Hillsborough Disaster

[kerry 6138]

yes I selected the most neutral video I could find time stamped,serial numbered clips from several sources presented has evidence at inquest, not Liverpool fans or 96 campaign videos, which in my opinion contradict the image presented at the time by the Police,Press Government and rehashed on this particular thread.
This doesnt mean you are wrong about Heysel youve had years to research talk to locals ect to build up your dislike of Liverpool fans so I wouldnt expect you to watch a few minutes of video that may contradict your long held view of what happened on that particular day, my issue is how peoples views were coloured by SYP dark arts dept has they became known locally and still persist today,

[EnjoyingTheSun]

This doesnt mean you are wrong about Heysel youve had years to research talk to locals ect to build up your dislike of Liverpool fans so I wouldnt expect you to watch a few minutes of video that may contradict your long held view of what happened on that particular day, my issue is how peoples views were coloured by SYP dark arts dept has they became known locally and still persist today,

It really doesn't take much research to find out that the most sporting fans in the country aren't.

You know the Merseyside police echoed a lot of what the SYP said don't you?
Could all be police together of course or maybe they knew their locals.

As for the SYP colouring peoples opinions of Liverpool supporters I think you'll find they reinforced the views of most who had interacted with them.

How many quotes do you want me to put up about them bunking games, stealing tickets etc?

Don't be shy it really won't take long.

[Art]

Ok....let’s park for a moment the debate about the Liverpool fans and their contribution to the disaster.

Take a look at these facts which are undisputed.


- 41 of the 96 victims had the potential to survive but didn’t....Emergency Services failed in their duty.

- 116 of 164 police statement were amended to remove or alter any detrimental comments relating to SYP

- SYP and the Emergency Services made “strenuous attempts” to deflect blame for the crush onto victims.

- Police carried out alcohol blood tests on the victims including children ,in order to impugn their reputation.

- PM David Cameron and Sun Editor Kelvin McKen offered profus apologies.


None of the above is speculative it’s all factual.based on legitimate evidence..

[EnjoyingTheSun]

- 41 of the 96 victims had the potential to survive but didn’t....Emergency Services failed in their duty.

I think most people believe our ambulance services do a fantastic job. You have to be careful not to Monday morning quarterback in these situations.
Its an out of the blue disaster, people panic or shut down, it's chaos etc etc.
I have no doubt that the ambulance services did their best and also have no doubt that anyone who has ever died in an ambulance on the way to hospital would have someone saying coulda woulda shoulda.

- 116 of 164 police statement were amended to remove or alter any detrimental comments relating to SYP

No surprise there, Liverpool fans will put their hands up for Heysel before a policeman puts their hands up to anything.

- SYP and the Emergency Services made “strenuous attempts” to deflect blame for the crush onto victims.

Victims or supporters? The 96 who got there early with a ticket to watch a game of football were the victims.

- Police carried out alcohol blood tests on the victims including children ,in order to impugn their reputation.

Pretty typical of ham fisted damage limitation. The problem they had was they couldn't carry out alcohol blood tests on volunteers who might have given them the results they wanted.

- PM David Cameron and Sun Editor Kelvin McKen offered profus apologies.

It was ten years before Cameron was even a MP.
McKenzie apologised because the Sun's circulation went through the floor in Liverpool

None of the above is speculative it’s all factual.based on legitimate evidence..

My assertation that a large amount of Liverpool supporters bunk into football matches isn't speculative either.
I have never argued that the police cocked up or tried to cover up their mistakes.
Nor that the ground was a potential deathtrap.
Or even that the whole organistation and day was a clusterf$%k from start to finish.

My view is all of those factors happened on a fair few other occasions and I point to a factor x which was the tipping point that day.

The thing is there is no stomach to investigate that angle and so we will never know but I would bet vital parts of my anatomy that there were hundreds of Liverpool supporters trying to bully their way into that stand without tickets.
If they wasn't it will be the first and only major game they haven't in fifty years.

[kerry 6138]

This doesnt mean you are wrong about Heysel youve had years to research ]talk to locals ect to build up your dislike of Liverpool fans so I wouldnt expect you to watch a few minutes of video that may contradict your long held view of what happened on that particular day, my issue is how peoples views were coloured by SYP dark arts dept has they became known locally and still persist today,

It really doesn't take much research to find out that the most sporting fans in the country aren't.

?

You know the Merseyside police echoed a lot of what the SYP said don't you?
Could all be police together of course or maybe they knew their locals.

But they weren't there on the day and are part of the same Federation that put the spokesman up on the video I posted

As for the SYP colouring peoples opinions of Liverpool supporters I think you'll find they reinforced the views of most who had interacted with them.

Doesn't make them right on that day though.

(If the fans were so well behaved, sober and not to blame why did the match commander make the decision to open gates to try and prevent a crush outside the ground?)

Can you show me the evidence of misbehaving drunken fans on the day I'm willing to change my mind has I said I'm not Liverpool fan, dont be shy shouldn't take you long theres been 30 years for footage to appear.

How many quotes do you want me to put up about them bunking games, stealing tickets etc?

Not sure its relavent apart from being part of the intelligence used to decide how to Police the match that day unless of course you could find a video showing scouse fans storming the perimeters in their hundreds.

Don't be shy it really won't take long.

We maybe in danger of boring other members with this thread

[topten]

The other manager at that time was Brian Clough he spoke the truth about the disaster, and he laid the blame mainly on drunken late arrivals with no tickets trying to blag their way in. But yes the easy scapegoats are the police lets all blame them.

[kerry 6138]

The other manager at that time was Brian Clough he spoke the truth about the disaster, and he laid the blame mainly on drunken late arrivals with no tickets trying to blag their way in. But yes the easy scapegoats are the police lets all blame them.

Thats it sorted then who needs inquest , enquirys reports when you've got Cloughy sat pitch side with xray vision seeing through walls.
Meanwhile footage no one wants to watch unless they're paid to, shows Hundreds of ticketless Liverpool Thugs queing 4 Abreast supervised by mounted police around Entrance to Lepping lane around the time the disaster unfolds not mounting the hidden scaling ladders battering ram in hand at the gates.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Hundreds of ticketless Liverpool Thugs queing 4 Abreast supervised by mounted police around Entrance to Lepping lane around the time the disaster unfolds not mounting the hidden scaling ladders battering ram in hand at the gates.

Thought we’d agreed that every single Liverpool supporter had a ticket for that one game.

[jofra]

I wonder how just any one of the families who lost someone at Hillsborough would feel if they were to read this thread? An inquiry has (finally) taken place, and various court actions are to take place - but still, opinionated, biased, bigoted individuals are even now arguing, "I'm right, you're wrong; no,YOU'RE Wrong AND I'M RIGHT...."
Were ANY of you there? Did ANY of you lose someone?
Totally disgusting; remember and respect the dead - and their families - and shut up!

[kerry 6138]

Hundreds of ticketless Liverpool Thugs queing 4 Abreast supervised by mounted police around Entrance to Lepping lane around the time the disaster unfolds not mounting the hidden scaling ladders battering ram in hand at the gates.

Thought we’d agreed that every single Liverpool supporter had a ticket for that one game.

I thought we agreed that ticket or not wasnt the issue but the behaviour of the crowd

[Art]

.

Jofra.

I don’t think anyone is being disrespectful.We are just having a very open and frank debate about a very serious incident which has been publically documented..And let’s not forget the many years it took the families to uncover the truth by refusing to accept the massive cover up.

Thankfully they decided not to “shut up “ and neither will I .

[kerry 6138]

Enjoying the Sun
"Liverpool supporters have yet to admit they did anything wrong at Heysel and blame the safety of the stadium so there is little chance any will admit to any wrong doing at Hillsborough."
" Like I said they never accepted any blame for Heysel"
"And Heysel? The ground again?"

Still dont see the relevance to Hillsborough though

Youve left out the 6 year ban the club got and the 14 Liverpool fans sentenced to 3 years for Manslaughter increased to 5 on appeal

AP
"How many Liverpool supporters/thugs were convicted"

It appears 14 but if you mean Hillsborough none because numerous inquiries couldnt find the evidence that it played a major part, the crowd surge happened when someone decided to not control the ever increasing crowd fed down the bottle neck that leads to the gates and opened said gates abandoning all control of ticket checking and funneled this crowd through a tunnel into a space 4 times smaller than was available to Spurs fans in 81 which resulted in broken arm legs and Ribs.

If you've ever been to the Leppings Lane end of Hillsborough you will know its impossible to see the Terrace from the turnstile area or the tunnel.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Still dont see the relevance to Hillsborough though

Youve left out the 6 year ban the club got and the 14 Liverpool fans sentenced to 3 years for Manslaughter increased to 5 on appeal

AP
"How many Liverpool supporters/thugs were convicted"

It appears 14 but if you mean Hillsborough none because numerous inquiries couldnt find the evidence that it played a major part, the crowd surge happened when someone decided to not control the ever increasing crowd fed down the bottle neck that leads to the gates and opened said gates abandoning all control of ticket checking and funneled this crowd through a tunnel into a space 4 times smaller than was available to Spurs fans in 81 which resulted in broken arm legs and Ribs.

If you've ever been to the Leppings Lane end of Hillsborough you will know its impossible to see the Terrace from the turnstile area or the tunnel.

I bring up Heysel to illustrate that Liverpool supporters never put their hands up to anything. I'm pretty sure the 14 didn't plead guilty and the view on Merseyside at the time was that it was a disgrace they were doing time. I suppose they could have been Chelsea supporters, the fact they all came from Kirby or the Wirral would have made it the greatest undercover operation since Burgess, Philby and McLean.

I was at Hillsborough in 1981 and at the Leppings Lane end terrified.
No I agree the visuals are poor but you can see people being crushed in front of you and push and shout back. It worked in 1981.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Thats it sorted then who needs inquest , enquirys reports when you've got Cloughy sat pitch side with xray vision seeing through walls.

What is interesting is that Clough wrote his opinion in the first version of his autobiography and then removed it in a rewrite. Which kind of illustrates that the censorship isn't all on one side because Clough wasn't someone to have his mind changed.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Were ANY of you there? Did ANY of you lose someone?
Totally disgusting; remember and respect the dead - and their families - and shut up!

I don't think anyone has expressed anything but sympathy and respect for the dead victims, I know I have on numerous occassions. They were completely innocent.
The debate is about what caused the tragedy.

If you had someone in prison by a miscarriage of justice would you not point it out even if it would upset the original victim's family.


I believe if everyone chooses to ignore the behaviour of some of the Liverpool supporters on the day, like they usually do, then all we are doing is putting some of the elements in place for another Hillsborough.
We have even had the ambulance crews blamed for people dying, people who surely no-one can deny do their best to help people.

As someone pointed out they altered the layout of the Leppings Lane after the 1981 game. They did that to help and prevent a tragedy not to create one but unfortunately it exasperated the problem in 1989.

No one goes to work thinking I'm going to funnel the crowds in such a way as to kill people or design a ground that will kill people.
People generally do their best to react to a situation and hindsight is always 20/20.

[tomsteel]

I wonder how just any one of the families who lost someone at Hillsborough would feel if they were to read this thread? An inquiry has (finally) taken place, and various court actions are to take place - but still, opinionated, biased, bigoted individuals are even now arguing, "I'm right, you're wrong; no,YOU'RE Wrong AND I'M RIGHT...."
Were ANY of you there? Did ANY of you lose someone?
Totally disgusting; remember and respect the dead - and their families - and shut up!

Whilst I respect your right to express an opinion on a post, I do not accept your right to tell other posters to 'shut up'. What/who gives you that right? If you disagree, move on and do not follow the thread further. Nobody denies those who died were innocent and their deaths were caused by crushing injuries from a crowd surge from behind caused by? This is the question and subsequent police and emergency services actions being debated here, not the innocent victims and their families.

[jofra]

....Nobody denies those who died were innocent and their deaths were caused by crushing injuries from a crowd surge from behind caused by? This is the question and subsequent police and emergency services actions being debated here, not the innocent victims and their families.

But it is being implied by some that those who died were NOT totally innocent - and this thread appears to have descended to wrangling between those who support and those who refute those implications - as I said, disgusting and disgraceful and I DO have the right to that opinion.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

But it is being implied by some that those who died were NOT totally innocent

I believe I've probably been the person who has said the most about some Liverpool fans being culpable but I believe the victims were totally and utterly innocent and also believe I have said that on countless occasions. I can't remember seeing anybody else saying the victims were guilty of anything.
Whenever someone uses the word implied I usually think that is an excuse for them to put words into someone else's mouth.
So convince me otherwise, show me a post where it is 'implied' that those who died were not totally innocent.

[tomsteel]

....Nobody denies those who died were innocent and their deaths were caused by crushing injuries from a crowd surge from behind caused by? This is the question and subsequent police and emergency services actions being debated here, not the innocent victims and their families.

But it is being implied by some that those who died were NOT totally innocent - and this thread appears to have descended to wrangling between those who support and those who refute those implications - as I said, disgusting and disgraceful and I DO have the right to that opinion.

Of course you have the right to your opinion and to express it. However, and I reiterate my view, most strongly, you DO NOT have the right to tell those who do not share your view to "SHUT UP." That is the crux of my point, not implications of those who may or may not be guilty of causation/effect. I note you gloss over my question as to your right.

[cambridge]

I think I was the third poster on this thread and bought up the possibility that other factors may have been involved in the appalling incident. I think the officer in charge probably made an error in opening the gate to allow fans to charge through un hindered. However, had he not done so, what would have happened at the turnstiles already jam packed?Had the crush and deaths occurred there then he would have been blamed. What would you have done in his situation? Rock and a hard place comes to mind.
My feeling is that the this guy is the fall guy for the piss poor planning that preceded the game with regard to the reputation Liverpool supporters have gained, rightly or wrongly.
By the way Art I have also been in the crowd out of the old Spion Kop at St Andrews without my feet touching the floor. Those were the days.

[Art]

Cambridge,

Interestingly my dad used to put me through the turnstiles at SA free of charge.I was almost attached to his legs as we walked through the turnstiles and the operators (for a shilling) always turned a blind eye.

It seems nothing has changed over the years and health and safety at football grounds in the 50/60s was never a priority or a concern.Drinking before the game was manatory and hundreds of fans turning up late for the start of the game was guarenteed.

Crowds of 45/50,000 were quite common in a ground which now has a capacity of 35,000 so I guess the Hillsborough disaster eventually was inevitable but following the Taylor report the grounds and the entire football experience changed for the better,in my view.Sadly it came too late for the 96 innocent victims.

[jofra]

No, Heaven forbid; let's NOT "gloss over" your comment -

....What/who gives you that right? If you disagree, move on and do not follow the thread further.....

....Of course you have the right to your opinion and to express it....I note you gloss over my question as to your right.

By exactly the same token, "What/who gives YOU that right" to tell me to move on etc.?
Other than the patronising and arrogant manner which also is displayed as in your reply (message 16) in another thread....and similarly in yet another thread...?

[EnjoyingTheSun]

No, Heaven forbid; let's NOT "gloss over" your comment -

....What/who gives you that right? If you disagree, move on and do not follow the thread further.....

....Of course you have the right to your opinion and to express it....I note you gloss over my question as to your right.

By exactly the same token, "What/who gives YOU that right" to tell me to move on etc.?
Other than the patronising and arrogant manner which also is displayed as in your reply (message 16) in another thread....and similarly in yet another thread...?

While you’re digging out quotes any luck on finding any posts where it was implied that the victims were anything but innocent?

[kerry 6138]

I have been a victim of Liverpool fans bunking in at Highbury in the 60/70s. On one occasion children in the family section had to be moved on to the pitch for safety reasons. The police were powerless to evict the culprits. It was in the days of pay your money at the turnstile and you were in the ground. Yes it is all about compensation. How come the thugs who bunked in were never prosecuted- they are the real culprits!!

If they made you move your kids in 60/70 they must be terrible people by the end of the 80's

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster

Psychiatric injury and other litigation

Various negligence cases were brought against the police by spectators who had been at the ground but had not been in the pens, and by people who watched the incident unfolding on television (or heard about it on the radio). A case, Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, was eventually appealed to the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords and was an important milestone in the law of claims of secondary victims for negligently inflicted psychiatric injury. It was held that claimants who watched the disaster on television/listened on radio were not 'proximal' and their claims were rejected.

also not to be left out

Another psychiatric injury claim was brought to the House of Lords, White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 A.C. 455. It was brought by police officers on duty against the Chief Constable who was said to have been vicariously liable for the disaster. Their claims were dismissed and the Alcock decision was upheld. It affirmed the position of the courts once again towards claims of psychiatric injuries of secondary victims

So maybe not about the money then

[kerry 6138]

The thing is there is no stomach to investigate that angle and so we will never know but I would bet vital parts of my anatomy that there were hundreds of Liverpool supporters trying to bully their way into that stand without tickets. 
If they wasn't it will be the first and only major game they haven't in fifty years.

EnjoyingTheSun 217 Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:46 pm

If thats true why no disaster the year before same game same sets of fans what was different.

Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety.

believe if everyone chooses to ignore the behaviour of some of the Liverpool supporters on the day, like they usually do, then all we are doing is putting some of the elements in place for another Hillsborough. 
We have even had the ambulance crews blamed for people dying, people who surely no-one can deny do their best to help people.

Still waiting to see evidence why 89 not 88 game?
Ambulance service responce and planning,not individual crews were critised

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster
The agreed upon protocol for the South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service, or SYMAS was that ambulances were to queue at the entrance to the gymnasium, termed the casualty reception point, or CRP.[40]:145 Any individuals within the stadium in need of medical attention were to be delivered expeditiously by police and paramedics to the CRP.[40]:142

The system of ferrying injured from any location within the stadium to the CRP required a formal declaration to be made by those in charge for it to take effect.[40]:137,138 As this declaration was not immediately performed, confusion reigned over those attempting to administer aid on the pitch. This confusion migrated to the first responders waiting in ambulances at the CRP, a location which quickly deteriorated into an ambulance parking lot.[40]:143 Some crews were hesitant to leave their vehicles, unsure of whether patients were coming to them, or vice versa.[40]:138–140 Others who did leave their vehicles were then faced with the obstacles inherent in placing distance between oneself and one's equipment. As the Panel explained in their report:

No one goes to work thinking I'm going to funnel the crowds in such a way as to kill people or design a ground that will kill people. 

Thats why the charge is manslaughter by gross negligence, misconduct in public office and perverting the course of justice not Murder and health and safety breaches for Hillsborough.

[kerry 6138]

Thats it sorted then who needs inquest , enquirys reports when you've got Cloughy sat pitch side with xray vision seeing through walls.

What is interesting is that Clough wrote his opinion in the first version of his autobiography and then removed it in a rewrite. Which kind of illustrates that the censorship isn't all on one side because Clough wasn't someone to have his mind changed.

Censorship implies he was told to remove it, Cloughy wasn't someone you could tell what to do, more likely rather than admit he was wrong he left it out.

[kerry 6138]

Prof. Dr. G. Keith Still FIMA FICPEM SFIIRSM MEWI FIPM

http://www.gkstill.com/CV/ExpertWitness ... sters.html

We often see sensational headlines, like “Panic”, “Stampede” but when you analyse the facts the crowd is rarely the cause of major incidents. The reports below highlight how often these media words are used in reports. It is both misleading and misinforming the public on causality of major incidents, propagating the myth of of panic, diverting attention away from systematic failure of organisations to provide a safe environment for places of public assembly.

[kerry 6138]

The other manager at that time was Brian Clough he spoke the truth about the disaster, and he laid the blame mainly on drunken late arrivals with no tickets trying to blag their way in. But yes the easy scapegoats are the police lets all blame them.

Easy scapegoats 30 years?

In December 2017, it was announced that a police officer and a farrier would not be prosecuted over allegations that they fabricated a story about a police horse being burned with cigarettes at Hillsborough. Although there was enough evidence to charge the farrier with perverting the course of justice, it was felt not to be in the public interest to charge him. There was insufficient evidence against the police officer to charge him with the offence.

Duckenfield admitted he had lied in certain statements regarding the causes of the disaster. 

Police disciplinary charges were abandoned when Duckenfield retired on health grounds and, because he was unavailable, it was decided it would be unfair to proceed with disciplinary charges against Bernard Murray. Duckenfield took medical retirement on a full police pension.

The IPCC announced on 12 October 2012 that it would investigate the failure of the police to declare a major incident, failure to close the tunnel to the stands which led to overcrowded pens despite evidence it had been closed in such circumstances in the past; changes made to the statements of police officers; actions which misled Parliament and the media; shortcomings of previous investigations; and the role played by Norman Bettison.

By 22 October 2012, the names of at least 1,444 serving and former police officers had been referred to the IPCC investigation.

On 23 October 2012, Norman Bettison resigned with immediate effect as Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, after Maria Eagle MP on the floor of the House and protected by Parliamentary privilege, accused him of boasting about concocting a story that all the Liverpool fans were drunk and police were afraid they were going to break down the gates and decided to open them.

[tomsteel]

No, Heaven forbid; let's NOT "gloss over" your comment -

....What/who gives you that right? If you disagree, move on and do not follow the thread further.....

....Of course you have the right to your opinion and to express it....I note you gloss over my question as to your right.

By exactly the same token, "What/who gives YOU that right" to tell me to move on etc.?
Other than the patronising and arrogant manner which also is displayed as in your reply (message 16) in another thread....and similarly in yet another thread...?

You appear keen to follow my posts! However, our difference offers little to the general thrust of the topic, hence we shall have no further discussion.

[Art]

Prof. Dr. G. Keith Still FIMA FICPEM SFIIRSM MEWI FIPM

http://www.gkstill.com/CV/ExpertWitness ... sters.html

We often see sensational headlines, like “Panic”, “Stampede” but when you analyse the facts the crowd is rarely the cause of major incidents. The reports below highlight how often these media words are used in reports. It is both misleading and misinforming the public on causality of major incidents, propagating the myth of of panic, diverting attention away from systematic failure of organisations to provide a safe environment for places of public assembly.

Very interesting article which has added a different perspective to the debate.

I well recall many a stampede by late arrivals at matches during the 60/70s which rarely led to injuries or fatalities.

The article also refers to a previous incident at Hillsborough which was raised in the Taylor report who at the time questioned why the match was allowed to be played at Hillsborough..

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Censorship implies he was told to remove it, Cloughy wasn't someone you could tell what to do, more likely rather than admit he was wrong he left it out.

In late 2001 Clough apologised after a threatened cross-Liverpool boycott of UK soccer magazine Four-Four-Two which had just signed him as a columnist.
Under intense pressure, its editor insisted he publicly apologised.
When he died a couple of years later the Liverpool supporters still booed the announcement of Clough’s death at the Liverpool-Man U game.
So shall we call it economic sanctions rather than censorship or censorship by economic sanctions. In my experience when you bully someone into retracting their opinion rather than convince them by debate it is an admission that your case isn’t that strong. Were the police to threaten to shut up differing opinions by threatening fines then they would be rightly criticised.

Various negligence cases were brought against the police by spectators who had been at the ground but had not been in the pens, and by people who watched the incident unfolding on television (or heard about it on the radio). A case, Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, was eventually appealed to the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords and was an important milestone in the law of claims of secondary victims for negligently inflicted psychiatric injury. It was held that claimants who watched the disaster on television/listened on radio were not 'proximal' and their claims were rejected.
also not to be left out
Another psychiatric injury claim was brought to the House of Lords, White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 A.C. 455. It was brought by police officers on duty against the Chief Constable who was said to have been vicariously liable for the disaster. Their claims were dismissed and the Alcock decision was upheld. It affirmed the position of the courts once again towards claims of psychiatric injuries of secondary victims
So maybe not about the money then

Not too sure what that proves? Surely it proves that people other than the direct victims had a go at getting compensation and failed.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

I well recall many a stampede by late arrivals at matches during the 60/70s which rarely led to injuries or fatalities.

[/quote][/quote]

Sadly we run out of luck.
Tell me when you are in a bit of a hurry to get through the entrance of say Lemar and an elderly couple are dawdling, do you give them a push to hurry them on their way?

[EnjoyingTheSun]

[quote="kerry 6138"]
If thats true why no disaster the year before same game same sets of fans what was different.

Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety.
[quote]



In 1988 I believe the police closed the tunnel leading to the central pens to stop more people entering the area. On that day the police got it right. No one is arguing that the police got this horribly wrong my argument was that there were three factors, police, ground and some fans.
My problem is the inability to take any personal responsibility.
The ground was unsafe, cars are potentially unsafe.

Same question do you push your way into Lemar?

If you drive 100 MPH on a motorway and kill some passengers in another car is that wholy the police's fault for not ensuring you kept to the speed limit?

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Still waiting to see evidence why 89 not 88 game?

You raise a question and then chase an answer to it in the same post?

[EnjoyingTheSun]

The system of ferrying injured from any location within the stadium to the CRP required a formal declaration to be made by those in charge for it to take effect.[40]:137,138 As this declaration was not immediately performed, confusion reigned over those attempting to administer aid on the pitch. This confusion migrated to the first responders waiting in ambulances at the CRP, a location which quickly deteriorated into an ambulance parking lot.[40]:143 Some crews were hesitant to leave their vehicles, unsure of whether patients were coming to them, or vice versa.[40]:138–140 Others who did leave their vehicles were then faced with the obstacles inherent in placing distance between oneself and one's equipment.

So basically the police didn’t do their job so the ambulance crews couldn’t do theirs? How does that make it the ambulance crews fault?

Duckenfield admitted he had lied in certain statements regarding the causes of the disaster.

Police disciplinary charges were abandoned when Duckenfield retired on health grounds and, because he was unavailable, it was decided it would be unfair to proceed with disciplinary charges against Bernard Murray. Duckenfield took medical retirement on a full police pension.

Retiring through ill health when in trouble is a common tactic of the police. No one denies the police cocked this up and covered up. That some police are corrupt isn’t a surprise to me I could make your hair curl with stories of police corruption I am aware of

Maria Eagle MP on the floor of the House and protected by Parliamentary privilege, accused him of boasting about concocting a story that all the Liverpool fans were drunk and police were afraid they were going to break down the gates and decided to open them.

I have my doubts he said all the Liverpool fans were drunk but that is the beauty of Parliamentary privilege you can say what you like without fear of being sued for slander.

[sophie]

I can't participate at all to this discussion (I don't know the facts) but as a Mother I can safely say, I would and have done in the past, defended my children publically i.e. if they were accused of being drunk and disorderly I'm pretty sure I would have said "my children NEVER get drunk" even if I know they certainly were on a number of occasions. I gave them hell behind closed doors though and they saw the error of their ways. To say that none of those that were sadly killed, were stone cold sober is a bit naïve.

[iancrumpy]

To say that none of those that were sadly killed, were stone cold sober is a bit naïve.

Sophie, your final sentence is at odds with the rest of your post. One presumes you wanted to write "To say that none of those that were sadly killed, had been drinking, is a bit naïve" or perhaps you wanted to write "To say that ALL of those that were sadly killed, were stone cold sober is a bit naïve."

Either way, no-one has ever claimed that - Some alcohol had certainly been consumed by some supporters, but this doesn't make them culpable for the disaster that sadly happened.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

To say that none of those that were sadly killed, were stone cold sober is a bit naïve.

Sophie, your final sentence is at odds with the rest of your post. One presumes you wanted to write "To say that none of those that were sadly killed, had been drinking, is a bit naïve" or perhaps you wanted to write "To say that ALL of those that were sadly killed, were stone cold sober is a bit naïve."

Either way, no-one has ever claimed that - Some alcohol had certainly been consumed by some supporters, but this doesn't make them culpable for the disaster that sadly happened.

I would guess that all the victims were sober, they get there early to get a good view and probably went without a pint. Many were young so didn't drink anyway.
I don't think drink would've been much of a factor anyway people can be boorish stone cold sober.

[kerry 6138]

Still waiting to see evidence why 89 not 88 game?

You raise a question and then chase an answer to it in the same post?

Ive been asking for anyone to provide evidence of bad behavior on the day beyond what you would see at any FA cup semi, or local derby throughout this thread no takers so far except apparently bad reputation.
Ive tried to steer clear of posting links showing real trouble at a football game, Sprurs Arsenal Millwall, because its not relevent.
Some of the posts on this thread would make the ROC propaganda machine look like amateurs.

But I will try again has anyone found evidence of riots, fights bunking (what ever that is ) in and around Leppings lane between 2.30 and 3.30pm. 1989
Or
Can someone explain what the differences were when the identical game was played the year before
for example was the stadium modified?
Did the weather put off the drunken ticketless thugs that have apperantly made it to every game for 50 years?

[EnjoyingTheSun]

But I will try again has anyone found evidence of riots, fights bunking (what ever that is ) in and around Leppings lane between 2.30 and 3.30pm. 1989

It would be impossible to find that evidence. After the disaster I would imagine the gates were thrown open as they are after every football match. No one get's their tickets checked going out of a football match. I doubt anyone has come forward since and proudly said they bunked their way into that football match, just every other one it seems.
Now no-one is looking, the narrative is the police are 100% to blame.
As for riot, there is a fair amount of evidence of pushing creating a crush, that is why they erroneously threw the gates open.

Can someone explain what the differences were when the identical game was played the year before
for example was the stadium modified?
Did the weather put off the drunken ticketless thugs that have apperantly made it to every game for 50 years?

They run out of luck. As simple as that unfortunately

[kerry 6138]

But I will try again has anyone found evidence of riots, fights bunking (what ever that is ) in and around Leppings lane between 2.30 and 3.30pm. 1989

It would be impossible to find that evidence. .
Now no-one is looking, the narrative is the police are 100% to blame.
As for riot, there is a fair amount of evidence of pushing creating a crush, that is why they erroneously threw the gates open.

Well lets see this evidence that crowd behavior was different with 1989 Liverpool fans than the 1981 Spurs ,1987 Coventry and 1987 Leeds games shouldnt be problem theres a fair amount of it after all.
I'll forward it on to SY Police, West Midlands Police, and Cloughys publisher if it help even Mr Duckenfields reps who couldnt find any so they resorted to just saying it. mmm

Come on, Art and myself are doing all the work here defending a city we have no links to, trawling tinterweb cutting ,pasting video and text

2 minutes on Google hundreds if not thousands of images/video of Spurs / Arsenal and evey other flavour of fan clashing with rival fans and Police, warning though some of them do show blood the odd mounted officer with raised batton and even the occasional fence

Same search of images for the day in question including Lepping lane shown in the video in message 49 by the way,
show Liverpool fans behaving no differently to any other fans attending a cup tie . derby game imo.
warning they do show a mounted policeman wagging his fingerand you will see the odd crime against fashion

[kerry 6138]

Same question do you push your way into Lemar?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-new ... ow-1452562
https://www.thesouthafrican.com/how-man ... y-madness/

there were three factors, police, ground and some fans.
My problem is the inability to take any personal responsibility.

Then you are responsible for the injuries caused in 81 you were part of the crowd that went through the turnstile under some kind of control but still you were part of the crowd that pushed and shoved and injured your own fans, and you say Liverpools luck ran out you were lucky the match commander wasnt Duckenfield that day or. are we now going to be told Spurs fans would not have gone through the gate unless the steward checked your ticket

Its obvious the crowd played a part in the disaster if you followed the thread I linked to a academic study about crowd behaviour by some Prof with more letters after his name than in his name
The issue is the Police trying to avoid responsibility accused the fans of things that were proven later they did not do ie pushing open the gates and to help with this they described the crowd has drunken yobs, I certainly dont believe no one had been drinking, it was and still is part of the game, but not all drunk the crowd was a mix of ages and sexes in the videos
You and others on this thread have carried on this campain with the constant reference to Heysel, Ambulance chasers, bunking, drunken yob comments without once providing any evidence these comments had any effect with what happened that day.

Are we really expected to believe Spurs fans prevented there own disaster because thousands of Spurs fans some how behave differently to thousands of fans from another city or thousands of worshippers at the Haj or hundreds of shoppers on black Friday

[Art]

Regardless of the constant referral to Heysle the enquiry exonerated the Liverpool fans from any blame and again I repeat found very little evidence of excessive alcohol being consumed prior to the match so the Heysle argument is not really relevant in this instance.

Those who doubt the findings of the report will always believe differently and that’s fine but I’m more concerned about the police cover up which was on a massive scale and as Tom Steel pointed out was probably orchestrated by a much higher authority.

It is absolutely outrageous that families and relatives of the unfortunate 96 victims have had to wait all this time without anyone being procecuted.

Hopefully the Duckenfield trial will help to bring a close to the grieving families who have suffered so much.

[silverfox1]

This is now turning into a boring and repetitive argument between a few members. Can we give it a rest now and leave the final decisions to the authorities .... Please!

[EnjoyingTheSun]

This is an interesting few posts about the 2007 Champions League Final from a Liverpool fans site which touches on Hillsborough.

https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/in ... 179084.200

Here's a couple of quotes I find interesting

You may have opened up a taboo subject but I sometimes wonder if we did use the Sun (and the South Yorkshire Police) to purge ourselves of all responsibility.
Like many here, I was at Hillsborough and concur with just about everything in the Taylor Report. Policing was definitely the major issue.
But I also know what it was like being a fan before Hillsborough. Of being crushed outside against walls, whirling and eddying until being squirted into a turnstile like a grape pip. Of being trapped in tunnels with people pushing from the back. People always pushed because they felt that those at the front were refusing to move - and often they were right. At old Wembley, on the lower tiers, you got a pretty good view as you entered the terrace so people stuck there. Tannoy announcements to move down had little effect, so you expected a bit of shoving. Where I used to stand on the Kop, there was a always a group of lads who'd steamroller in five minutes before kick-off. It was all a bit of a joke and we never felt threatened because people just didn't die in football crowds... Nobody thought there could be consequences.
After Hillsborough, I never saw that group steamroller in again. It was a reality check to all of us and, despite knowing that policing was the key factor, I sometimes wondered: Were there people who entered the crush outside the ground with no ticket and no chance of turning back? In their heart of hearts, are there people who know they pushed in that tunnel? This isn't pointing the finger at anyone. It's a recognition of what terrace culture was at the time. Did we conveniently accept the fact that it was caused 100% by the authorities and simply file for future reference? Because, if we did, we have forgotten lessons that need to be remembered today. We may come up against inept organisations but our actions also have consequences. Having read accounts of Eindhoven and Athens, maybe some of our younger fans also need this reality check.

And another here

If anyone really thinks this kind of behaviour is in no way related to what happened in Hillsborough then that beggars belief IMHO.

The fact is that the police last night did what was right to stop another dangerous crush. Which was lock loads of decent ticketed reds out for a game they qualified for. If they'd open the gates only a miracle would have prevented a Hillsborough type crush. You see the authorities have learned how to prevent tragedy: we as a group still don't care. "In's in la". Bollocks. And in this same group of bunkers will be those that shout loudest about H.J.C. etc.

You know one of the worst things about what the Sun printed? That we as a group have partly used it to absolve ourselves of all blame for what happened at Hillsborough. We haven't had the insight to realise that our own behaviour can set in train a series of events that can create a situation for the police to mismanage. Or rather we seem to have forgotten that. For years after Hillsborough behaviour did seem better but its got worse over the last two seasons, and this season particularly.

You know what we have got some whoppers following us, and the worst are with a scouse accent. Licenced to rob, to fight, to bunk, to show frank disregard for anyone but their selves. Licenced to stand there the whole game singing racist and antisemetic songs. Licenced to kick the "ooops" out of an 18 y.o.ish Milan fan in our end - although obviously licenced to bunk in their end when they like him are just desperate to watch their team.

And these are from Liverpool fans remember.

Here is a link to some evidence from the Taylor report

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/re ... en-7722398

[EnjoyingTheSun]

This is now turning into a boring and repetitive argument between a few members. Can we give it a rest now and leave the final decisions to the authorities .... Please!

Don't read it then. I skip past forums that are of no interest to me

[EnjoyingTheSun]

So in summary here is my view on Hillsborough.


1) The ground wasn't safe many weren't. The clubs pretty much treated their customers with contempt and now the bulk of their money comes from television and marketing I don't suppose that view has changed.

2) The police cocked it up, no doubt of that. They also tried to cover it up no doubt of that.

3) The victims were 100% innocent and anyone with a heart grieves for them. Their families have kept up a campaign for the truth and got a truth. I don't think the city of Liverpool could accept the whole truth but if it gives them comfort then that's great.


4) I don't think the victim's families have chased this for compensation what amount of money can bring your children back? If compensation does start to be given out I'm sure that some will claim with no good reason and that includes the police.

5) Alcohol didn't play a factor in my mind. No doubt some was consumed but it wasn't relevant.

6) There has always been crushes at football matches and supporters have always bunked in. I believe, and I am not alone in this view, that Liverpool supporters are the worst at bunking in.
Hillsborough was the day the luck ran out. There had been countless near misses over the years but Hillsborough was a day when everything aligned and tragedy resulted.
But everything aligning included supporters bunking in.

7) It seems to be a cultural thing that Liverpool supporters or maybe even a significant amount of the city cannot/will not ever admit they are at fault for anything. Not even 1%.


8) As I hope I illustrated with the quotes from a Liverpool fans site that the lessons of Hillsborough don't seem to have been learn't by many. If you 100% believe it was the police and the football authorities to blame wouldn't you as a group who are proud of their community think; "Remember Hillsborough here this could get nasty?"
Or do you keep up the boorish behaviour

Or do we simply throw a few bodies to the wolves absolve the supporters of absolutely any responsibility and let them carry on.
Hillsborough was a long time coming because lessons from the past weren't heeded. Are we going to do it again?

We may have all seater stadiums now but you can still get crushed outside.
It may take a few years but it frightens me that a Hillsborough might happen again and I know who I am betting on it happening to.

[kerry 6138]

) I don't think the victim's families have chased this for compensation what amount of money can bring your children back? If compensation does start to be given out I'm sure that some will claim with no good reason and that includes the police.

I posted this previously
Psychiatric injury and other litigation

Various negligence cases were brought against the police by spectators who had been at the ground but had not been in the pens, and by people who watched the incident unfolding on television (or heard about it on the radio). A case, Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, was eventually appealed to the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords and was an important milestone in the law of claims of secondary victims for negligently inflicted psychiatric injury. It was held that claimants who watched the disaster on television/listened on radio were not 'proximal' and their claims were rejected.

also not to be left out

Another psychiatric injury claim was brought to the House of Lords, White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 A.C. 455. It was brought by police officers on duty against the Chief Constable who was said to have been vicariously liable for the disaster. Their claims were dismissed and the Alcock decision was upheld. It affirmed the position of the courts once again towards claims of psychiatric injuries of secondary victims

The important part is the last sentence.

It affirmed the position of the courts once again towards claims of psychiatric injuries of secondary victims

[Art]

Enjoying the Sun.

I think your summary was absolutely brilliant and beautifully sums up the facts.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Enjoying the Sun.

I think your summary was absolutely brilliant and beautifully sums up the facts.

Bless you for that Art.

Maybe for the first time I managed to get my view across concisely.
If we are apportioning blame I wouldn't even give ticketless boorish fans a third of it but just think it is naïve to give them a complete pass and doesn't help in the future.
People do have to take some personal responsibility in life.

BTW Birmingham have some great fans, I remember them coming to Tottenham in the early eighties for an FA Cup game, filling the Park Lane and generally outsinging the home support.

We did win the game though