Hillsborough document release

[mikem8634]

This Monday afternoon - 22/20/12 there is to be a Hillsborough debate in the House of Commons

 

http://services.parliament.uk/calendar/#!/calendar/Commons/MainChamber/2012/10/22/events.html

 

If anyone is interested here is a link to the Home Affairs Committee questioning David Crompton, Chief Constable, South Yorkshire Police about SYP's response to the Hillsborough Independent Panel Report and the IPCC investigation.

 

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=11516

 

*Note - there is also time devoted to the recent child protection scandal in Rotherham.

[Darth Vader]

This Monday afternoon - 22/20/12 there is to be a Hillsborough debate in the House of Commons

 

http://services.parliament.uk/calendar/#!/calendar/Commons/MainChamber/2012/10/22/events.html

 

If anyone is interested here is a link to the Home Affairs Committee questioning David Crompton, Chief Constable, South Yorkshire Police about SYP's response to the Hillsborough Independent Panel Report and the IPCC investigation.

 

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=11516

 

*Note - there is also time devoted to the recent child protection scandal in Rotherham.

 

Thanks for that.

[NERVY-OWL]

You make some worthwhile points and some of your approach is reasonable but still fall into denigrating Liverpool fans without evidence or reason. If I consistently told everyone that you dressed as Genghis Khan every night and ran about the fields eating foxes you would, quite rightly, expect me to prove it or shut up.

 

Firstly, of course they played a part in decisions made, they were there and needed managing as every crowd does at every football match. If you have a reason for singling them out with comments like this please provide evidence.

 

Secondly, the introduction of fences to football stadia was a reaction to hooliganism and violence from many many clubs. Why single out Liverpool fans? It is precisely this kind of attitude that led the senior management of SYP to preoccupy themselves with hooligans and the suppression of violence and not realise they were dealing with a disaster and tragedy until it was far too late. (I've got a sneaky feeling I can see where somebody may take this next).

 

I cannot believe I am still having to say this after 23 years. As I posted above - PS I'm not denying that in any Liverpool crowd, massive as it is, there will be SOME unruly fans. That is the case with every crowd. It is just that it is not a significant factor in what happened that day and that can be backed up with evidence. My point, as ever, is if you (as in everyone) have a doubt or a question you might find what you need by reading the report http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/

 

Firstly I admitted the fans behavior may not of been any worse than other semi final games, the pictures and videos I seem to remember though around the gate seemed pretty bad, maybe I'm remembering wrong though.

Secondly I never said it was only Liverpool fans involved in hooliganism, as today it was more than 1 set of fans involved. All I meant was they seem to have a bad reputation from that era of hooliganism, if I'm wrong then I apologise but I was under the impression they were pretty bad.

As I said before the blaming of organisations, fans etc should stop now. I do hope the peoplee involved in cover ups are charged with anything they can be, I'm ashamed the police force that is supposed to protect us is capable of such a cover up

[mikem8634]

Firstly I admitted the fans behavior may not of been any worse than other semi final games, the pictures and videos I seem to remember though around the gate seemed pretty bad, maybe I'm remembering wrong though.

Secondly I never said it was only Liverpool fans involved in hooliganism, as today it was more than 1 set of fans involved. All I meant was they seem to have a bad reputation from that era of hooliganism, if I'm wrong then I apologise but I was under the impression they were pretty bad.

As I said before the blaming of organisations, fans etc should stop now. I do hope the peoplee involved in cover ups are charged with anything they can be, I'm ashamed the police force that is supposed to protect us is capable of such a cover up

 

Have you ever questioned why you believe those things in bold? I imagine many did/do because of Heysel (*see below). I don't for a second consider there is any malice whatsoever in your posts Nervy-Owl and thanks for getting back to me. I get the impression that you are genuinely saddened and shocked by some of the revelations. My only point is that for 23 years the Liverpool fans have been much maligned to the point that it still happens without people even realising it. If you look at the points I make below regarding your previous post I hope it shows that in some of the language choices you made (probably unintentional) criticism of those fans seeps through. I know to some my points will seem pedantic and over zealous but when you are challenging an all-pervasive lie that has persisted for 23 years and is only just starting to be broken down you have to be vigilant.

 

in regards to the fans behaviour i still believe they played a part in certain decisions being made that day but it's debatable if the behaviour was any worse than any other semi final game so the authorities should shoulder the majority of the blame.

 

Who should shoulder the rest? Please bear in mind post 894.

 

if one good thing did come out of the disaster it was the removal of those fences which were only put up due to hooliganism at the time, which as far as i'm aware liverpool fans played a large part in those days.

 

'Fencing had been put up by many football clubs during the 1970s and 80s to control crowds and prevent pitch invasions.' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19545126 Liverpool fans played a part in this, as did many other clubs' hooligan elements. If you claim a large part that implies worse than most and should be backed with evidence. (*Just in case anyone (not directed at you Nervy-Owl) decides that Heysel is evidence of this it should be noted that the fences went up many years before in response to domestic hooliganism. For the record Heysel was shameful and I won't defend the indefensible but it is an entirely separate issue to Hillsborough)

 

in the end it was a tragic accident

One of the things that the families have found most difficult to cope with is the coroner's verdict of 'accidental death'. Indeed, many have refused to collect their loved one's death certificates until this verdict is corrected. The attorney General has requested fresh inquests take place to have this gross injustice rectified. See post 949

 

Sorry if it seems like I'm going on but there are so many fans who survived that day whose lives have never been the same. Yes there were a handful of idiots I'm sure but it's time they stopped dominating the debate.

 

Thanks for listening.

[NERVY-OWL]

Sorry, I certainly didn't mean any of my post to be malicious, sometimes hard to get the point across online. It's a topic that will always split opinions and something the families will probably never accept. I have my views on that day and as I was only born in 82 my views on Liverpool fans role in hooliganism are only what I read and hear so if I'm wrong I apologise.

[mikem8634]

Sorry, I certainly didn't mean any of my post to be malicious, sometimes hard to get the point across online. It's a topic that will always split opinions and something the families will probably never accept. I have my views on that day and as I was only born in 82 my views on Liverpool fans role in hooliganism are only what I read and hear so if I'm wrong I apologise.

 

You're a star - thank you that means a lot

[Jim Hardie]

Every post of yours that I've read on this topic is based on hypothesis, assumption and speculation and never on facts. None of the things I've highlighted actually happened - milling around is hardly being unruly - and if they had that would still not be a reason to open the gate, but rather a reason for the police outside the ground to restore order. But there were hardly any police outside the ground due to a failure of policing.

 

You are arguing that the gates were opened because there was the possibility that the queue outside could collapse into anarchy. But you provide no evidence, as usual. Could you provide evidence when you post on this topic rather than some nebulous theory containing more ifs and bad guesswork than substantiated reality. Otherwise I will hypothesise, assume and speculate that you are just making things up as you go along due to a hidden agenda to protect the authorities, particularly the police,

 

For the record, David Cameron has apologised for the scandal, a scandal in which a Tory MP was central and the Tories are hardly anti-police. There will be criminal investigations. If you think you can change the course of what's going to happen by posting lies on here then you're in for a big disappointment. Maybe you can have an input into the invesitigations to come as you seem to know so much about what happened. But of course you know nothing but the lies and warped fantasies in your head.

 

Milling around as opposed to forming orderly queues constitutes unruly behaviour in my book.

I never said the exit gate was opened 'because there was a possibility that the queue outside could collapse into anarchy'. It had already collapsed into anarchy. What do you suppose caused this?

Where are the lies you accuse me of posting?

If you think I have a 'hidden agenda to protect the authorities' then it's your own head wherein the warped fantasies lie.

[Hots on]

Milling around as opposed to forming orderly queues constitutes unruly behaviour in my book.

I never said the exit gate was opened 'because there was a possibility that the queue outside could collapse into anarchy'. It had already collapsed into anarchy. What do you suppose caused this?

Where are the lies you accuse me of posting?

If you think I have a 'hidden agenda to protect the authorities' then it's your own head wherein the warped fantasies lie.

 

That gate was probably opened because Duckenfield ,whatever his name is, didn't want all those fans, most of whom had had one over the eight in the Park Hotel and the White Horse, causing mayhem in the streets around the ground.

[*_ash_*]

You seem to ask a lot of questions and present a lot of hypothetical scenarios that make reference to 'unruly' fan behaviour and 'prisoners'.

And you seem to presume a lot based on making conclusions by misquoting as you did, and I highlighted in post #936

 

Where are your questions and concerns about the behaviour of the police, the press, the ambulance service etc.? You say it's possible to look at all the positions but I only see you looking one way.

 

I answered these earlier in the thread.

 

I also asked you (and I have asked before, but no one dare answer, so it's not a personal criticism) with the decision to open the gate c. Even with 23 years hindsight, no one can answer that.

 

You even said that the photos 'appeared to show' unruly behaviour, yet failed to answer my point that at the time perhaps the authorities did. They didn't have time to analyse like we do.

 

 

23 years of the most vile cover-up in UK history and you think 'how many people were detained and whether it was more or less than usual?' If you cannot see how that is a clear suggestion that bad behaviour limited the abilities of the police then I cannot help you. How is that different from Bettison's widely abhorred and discredited statement that Liverpool fans made policing on that day 'harder than it needed to be.'? I think, as most do, that after 23 years of smear the focus should be less on who was and more on who will be detained.

 

I'm not 'smearing' anything. I'm quite capable of thinking for myself.

 

I am criticizing you not for reading the evidence but for filtering it through a bias which I will be surprised if I am the only one to recognise.

 

I noticed though that you don't argue with the posters (and in fact agree with posters) who claim: 'At last we see where the blame lays fair and square, on the grubby, dishonest police sneaking about taking blood from dead children and lying about it.'

 

If I'm biased then you are doing no less. No one has commented on that actions of the Hull fans either. I'm looking for evidence that The Police [as a whole] are murderers.

 

 

Ash - I can't imagine you haven't seen this given your dogged attention to the evidence. I can imagine that it doesn't fit in the elements of the evidence you find the most interesting and worthy of attention.

 

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statement

 

In response to Norman Bettison’s claim that Liverpool fans made policing Hillsborough ‘more difficult than it needed to be’

 

60. In relation to the complaints about his statement on 13 September 2012, I have read his statement, and his “updated comment” issued the following day. It does not seem to me that this is a matter requiring investigation – there is no doubt that he made the first statement, which many people regarded as highly offensive, and which flew in the face of the report’s definitive findings, and that he attempted to explain it with his second statement.

 

61. It was unwise of Sir Norman Bettison to issue a press statement attempting to exonerate himself immediately after publication of the report. It was also insensitive and inappropriate to make reference to fans’ behaviour at all – bearing in mind that publication of the report represented a vindication for the fans that their behaviour was not a factor.

 

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/Pages/pr_121012.aspx

 

 

Please explain how Bettison's statement

 

that Liverpool fans made policing Hillsborough ‘more difficult than it needed to be’

 

differs from the following scenario you have presented -

 

 

 

 

 

They both arrive at the same insensitive, inappropriate and unwise place.

 

So I'm insensitive, inappropriate and unwise then?

 

I'm often guilty of the first, but I've never called the fans who were alive grubby and dishonest or murderers - even if I had blamed them 100%. You accept inappropriate posts, and dismiss ones that are logical ones. That is unwise.

[mikem8634]

And you seem to presume a lot based on making conclusions by misquoting as you did, and I highlighted in post #936

 

 

 

I answered these earlier in the thread.

 

I also asked you (and I have asked before, but no one dare answer, so it's not a personal criticism) with the decision to open the gate c. Even with 23 years hindsight, no one can answer that.

 

You even said that the photos 'appeared to show' unruly behaviour, yet failed to answer my point that at the time perhaps the authorities did. They didn't have time to analyse like we do.

 

 

 

 

I'm not 'smearing' anything. I'm quite capable of thinking for myself.

 

 

 

I noticed though that you don't argue with the posters (and in fact agree with posters) who claim: 'At last we see where the blame lays fair and square, on the grubby, dishonest police sneaking about taking blood from dead children and lying about it.'

 

If I'm biased then you are doing no less. No one has commented on that actions of the Hull fans either. I'm looking for evidence that The Police [as a whole] are murderers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So I'm insensitive, inappropriate and unwise then?

 

I'm often guilty of the first, but I've never called the fans who were alive grubby and dishonest or murderers - even if I had blamed them 100%. You accept inappropriate posts, and dismiss ones that are logical ones. That is unwise.

 

 

Ok - let's just agree to differ - fair enough? It has been pointed out to me that I may well have misjudged you and if that is the case I apologise.

 

I am the first to admit I have an agenda - to do what I can to end the culture of blame that still hangs over the Liverpool fans - just look at 957 and 958 for proof. If I see an allegation, accusation or perceive any negative spin (on behaviour that has been proven to have been utterly inconsequential in the events that followed) I ask for evidence to back it up. If that evidence is presented (and, to your credit, you are the only one who has actually given me some evidence to consider) I review it. Whatever that evidence proves I will accept. I may have an agenda but I am not blinkered.

 

So, hopefully, you may understand a little more about where I am coming from. I think I now understand you a little better and was I probably over zealous in attaching meanings to or reading things into your posts.

 

'I noticed though that you don't argue with the posters (and in fact agree with posters) who claim: 'At last we see where the blame lays fair and square, on the grubby, dishonest police sneaking about taking blood from dead children and lying about it.'[/i'] That is unfair and untrue as I've never even seen that statement before and have no idea who made it. To be fair I have made several posts supporting aspects of the 'on the ground' policing (see 912 and 922 - there were more but they were culled and pruned in parts of the discussion that descended into a mess). I'm not sure what inappropriate posts you think I accept. I suppose the reason I haven't challenged negative statements about the police is that I only have so much time and they have, and have had for the last 23 years, a very powerful voice all of their own. To be honest I'm not sure they need me to defend them.

 

I will state for the record - SYP did not murder anyone at Hillsborough and nobody has the right to level such a baseless allegation - many of the officers 'on the ground' performed heroically and have had their lives destroyed by this event just as much as many Liverpool fans (the bereaved, however, have experienced a unique hell) - the evidence does not look good for the senior management and I support full accountability at that level which will probably include manslaughter charges. I hope that is clear, unequivocal and considered reasonable.

 

Perhaps we could start with a clean slate?

Edited October 18, 2012 by mikem8634