Duckinfield not guilty
Duckinfield not guilty
Verdict just in
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Last edited by Bosscat on Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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
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.
-
- Posts: 3553
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
- Been Liked: 656 times
- Has Liked: 2899 times
-
- Posts: 17277
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:57 pm
- Been Liked: 6492 times
- Has Liked: 2919 times
- Location: Fife
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
They will get him eventually.Burnley Ace wrote:Best of 3?
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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
-
- Posts: 3553
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
- Been Liked: 656 times
- Has Liked: 2899 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
There may be a civil case (suing him) but it’s not a private prosecution. autrefois acquitmdd2 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?
This user liked this post: Marty Dobson
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
How does that work Burnley ace ie getting compensation when no crime was committed given this result?
-
- Posts: 3962
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1240 times
- Has Liked: 491 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
There is only one guaranteed winner in this sorry mess....
I give you....
Lawyers
I give you....
Lawyers
This user liked this post: boatshed bill
-
- Posts: 6141
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:53 am
- Been Liked: 2635 times
- Has Liked: 6464 times
- Location: -90.000000, 0.000000
Hillsborough police chief David Duckenfield cleared of manslaughter
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;
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;
-
- Posts: 2713
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
- Been Liked: 482 times
- Has Liked: 2292 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
And also those who went without tickets to a venue already sold out to it's safe capacity? What were they thinking?Steve1956 wrote:They will get him eventually.
-
- Posts: 2758
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 711 times
- Has Liked: 667 times
- Location: Château d'If
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
it's sickening that folk still hold this view after all this time.basil6345789 wrote:And also those who went without tickets to a venue already sold out to it's safe capacity? What were they thinking?
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?
-
- Posts: 7219
- Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:11 pm
- Been Liked: 2379 times
- Has Liked: 3807 times
- Location: Padiham
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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
-
- Posts: 2713
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
- Been Liked: 482 times
- Has Liked: 2292 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Don't understand the point you're trying to make.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?
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Says more about you tbh.basil6345789 wrote:Don't understand the point you're trying to make.
-
- Posts: 2758
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 711 times
- Has Liked: 667 times
- Location: Château d'If
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
that is because you are stupid.basil6345789 wrote:Don't understand the point you're trying to make.
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.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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?basil6345789 wrote:Don't understand the point you're trying to make.
This user liked this post: JohnDearyMe
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.
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
-
- Posts: 15265
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3164 times
- Has Liked: 6762 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
But he's apologised, which makes everything allright.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?
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
The courts determined those who died were killed unlawfully. That is not an accident.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.
These 4 users liked this post: boatshed bill Hibsclaret JohnDearyMe paulatky
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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!
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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.
-
- Posts: 3962
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1240 times
- Has Liked: 491 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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
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
-
- Posts: 2713
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
- Been Liked: 482 times
- Has Liked: 2292 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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?
-
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
- Been Liked: 1029 times
- Has Liked: 1521 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Hmm, I wonder what you'll be voting in this election.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!
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Your ignorance is even worse.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.
These 2 users liked this post: ClaretTony Greenmile
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
I disagree with that decision and IMO was a tragic accident.ClaretTony wrote:The courts determined those who died were killed unlawfully. That is not an accident.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.Firthy wrote:I disagree with that decision and IMO was a tragic accident.
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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
-
- Posts: 2758
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 711 times
- Has Liked: 667 times
- Location: Château d'If
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
yeah i'm not sure you'd be so magnanimous if it was your wife/son etc who died at a football match.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
especially after 30 years of lies and poison.
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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 ).
-
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
- Been Liked: 1029 times
- Has Liked: 1521 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Probably your immediate descent into class warfare. Honestly, I couldn't have thought something more pathetic than you put if I'd tried.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 ).
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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
-
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
- Been Liked: 1029 times
- Has Liked: 1521 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Infact, why ARE you using the lives of 96 "working folk" to push your agenda here?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 ).
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.ClaretTony wrote:No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.
It has to be a shock result and our judiciary doing their job, knowing the backlash that would result.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
It’s not an interesting point, it is fact.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.
-
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 3:44 pm
- Been Liked: 156 times
- Has Liked: 107 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.
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.
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Is that the coroners Court verdict you are quoting?ClaretTony wrote:No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.
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.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Duckenfield told downright lies and it took him 27 years to admit they were lies.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.
-
- Posts: 2758
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 711 times
- Has Liked: 667 times
- Location: Château d'If
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
nobody will ever fully be held responsible for the consequences of hillsborough and you're right about the miners as well.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.
i suspect that by the time the full truths come out all the parties involved will be long dead.
a national disgrace.
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.ClaretTony wrote:No it wasn’t, it was unlawful killing.
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Pretty much my point.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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 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.
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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.
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
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
He messed up, he had a very bad day at work that led to an horrific situation but his actions were not criminal.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.
-
- Posts: 67896
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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....
My thoughts are with the families of those who lost their lives that day.
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
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.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.
-
- Posts: 10328
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3342 times
- Has Liked: 1964 times
Re: Duckinfield not guilty
Has Duckinfield received any sort of punishment at all for lying for all those years and finally admitting it?