Jump to content

Hillsborough Trial


SaintRam

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

This probably won’t be a popular view but here we go......

Just how many Liverpool supporters, whom knowingly attended the match without a ticket and with absolutely no intention of buying a ticket subsequently rushed their way in on that dreadful day. 

I think the whole thing has been handled inexcusably, but unfortunately the innocent Liverpool supporters perished due to the actions of fellow Liverpool Fans, The Police and all the other listed services expected to be on service at such events. 

I have witnessed it with my own eyes how Liverpool fans always and I mean always used to wait until 10mins before kick off and then surge at the gates at the BBG. They would do this every time without fail and gain entry free of charge. 

It truly was tragic what happened but the question has never really been addressed as to how many fans were there without tickets, hundreds if not thousands. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ted McMinn Football Genius said:

This probably won’t be a popular view but here we go......

Just how many Liverpool supporters, whom knowingly attended the match without a ticket and with absolutely no intention of buying a ticket subsequently rushed their way in on that dreadful day. 

I think the whole thing has been handled inexcusably, but unfortunately the innocent Liverpool supporters perished due to the actions of fellow Liverpool Fans, The Police and all the other listed services expected to be on service at such events. 

I have witnessed it with my own eyes how Liverpool fans always and I mean always used to wait until 10mins before kick off and then surge at the gates at the BBG. They would do this every time without fail and gain entry free of charge. 

It truly was tragic what happened but the question has never really been addressed as to how many fans were there without tickets, hundreds if not thousands. 

It had been proved beyond doubt that the Liverpool fans were not responsible. It’s not a matter of being unpopular- it’s just wrong in the eyes of the Law, and more importantly, eye witnesses.

As regards rushing the turnstiles at the Baseball Ground, Man Utd had it down to a fine art and their fans used to brag about it openly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said:

It had been proved beyond doubt that the Liverpool fans were not responsible. It’s not a matter of being unpopular- it’s just wrong in the eyes of the Law, and more importantly, eye witnesses.

As regards rushing the turnstiles at the Baseball Ground, Man Utd had it down to a fine art and their fans used to brag about it openly.

Yep it was a thing back then. United fans, Liverpool fans, a lot of clubs fans used to do it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ted McMinn Football Genius said:

I have witnessed it with my own eyes how Liverpool fans always and I mean always used to wait until 10mins before kick off and then surge at the gates at the BBG. They would do this every time without fail and gain entry free of charge. 

Derby fans use to do it at home, in the popside, when it was big games.  I experianced it once, and from that day, decided to pay more for a seat.

Football fans, back then, where treated like animals by society, and the police.  Treat people in a certain way, they will react in a pack like mentality.

Certain grounds, especially Hillsborough, had little regard for 'fans'.  Many grounds where death traps, and even if thye failed the safety inspection, they still operated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

Derby fans use to do it at home, in the popside, when it was big games.  I experianced it once, and from that day, decided to pay more for a seat.

Football fans, back then, where treated like animals by society, and the police.  Treat people in a certain way, they will react in a pack like mentality.

Certain grounds, especially Hillsborough, had little regard for 'fans'.  Many grounds where death traps, and even if thye failed the safety inspection, they still operated.

Agreed, but for this police chief to carry the can seems more like a witch hunt! He can’t be held solely responsible (as it appears to be happening that way). 

He hasn’t been whiter than white in this awful incident where so many have lost their loved ones & should’ve offered up the information earlier, but I don’t believe it is a single fault it is multi faceted. 

We were all treated like cattle back in the day with very little or no regard whatsoever at times. 

With regards to the whole catastrophe at Hillsborough many factors haven’t been reported honestly and lies have been and are still being spewed out even now. 

We will never get to the truth and that’s my opinion on this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/07/2018 at 07:58, Ted McMinn Football Genius said:

Agreed, but for this police chief to carry the can seems more like a witch hunt! He can’t be held solely responsible (as it appears to be happening that way). 

He hasn’t been whiter than white in this awful incident where so many have lost their loved ones & should’ve offered up the information earlier, but I don’t believe it is a single fault it is multi faceted. 

We were all treated like cattle back in the day with very little or no regard whatsoever at times. 

With regards to the whole catastrophe at Hillsborough many factors haven’t been reported honestly and lies have been and are still being spewed out even now. 

We will never get to the truth and that’s my opinion on this. 

At the end of it all, he's the man with the most responsibility. Under his watch (possibly even literally) statements were changed, details hidden, and his decisions, both on the day, and afterwards, were some of the biggest contributing factors.

You're right, it was multi-faceted. But he's not carrying the can at all. He is one of six:

Quote

Six people have been charged with offences over the Hillsborough Disaster, it has been announced. They include David Duckenfield, who was the Match Commander for South Yorkshire Police on the day of the disaster; Graham Henry Mackrell, who was Sheffield Wednesday Football Club’s company secretary and safety officer at the time of the disaster in 1989; Peter Metcalf, the solicitor acting for the South Yorkshire Police during the Taylor Inquiry and the first inquests; Former Chief Superintendent Donald Denton of South Yorkshire Police; Former Detective Chief Inspector Alan Foster of South Yorkshire Police and Norman Bettison, a former officer with South Yorkshire Police and subsequently Chief Constable of Merseyside and West Yorkshire Police. The decisions come after 23 suspects were recommended for consideration by CPS lawyers from two criminal probes into the tragedy and its aftermath.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/hillsborough-charging-decisions-announced-updates-13249366

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/07/2018 at 20:04, uttoxram75 said:

It had been proved beyond doubt that the Liverpool fans were not responsible. It’s not a matter of being unpopular- it’s just wrong in the eyes of the Law, and more importantly, eye witnesses.

As regards rushing the turnstiles at the Baseball Ground, Man Utd had it down to a fine art and their fans used to brag about it openly.

Michael Jackson and OJ were both found not guilty in the eyes of the law...the Birmingham 6 were found guilty and locked up..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blame is not a pie to be shared out. It is not a finite figure.

Partial responsibility for one group or figure does not reduce the level of responsibility of another.

How much blame the Liverpool supporters should or should not face is entirely irrelevant. 

The unsafe ground was full, and David Duckerfield made the call to open the exit gate. That was the cause of the crush.

Folks trying to get in the full stadium would have simply failed to do so had the exit gate not been opened. No crush.

If there were folks inside the stadium without tickets, then their numbers would simply have replaced those with a ticket in the crowd outside. Doesn't change anything. Not the cause. 

A contributory factor, sure, but there were people who's jobs were to be responsible for avoiding exactly this scenario. They failed. Their blame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

Blame is not a pie to be shared out. It is not a finite figure.

Partial responsibility for one group or figure does not reduce the level of responsibility of another.

How much blame the Liverpool supporters should or should not face is entirely irrelevant. 

The unsafe ground was full, and David Duckerfield made the call to open the exit gate. That was the cause of the crush.

Folks trying to get in the full stadium would have simply failed to do so had the exit gate not been opened. No crush.

If there were folks inside the stadium without tickets, then their numbers would simply have replaced those with a ticket in the crowd outside. Doesn't change anything. Not the cause. 

A contributory factor, sure, but there were people who's jobs were to be responsible for avoiding exactly this scenario. They failed. Their blame. 

Saw one of those in-depth documentaries about this whole event. Some really interesting footage.

- the ground wasn’t full. There were 3 terrace pens at the leppings lane end. The side 2 had plenty of room but the overcrowding and tragedy occurred in the middle.

- ticketing didn’t allocate you to a pen - so the majority wanted to go to the middle to be behind the goal.

- the signage at the ground was hopeless with a ruddy great notice that is straight in front of the turnstiles directing people down the centre tunnel to the middle and small obscure signs indicating the way to the sides.

- the tunnel was only opened to try to prevent a dangerous crush on the concourse between the turnstiles and the entrances to the terraces.

- and that crush was created by opening more turnstiles to prevent a dangerous crush developing outside the ground

 

the commander was completely unfit to take charge. The met - who are used to Wembley crowd management would have set up lines of horses and officers to effectively chunk up the arriving crowd into more manageable cohorts. South Yorkshire seemed to have one bloke on a horse with a megaphone outside the ground and he almost fell into the crowd and panicked.

awful - but there has never been any evidence of fans being there who did not have tickets. None.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HantsRam said:

 

I deleted the text just to save people scrolling.

Thanks for that HantsRam, genuinely unaware. Appreciate the knowledge. 

Gives one additional appreciation for just how bad the whole cover up, and the earlier accusations, were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

Blame is not a pie to be shared out. It is not a finite figure.

Partial responsibility for one group or figure does not reduce the level of responsibility of another.

How much blame the Liverpool supporters should or should not face is entirely irrelevant. 

The unsafe ground was full, and David Duckerfield made the call to open the exit gate. That was the cause of the crush.

Folks trying to get in the full stadium would have simply failed to do so had the exit gate not been opened. No crush.

If there were folks inside the stadium without tickets, then their numbers would simply have replaced those with a ticket in the crowd outside. Doesn't change anything. Not the cause. 

A contributory factor, sure, but there were people who's jobs were to be responsible for avoiding exactly this scenario. They failed. Their blame. 

I thought the reason they opened the gates was that they thought there would be a crush outside? (due to a large number of ticketless Liverpool fans turning up late) and if he was convinced that such a crush might have caused loss of life, you could understand his reasoning for opening the gates - it's only with hindsight that people have understood the error of the decision. If he had kept the gates locked and people had been killed when crushed against the turnstiles, people would have questioned why he didn't open the gates - you could argue that the bloke was between a rock and a hard place and was going to be in the wrong whatever he decided....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gaspode said:

I thought the reason they opened the gates was that they thought there would be a crush outside? (due to a large number of ticketless Liverpool fans turning up late) and if he was convinced that such a crush might have caused loss of life, you could understand his reasoning for opening the gates - it's only with hindsight that people have understood the error of the decision. If he had kept the gates locked and people had been killed when crushed against the turnstiles, people would have questioned why he didn't open the gates - you could argue that the bloke was between a rock and a hard place and was going to be in the wrong whatever he decided....

I direct you to HantsRam's response and bow out to more knowledgeable folk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gaspode said:

I thought the reason they opened the gates was that they thought there would be a crush outside? (due to a large number of ticketless Liverpool fans turning up late) and if he was convinced that such a crush might have caused loss of life, you could understand his reasoning for opening the gates - it's only with hindsight that people have understood the error of the decision. If he had kept the gates locked and people had been killed when crushed against the turnstiles, people would have questioned why he didn't open the gates - you could argue that the bloke was between a rock and a hard place and was going to be in the wrong whatever he decided....

The penalty cannot and must not be focused on the tragedy of people losing their lives, in my opinion. Dukinfield was ultimately responsible for the events that day as he was the man in charge. The unforgiveable part is the cover up, and the tragedy was how Dukinfield was able to take a responsibility beyond his capability. 

The events were tragic but tragic accidents happen. The question should be how did events get to that state and what should have happened differently. And why did it take such a prolonged effort to uncover the truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

I direct you to HantsRam's response and bow out to more knowledgeable folk. 

I was just responding to your suggestion that there was no reason to open the gates - as for no evidence of ticketless fans, Liverpool, Man Utd, etc ALWAYS had ticketlesss fans turning up at away games when there was terracing - they knew that they would normally be let in rather than be left to roam the streets or visit the local pubs - though the chances of a single fan admitting they were there without a ticket after seeing the tragedy unfold is pretty remote...so how do you prove they were or weren't there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

The penalty cannot and must not be focused on the tragedy of people losing their lives, in my opinion. Dukinfield was ultimately responsible for the events that day as he was the man in charge. The unforgiveable part is the cover up, and the tragedy was how Dukinfield was able to take a responsibility beyond his capability. 

The events were tragic but tragic accidents happen. The question should be how did events get to that state and what should have happened differently. And why did it take such a prolonged effort to uncover the truth. 

Agree regarding Dukinfield being ultimately responsible for what happened which is why he's standing trial for manslaughter - but I wonder what I would have done in his position - and it's not as clear cut as saying he was wrong to open the gates.

The coverup is the real issue because it's stopped the relatives getting closure for far too long - the people who decided to hide the truth need to be locked up for a long, long time....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

The penalty cannot and must not be focused on the tragedy of people losing their lives, in my opinion. Dukinfield was ultimately responsible for the events that day as he was the man in charge. The unforgiveable part is the cover up, and the tragedy was how Dukinfield was able to take a responsibility beyond his capability. 

The events were tragic but tragic accidents happen. The question should be how did events get to that state and what should have happened differently. And why did it take such a prolonged effort to uncover the truth. 

Exactly, I dont blame him for the decision to open the gates, heck I would have panicked and done the same if I was in his position at the time. The cover up is absolutely unacceptable and the pain the victims families had to go through - a price needs to be paid for that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dcfcfan1 said:

Exactly, I dont blame him for the decision to open the gates, heck I would have panicked and done the same if I was in his position at the time. The cover up is absolutely unacceptable and the pain the victims families had to go through - a price needs to be paid for that

I would like to think the man in charge would not panic under pressure. That's what you need in the job - someone who will make good decisions under pressure. He seems not to fit that job description - so how was he ever in the role if that's the case? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole event is full of people taking blame where they shouldn't have to and people not taking any responsibility for their actions at all.

I hear all this "justice" talk, but does anyone actually want "justice" or do they just want a big pay out..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...