
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 1502 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:40 pm

MRG wrote:I am pretty sure that nothing was done that day maliciously however terribly the whole thing was managed. Let their poor souls rest in peace
I'm not a believer in souls, but their families have every right to seek justice for the unlawful killings of their loved ones and as yet they haven't fully had it.

tarkys_ears
Posts: 937
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
Been Liked: 220 times
Has Liked: 213 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by tarkys_ears » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:41 pm

Terrier wrote:Tarky's,....not sure what your question has to do with this subject but for your info i'm from a mining family brought up around stoops so it all points one way but for the first time ever I will vote tory ( my grandads will turn in their grave ).
Infact, why ARE you using the lives of 96 "working folk" to push your agenda here?

elwaclaret
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 608 times
Has Liked: 1195 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by elwaclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:41 pm

ClaretTony wrote:No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.
Interesting point Tony. I agree with it in principle. However, I think our judicial system and the jury could have easily thrown him under a bus and know most people would be happy. They didn’t... which suggests the evidence was not in truth even close to conviction.

It has to be a shock result and our judiciary doing their job, knowing the backlash that would result.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:42 pm

elwaclaret wrote:Interesting point Tony. I agree with it in principle. However, I think our judicial system and the jury could have easily thrown him under a bus and know most people would be happy. They didn’t... which suggests the evidence was not in truth even close to conviction.

It has to be a shock result and our judiciary doing their job, knowing the backlash that would result.
It’s not an interesting point, it is fact.

Claret Toni
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 3:44 pm
Been Liked: 21 times
Has Liked: 7 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Claret Toni » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:43 pm

It has ben reported that 23 minutes after he gave the order to open the gates Duckinfield stated the gates had been forced.

To my mind, either he forgot what he said that short time previously, or he knew he'd erred and was trying to cover it up.

Of course that's not the only thing the South Yorkshire Police tried to cover up at Hillsborough.



….weren't they the force used to oppose the striking miners, a few years previously. Above the law; surely not.
Last edited by Claret Toni on Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Grumps
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 230 times
Has Liked: 111 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Grumps » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:44 pm

ClaretTony wrote:No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.
Is that the coroners Court verdict you are quoting?
Probably the only person who could have been convicted of unlawful killing has been found not guilty
So I guess it depends which court verdict we rely on to support the different views many have.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:45 pm

Claret Toni wrote:It has ben reported that 23 minutes after he gave the order to open the gates Duckinfield stated the gates had been forced.

To my mind, either he forgot what he said that short time previously, or he knew he'd erred and was trying to cover it up.

Of course that's not the only thing the South Yorkshire Police tried to cover up at Hillsborough, of course.



….weren't they the force used to oppose the striking miners, a few years previously. Above the law; surely not.
Duckenfield told downright lies and it took him 27 years to admit they were lies.

yTib
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
Been Liked: 319 times
Has Liked: 242 times
Location: Château d'If

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by yTib » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:49 pm

Claret Toni wrote:It has ben reported that 23 minutes after he gave the order to open the gates Duckinfield stated the gates had been forced.

To my mind, either he forgot what he said that short time previously, or he knew he'd erred and was trying to cover it up.

Of course that's not the only thing the South Yorkshire Police tried to cover up at Hillsborough, of course.



….weren't they the force used to oppose the striking miners, a few years previously. Above the law; surely not.
nobody will ever fully be held responsible for the consequences of hillsborough and you're right about the miners as well.

i suspect that by the time the full truths come out all the parties involved will be long dead.

a national disgrace.

tim_noone
Posts: 12542
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3219 times
Has Liked: 11372 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by tim_noone » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:50 pm

ClaretTony wrote:No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.
Grenfell Tower residents and relatives of the deceased would assume the same regards their own disaster But the wheels turn slowly on this one.suspects and evidence will dissipate over time I'm quite sure.

elwaclaret
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 608 times
Has Liked: 1195 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by elwaclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:52 pm

Grumps wrote:Is that the coroners Court verdict you are quoting?
Probably the only person who could have been convicted of unlawful killing has been found not guilty
So I guess it depends which court verdict we rely on to support the different views many have.
Pretty much my point.
It would have been very difficult for jury, and those running the show to find not guilty. They knew what most of us thought.... and the backlash that will now rumble on and on, they decided on the evidence as presented to them, Knowing they’d be vilified yet still having the backbone to do the right thing....

I think they deserve great credit.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:55 pm

elwaclaret wrote:Pretty much my point.
It would have been very difficult for jury, and those running the show to find not guilty. They knew what most of us thought.... and the backlash that will now rumble on and on, they decided on the evidence as presented to them, Knowing they’d be vilified yet still having the backbone to do the right thing....

I think they deserve great credit.
I’d have given them more credit if they’d found him guilty. He made the mistakes, he lied about it for 27 years. Unfortunately I think it has just proved impossible to have a fair trial.

elwaclaret
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 608 times
Has Liked: 1195 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by elwaclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:05 pm

ClaretTony wrote:I’d have given them more credit if they’d found him guilty. He made the mistakes, he lied about it for 27 years. Unfortunately I think it has just proved impossible to have a fair trial.
So you’d be happy to be hung out to dry on public opinion, and the known facts over a jury trial on given evidence.... fair enough. The law was applied. They cannot try him for being a liar.... an asshole... or worst man in the world.

I’m amazed but I’m very happy that despite EVERYTHING they could not just throw the **** to the dogs....
This user liked this post: Burnley Ace

MRG
Posts: 975
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 am
Been Liked: 271 times
Has Liked: 127 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by MRG » Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:06 pm

ClaretTony wrote:I’d have given them more credit if they’d found him guilty. He made the mistakes, he lied about it for 27 years. Unfortunately I think it has just proved impossible to have a fair trial.
He messed up, he had a very bad day at work that led to an horrific situation but his actions were not criminal.

ClaretTony
Posts: 33490
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 15061 times
Has Liked: 2911 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:09 pm

elwaclaret wrote:So you’d be happy to be hung out to dry on public opinion, and the known facts over a jury trial on given evidence.... fair enough. The law was applied. They cannot try him for being a liar.... an asshole... or worst man in the world.

I’m amazed but I’m very happy that despite EVERYTHING they could not just throw the **** to the dogs....
Sadly they can’t try him for being a liar but at the end of the day his decisions were responsible for those unlawful deaths. I accept he didn’t kill anyone intentionally but he made huge, significant errors and then lied about them.

My thoughts are with the families of those who lost their lives that day.

MRG
Posts: 975
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:13 am
Been Liked: 271 times
Has Liked: 127 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by MRG » Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:11 pm

ClaretTony wrote:Sadly they can’t try him for being a liar but at the end of the day his decisions were responsible for those unlawful deaths. I accept he didn’t kill anyone intentionally but he made huge, significant errors and then lied about them.

My thoughts are with the families of those who lost their lives that day.
It’s the lies that I find the most difficult to accept, totally unforgivable. An horrific cowardly man but he’s not intentionally killed anybody.

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 6054
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 1923 times
Has Liked: 1010 times

Re: Duckinfield not guilty

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:12 pm

Has Duckinfield received any sort of punishment at all for lying for all those years and finally admitting it?

Post Reply