Hillsborough document release

[rossyrooney]

Just had a quick scroll down the stewards report; question 22 was interesting:

 

Question: Did you eject any supporters from the ground? give time and brief explanation

 

Answer: No, the police ejected a lot from about 1430 onwards, as crowds climbed over turnstiles in steady flow, the officers couldnt cope with the numbers because they were involved oin searching as well (about 2 officers to each turnstile)

 

He also stated that he saw fans outside drinking from cans then later said he didn't see any pushing outside as he was based behind the turnstiles,selective memory perhaps,or blaming others to deflect any vestige of blame from his steward managment capacities

[Ms Macbeth]

This comes just as steward statements about the bad behaviour of fans are being linked to and discussed.

 

No, it comes after a number of reports complaining about people who seem unable to discuss issues without being confrontational. Moderators and admin (all volunteers) are unable to deal with every report the minute it comes in so the timing was not intentional. However, the request is valid.

 

Thank you.

[Blue Day]

Also remember - the crowds at those turnstiles weren't just queing for the Leppings Lane terrace, they were also queing for the West Upper AND the North Stand.

 

23 turnstiles to deal with 24,000 fans - and it's widely reported even by Taylor that by 1:30 there were very few Liverpool fans inside the ground.

 

PLEASE NOTE - I'm not apportioning blame here, merely stating what those turnstiles and the operators had to cope with in the hour or so leading up to kick off.

 

The late arrivals weren't as evident the year before, as reported in Taylor. Taylor goes on to conclude one of the reasons for this was the fine sunny weather in '89 as opposed to it being 11 degrees cooler in '88. This, he says, led to more fans using locals pubs for a drink in '89 thus causing bigger queues late on.

 

As I've said in an earlier post, that's NO EXCUSE for the total mis management of the situation by SY Police. Delaying the kick off should have been the minimum reaction to the event, as well as closing off the already full central pens as had happened in '88.

[alteredgemed]

So the police were covering up but all other conspiracy theories are wrong.

Time for a few posters on this forum to grow up.

 

RIP the 96

[donkey]

What do the Labourites of the forum have to say about the Council at the time issuing the relevent safety certificate?

 

What safety certificate did they issue?

[Coxy]

Question 22 of that stewards report went as follows(my bold):

 

Question: Did you eject any supporters from the ground? give time and brief explanation

 

Answer: No, the police ejected a lot from about 1430 onwards, as crowds climbed over turnstiles in steady flow, the officers couldnt cope with the numbers because they were involved oin searching as well (about 2 officers to each turnstile)

 

They climbed over to escape the crush outside the ground - the very reason Gate C was opened. There is CCTV evidence of this happening.

[Blue Day]

What safety certificate did they issue?

 

The Council issued a safety certificate to SWFC in 79 (i think). This is what it says it is, a certificate to show the ground is safe.

 

However, after problems in 81 at the semi final and the alterations to the ground this certificate was never ammended. I don't think it had an 'expiry date' as such so I don't think it ran out. But obviously it wasnt up to date so I believe it was discounted as being valid.

[manceryder]

Are the police not supposed to be part of our city, indeed, to set an example as to how an honest person should act with integrity and intelligence ? So hows that work ? Nothing but lies for 23 years from the, "good honest decent folf", or those that represent them.

 

I seem to be answering loads of questions about shame but nothing coming back about what Im asking ? Then Im called a troll, this forum Im afraid, is infested with the same lack of reason and dishonesty that has made it possible for this to fester for 23 years.

 

SHAME!!

 

I really am surprised by the level of stupidity shown by some on this thread, pure ignorance and a refusal to grasp the facts.

 

Grow up, you heap more shame on us all with your statements on here, just stop.

 

 

I suppose our great city is better off without people like me, making it worse.

 

I truly am ashamed.

 

You level of ashamedness is of course a matter for you. I would only point out that as far as the current Police Officers in South Yorkshire Police had nothing to do with the incident and have not, in fact, been "covering it up for 23 years".

 

It is these men and women who will bring the guilty to justice. Assuming of course that in the clear light of day when all the breast beating and moralising is done there are guilty people.

[Cyclecar]

Many posters have mentioned 'crowd behaviour', as I am an occasional match spectator can I ask if there was a noticeable shift in crowd behaviour - at grounds in general - post 15th April 1989? My only experience of such a change was after the Bradford Fire (11th May 1985; 56 died, 265 injured), when I was sitting in the old - wooden - John Street stand at Bramall Lane a week or so later, and someone lit up a cigarette. The response of everyone sitting nearby was instantaneous, they almost tore the cigarette from his mouth! The stand was subsequently demolished, etc.

 

I think there is now a lot less shoving and pushing, indeed the grounds have changed to deter that, etc. Moreover the stewards are usually alert to any problems. Oh how we wish that there had been adequate 'traffic calming' at the entrance to that wretched tunnel.

 

But that's only one item in the catalogue of inadequacies.............

[myriad]

Question 22 of that stewards report went as follows(my bold):

 

Question: Did you eject any supporters from the ground? give time and brief explanation

 

Answer: No, the police ejected a lot from about 1430 onwards, as crowds climbed over turnstiles in steady flow, the officers couldnt cope with the numbers because they were involved oin searching as well (about 2 officers to each turnstile)

 

This is worded ambiguously imo, it could be taken to mean the officers outside couldn't cope with the overall size of the crowd present because there weren't enough of them there.

 

Having read the other stewards statement, it was interesting to see that he ends it with saying that the signs and direction to the side pens was inadequate and he'd already complained about it before.

 

The other weird thing is both statements are dated 2 and 3 weeks after the event. I would've expected people in as important position as they were on the day would've been interviewed much earlier. By the time they gave their statements the Sun's lies had long since been in the open which is something to think on