Hillsborough

Originally posted by @areloa-grandee

On this point,surely this is a discussion forum, where opinion is presented - the fact that folk are asking others to comment or provide a POV is in my mind at least out of respect for others opinion. There are Plenty of other issues on here where folk are openly questioning legal decisons, government policy, official stance, you yourself pap engage in such discussion.

You have picked a particularly bad example to take this to the abstract of “disagreeing with the official account”.

The whole reason this thread exists is because people vehemently disagreed with the then-official account and fought for decades to have this injustice corrected.

So why is it that in this case, the official judgemnets, can not be commented on? Are the sensitivities over the initial lies and misinformation influencing opinion on this?

I think I have you more than covered with my previous point, but I’d like to clear a couple of things up on this. First, no-one is stopping you from writing anything, but I find the comments particularly distasteful because they belong to the same category of lies that the families have had to deal with for years, and have spent years seeking exoneration from.

This isn’t some mandarin giving you an official account of a disputed event. It has mostly been bereaved and defamed families fighting for some semblance of justice after the original official account totally fucked them.

On a final point, no-one stops anyone from debating anything here. It’s free speech, after all - but a consequence of that is that you will have to deal with whatever you write, whether it’s counter-posts like these, downvotes or a loss of face and/or respect. Cost of doing business, I’m afraid, as it is anywhere.

Originally posted by @pap

Originally posted by @areloa-grandee

On this point,surely this is a discussion forum, where opinion is presented - the fact that folk are asking others to comment or provide a POV is in my mind at least out of respect for others opinion. There are Plenty of other issues on here where folk are openly questioning legal decisons, government policy, official stance, you yourself pap engage in such discussion.

You have picked a particularly bad example to take this to the abstract of “disagreeing with the official account”.

The whole reason this thread exists is because people vehemently disagreed with the then-official account and fought for decades to have this injustice corrected.

So why is it that in this case, the official judgemnets, can not be commented on? Are the sensitivities over the initial lies and misinformation influencing opinion on this?

I think I have you more than covered with my previous point, but I’d like to clear a couple of things up on this. First, no-one is stopping you from writing anything , but I find the comments particularly distasteful because they belong to the same category of lies that the families have had to deal with for years, and have spent years seeking exoneration from.

This isn’t some mandarin giving you an official account of a disputed event. It has mostly been bereaved and defamed families fighting for some semblance of justice after the original official account totally fucked them.

On a final point, no-one stops anyone from debating anything here. It’s free speech, after all - but a consequence of that is that you will have to deal with whatever you write, whether its counter-posts like these, downvotes or a loss of face and/or respect. Cost of doing business, I’m afraid.

Exactly the point i was making - You CHOSE to place these comments in that same category, it is your OPINION, but that is NOT the way they are intended and I dont believe they belong there. In fact, you suggesting this is ‘distasteful’ as you are missing the point. My comments are about crowd safety and the influence the crowds themselves have on risks. I dont believe this a bad example, but a highly sensitive one. Its not a bad example because tragically it has shown the very worst that can happen when safety processes break down.

You bring up the injustice again - and I have not disputed that, but to repeat, you have to separate the lies and coverup from everyhting else because that was after the fact and is not what my POV is about.

I dont get the purpose of your statement on ‘loss of face,or respect’ - are you actively inviting others to think that? Is this now a Forum POV as opposed to your own?

I am more than happy to deal with any ‘consequences’ of what i write as I believe its a valid discussion point. But it’s a shame that you have gone down the route of the emotional challenge by simply bucketing this in with ‘category of lies’ - I thought you would be better than that.

I’m just calling it how it is. How much respect do you think Flahute had for Phil’s opinion at the moment “clueless cunt” left his fingers?

I’m pointing out the obvious, nowt more.

1 Like

The people died because of a fuck up/mistakes/perfect storm of ineptitude but it’s the cover up that is the issue. Always has been.

4 Likes

Five myths dispelled.

Myth 1: Liverpool fans arrived ‘late and without tickets’

After the disaster, allegations emerged from “unnamed sources” - later established to be a Police Federation spokesman and the Sheffield Conservative MP, Irvine Patnick - claiming Liverpool supporters had “deliberately arrived late determined to force entry” to the ground.

What we know: The claim formed the basis of the “rock solid” defence South Yorkshire Police [SYP] sought to present at the 1989 Taylor inquiry into the disaster. The aim was to “deflect blame on to supporters” and exonerate the police.

While many Liverpool supporters did arrive after 14.30, the inquest was told evidence suggested it was actually the “failure to control the crowd” and “inadequate” turnstiles that led to the fatal crush.

The jury heard evidence from former South Yorkshire Police inspector Clive Davis who recalled being told by former Ch Supt Terry Wain “to put the blame for this disaster where it belongs: on the drunken, ticketless Liverpool fans”. This was denied in evidence by Mr Wain. However, he admitted a report he prepared had exaggerated claims that “several thousand” spectators had arrived at the ground within minutes of kick-off.

The inquests heard the 10,100 fans with standing tickets for the Leppings Lane end were expected to enter through just seven turnstiles, causing congestion outside the ground.

Lord Justice Taylor, in his 1990 report into the disaster, concluded fans were reasonable to arrive between 14.30 and 14.40 as match tickets only requested people be in their places “15 minutes before the game”. He was also satisfied that the large concentration of fans arriving at Leppings Lane at 14.40 to 14.50 “did not arrive as a result of any concerted plan”.

He concluded that police had “failed” to prepare for controlling the arrival of a large number of fans in a short period. Both the club and police “should have realised the turnstile area could not easily cope with the large numbers demanded of it” unless they arrived steadily over a lengthy period.

He accepted there were “small groups without tickets” looking to “exploit any chance of getting into the ground”. But the main problem was simply one of “large numbers packed into the small area outside the turnstiles”. He stated categorically that “fans’ behaviour played no part in the disaster”.

The Hillsborough Independent Panel (HIP) report concluded crowd congestion outside the stadium was “not caused by fans arriving late” for the kick-off. The turnstiles, it said, were “inadequate to process the crowd safely” and the rate of entry insufficient to prevent a dangerous build-up outside the ground.

What the jury said: The behaviour of Liverpool supporters did not cause or contribute to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles.

was the myth that some ppl like to try to push & force their way through a packed crowd Debunked bc that’s the only one i ever really believed srs

3 Likes

Gay & Phil, I do appreciate where you are trying to come from. As a dude that (as you’ve all discovered) has a strong penchant for delving to the very depths in search of truth, I understand the points you are making, and why you are asking the questions that you are.

The thing is, you’re attempting to do so, when in this case, the facts are already known. And I mean the actual facts, not the ‘facts’ the government wanted us to hear.

I’ll make this as simple as I can:

Due to a so called “career progression” (he was actually moved to Barnsley for involvement in bullying) – South Yorkshire Police suddenly and without warning, decided to transfer the highly experienced Match-day Commander, Chief Superintendant Brian Mole, who had run the operation at Hillsborough for years, and took charge of the previous years semis there, having established a system of control that worked – and replaced him with the inexperienced David Duckenfield, who had not even worked at Hillsborough in any capacity for over ten years.

Mole had a fine-tuned operation, which saw him driven all around the city for hours before the game, keeping an eye on the build up of the fans, and ensuring everything was under control. Once at the ground, he would be highly active in directing operations, and communicating essential information to his colleagues, about the movements of the crowd.

Duckenfield did none of this. In fact he refused to even familiarise himself with any of Mole’s established proceedures that had proven to work well. Such was his arrogance (and reputation as a “disciplinarian”) – he instead spent the hours before the game giving his new charges a dressing down, telling them how crap they all were, and that now things would be done “his way”. “His way”, was essentially to presume that all the fans were going to be beered up and looking for trouble, and as such, by his own admission (albeit after lying for 27 years) – he “didn’t even consider” the possibility of any danger through bottlenecking and crushing. He was only concerned with trouble. And rather than being active as was his predecessor, he hid himself away in the crontol box, and never emerged from it once there.

To make matters worse – as well as completely ignoring all of Mole’s proven methods, he was completely unaware of what was called the ‘Freeman tactic’ – which was to close what is known as “the tunnel” (a narrow galley that leads into the central “pens” where most of the 96 died) once they were full.

Ignorant as he was of the potential for a crush, when informed of the impending dangers rapidly building outside the turnstiles at the Leppings Lane End, after dallying for ages on what to do, (remember that as Flahute has said - this area was a funnel) as more and more fans arrived uncontrolled, compressing those at the front with nowhere to go, a dangerous crush was developing. If you look at the video on the Guardian article Fowlly linked, you’ll see that there was loads of space in the terracing to either side of the central pens, which had the Freeman Tactic been in operation as it should, and the Tunnel to the central pens closed – fans would naturally have been filtered into the spaceous areas to the sides when allowed entry.

But no. Duckenfield in his supreme arrogance, didn’t have a fucking clue, but thought he knew best. He ordered the gates to be opened to relieve the crush outside, failed to close the doors to the tunnel (which was directly in front of the gates to be opened) – and the fans – under the unavoidable crushing pressure from behind, poured straight down the tunnel, and into the already full to capacity central pens. The rest is horribly tragic history.

It was not the fans fault that South Yorks police failed to effectively control and stagger the crowds building up in the funnel of Leppings Lane outside. It was not the fans fault that under the horrible conditions at the front of that external crush, when saved by the opening of the gate, that under that tidal pressure of built-up humanity, they all rushed forth to escape certain death.

It is not the fans fault that a stupid arrogant cunt failed them yet again, by not closing the Tunnel doors as he should have known to do, and that they were then forced by the weight of the crowd straight forward into the already full to capacity central pens.

Had Duckenfield done his job properly, the crowd outside in Leppings Lane would have been effectively staggered to control the build up of fans. When discovering his initial fuck ups, he would have ordered the Tunnel doors closed, and then opened the turnstile gates, directing his officers to guide the fans down into the areas with plenty of space left to fill to the flanks.

The fans were completely at the mercy of his decisions. He tragically and criminally let them down, and sent them to their deaths. And all because he was too arrogant to do any research at all on how to control a crowd at Hillsborough, before taking responsibility for the safety of 54,000 human beings, going to “enjoy” what should have been one of their most memorable days of their lives, and for the right reasons, not the ones it is sadly so memorable for now.

To compound all this – in his extreme arrogance, he still could not accept and take responsibility for his actions, and instead sought to concoct a series of vicious lies, to paint the fans as being “to blame”, for drunken and unruly behaviour.

I hope that you can understand now, how the fans had no choice, and no fault in what happened to them. As he has finally broke down and admitted twenty fucking seven years too late – he fucked up on a massive scale – froze, and completely bottled it when the scale of his mistakes started become evident. David Duckenfield sent those fans to their dealths, and he now deserves to pay the price for his arrogance and lies.

7 Likes

Thank you, Jack, for the non-confrontational reply. Answers a lot of the questions that I have not heard answered elsewhere!

1 Like

Really? It’s all common knowledge. All of it, and has been for 27 years!

Depends where you get your knowlege from though doesnt it? The media peddled a completely different view for many years.

1 Like

Some of the media, not all of it. Observor has been telling the true story for decades.

And thereby lies the problem. It all depends where you go for your information.

1 Like

Jack, tahnk you for a measured and considered response. I do not disagre with anything you say, as my POV is not in anyway challenging these conclusions.

However, I do believe folk need to acknowledge that one can consider crowds and the way they behave as a risk factor, without casting blame on them, but it seems that this is still taboo with repsect to Hilsborough, and from what I have read was not part of the inquest.

I would most likely have behaved in **exactly the same way ** as those normal fans did on that sad day. With the wisdom of hindsight, I would now be much more cautious given the risks associated with crushing etc…

I just find it a liitle odd, that this view is considered ‘distateful’ and bucketed in with the ‘lies’ as this is both wrong and as an accustaion rather ignorant.

1 Like

It wasn’t considered as it was, and is, utterly irrelevant to the events 27 years ago. You may consider it so but far more learned folk than you didn’t and don’t.

Can you explain why it is irrelevent? That was and remains my question, as irrespective of ‘more learned folk’ - there is no reference to this in any of the findings, so if using a judicial framework for your POV, just becase it wa n ot considered does not make it irrelevent.

But it was always there. The facts have always been there but far too many decided that the “fans caused it” narritive suited their own agendas and still can’t accept the evidence that has been heard day after day for two years as it would mean they’d have to accept their own stupidity.

Can you enlighten me as to where I have ever said that the fans caused it’?

Do you think for one moment that it wasn’t considered whilst constructing the framework? That people like Michael Mansfield missed something like how a crowd acts and reacts? Or perhaps, just maybe, they did and considered it rrelevant.

The crowd dynamic is utterly irrevelvant as crowd control and thus control of any dynamic was absence due to SYP fuck ups.

You’re simply fishing for some sort of “mob rule” angle which has been utterly and totally dismissed.

I wasn’t referring to your goodself, more a general observation but certainly relevant to the cunts on TSW.

Nope, not fishing for anything, just base my opinion on how I would have behaved, and how I would behave differently now, with benefit of hindsight and more aware of the risks… For context, I stopped believing in the perspectioves spouted in the media and government about this many years ago, despite being taken in at first when even Lynam on the BBC grandstand was suggesting crowd ‘trouble’ initially. The evidence on blame and cause is clear. Please at the very least refrain from trying to put ‘words in my mouth’… as it’s total bollocks