Hillsborough inquest verdict.

BaZ87 · 27 Apr 2016 at 15:18

estebanrey said:
The Taylor Report blamed the police DESPITE their cover-ups, so had they been honest it would have still blamed them wouldn't it?

The point I'm making, which you are missing or deliberately ignoring, is that I believe the families would have been happy with that but that they've only continued to push for further enquiries because of the attempted whitewash by the police to blame the fans which they then wanted completely reversed to the exact opposite (i.e. Police 100% to blame and fans 0%).

The Taylor report did find the police most accontable despite all their attempts to shift the blame, yes. And I've not missed or ignored anything. What you fail to understand is that it was the verdict of the inquest (along with the police cover up/smear campaign) not the Taylor report that the families have been fighting against.

A lot of the findings in the Taylor report weren't considered at the inquest because of the 3.15pm cut off time that the coroner imposed.

estebanrey said:
I thought unlawful killing was generally used for things more than gross negligence. Like in a fight you punched someone and they fell and cracked their head, or a police marksmen killing someone against guidelines. In other words when a deliberate attempt to harm head been made, rather than a culmination of mistakes that resulted in tragedy.

To use an example, lots of horrible mistakes, negligence and bad procedures led to the death of 56 people in the Bradford City fire, the club were found to be responsible and yet there was no "unlawful killing" verdict for those victims (they got 'death misadventure').

I'm not a lawyer but from what I understand, yes gross negligence was enough to lead to an unlawful killing verdict.

Nix · 27 Apr 2016 at 15:21

Resident said:
3. Fans with or without tickets surged into the grounds. Through the gates AND jumping turnstiles (or are we not accepting the video evidence of this?)

If you're putting pressure on something then suddenly have a way of relieving that pressure, where do you think that something is going to go?

It wasn't a surge to get in quickly; watch the video. People were clearly carried by the force of the crowd behind them. People at the back may have well been worried about missing kick off and pushing forward, but how were they to know about the problems inside? The problem is that the police didn't manage the crowd flow properly in the first place. The crush, unfortunately, is the inevitable consequence of that oversight.

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:18

Nix said:
If you're putting pressure on something then suddenly have a way of relieving that pressure, where do you think that something is going to go?

It wasn't a surge to get in quickly; watch the video. People were clearly carried by the force of the crowd behind them. People at the back may have well been worried about missing kick off and pushing forward, but how were they to know about the problems inside? The problem is that the police didn't manage the crowd flow properly in the first place. The crush, unfortunately, is the inevitable consequence of that oversight.

True. But therefore to lay the blame entirely on the police as has been done is still not correct. The actions of the fans were a contributing factor.

Hilly · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:19

Dis86 said:
True. But therefore to lay the blame entirely on the police as has been done is still not correct. The actions of the fans were a contributing factor.

What actions exactly are you referring too?

Following the crowd in as they're meant too?

LoadsaMoney · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:21

Crompton suspended.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36154201

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:22

hilly said:
What actions exactly are you referring too?

Following the crowd in as they're meant too?

No. Exerting force on those in front of them. If there was no force from behind there can be no crush. Simple as that.

BaZ87 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:23

Question 7: behaviour of the supporters

Was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

Jury’s answer: No.

If your answer to the question above is “no”, then was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

Jury’s answer: No.

Tefal · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:23

estebanrey said:
I thought unlawful killing was generally used for things more than gross negligence. Like in a fight you punched someone and they fell and cracked their head, or a police marksmen killing someone against guidelines.

i think thats manslaughter

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:24

So then what crushed people? The police did not force people in. People forced themselves in.

Nix · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:24

Dis86 said:
True. But therefore to lay the blame entirely on the police as has been done is still not correct. The actions of the fans were a contributing factor.

A contributing factor, sure. Worthy of blame? No.

Aside from trying to get into a game and being unaware of the unfolding events ahead what are they guilty of? The fans were part of a multiplier effect, nothing more.

Are motorists guilty of causing congestion when there are traffic flow problems?

The police clearly failed here by not managing the situation properly.

Hilly · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:25

Dis86 said:
No. Exerting force on those in front of them. If there was no force from behind there can be no crush. Simple as that.

Wrong.

Educate yourself, before spouting such inane rubbish.

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:26

Nix said:
A contributing factor, sure. Worthy of blame? No.

Aside from trying to get into a game and being unaware of the unfolding events ahead what are they guilty of? The fans were part of a multiplier effect, nothing more.

Are motorists guilty of causing congestion when there are traffic flow problems?

The police clearly failed here by not managing the situation properly.

If a motorist drives in to the back of a car when there are traffic flow problems then they're guilty.

And that effectively is what we have here.

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:26

hilly said:
Wrong.

Educate yourself, before spouting such inane rubbish.

How is that inane rubbish? Show me how I'm wrong please.

Did these people crush themselves? No.

Did the police force people to push in? No.

People pushed in. They exerted a force. That force caused people to fall/be crushed.

Nix · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:28

Dis86 said:
So then what crushed people? The police did not force people in. People forced themselves in.

I'm not sure if you're trolling here or not.

People wanted to see a game and were trying to get into the ground before kick off. That was the motivation and reason why there was momentum towards the ground.

Due to the sheer numbers and natural topography of the ground, the small momentum towards the ground becomes multiplied. That force has to go somewhere. Due to bad management, people were getting crushed. When the police opened gate three, they didn't close off the central pen meaning the force/pressure which suddenly had somewhere to go inevitably surged into the central pen where there was already too many people. The police failed by not closing the central pen and directing the pressure towards the sides where there was space.

The police also failed by not managing people flow on approaching the stadium.

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:30

Nix said:
People wanted to see a game and were trying to get into the ground before kick off. That was the motivation and reason why there was momentum towards the ground.

The police also failed by not managing people flow on approaching the stadium.

There you go. You've said it yourself twice.

People were trying to get in to somewhere.

The police ALSO failed.

Entirely my point the whole way through, to solely blame the police is wrong.

Ayahuasca · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:31

Dis86 said:
If a motorist drives in to the back of a car when there are traffic flow problems then they're guilty.

And that effectively is what we have here.

This post is so stupid it actually hurt my brain.

I'm actually worried about some peoples brains in this thread.

McGray · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:32

Dis86 said:
People were trying to get in to somewhere.

The police ALSO failed.

Entirely my point the whole way through, to solely blame the police is wrong.

The public can't be held accountable for simply attending a planned event.

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:32

Ayahuasca said:
This post is so stupid it actually hurt my brain.

I'm actually worried about some peoples brains in this thread.

And how's it stupid?

Sorry, should I be jumping on the police hatred bandwagon of appeasement too?

Dis86 · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:33

McGray said:
The public can't be held accountable for simply attending a planned event.

Except they didn't simply attend did they? People actively tried to get in to somewhere that was obviously full.

cheesyboy · 27 Apr 2016 at 16:34

Dis86 said:
Except they didn't simply attend did they? People actively tried to get in to somewhere that was obviously full.

It wasn't full.

Leppings Lane stand didn't, by best official estimates, even hit its overall capacity - i.e. there were fewer supporters in the stand then there were tickets sold for the stand.