26-04-2016, 03:54 PM
(This post was last modified: 28-04-2016, 07:55 AM by David Guyatt.)
Hillsborough inquests: Fans unlawfully killed, jury concludes - 1 hour ago - Liverpool - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36138337
Ninety-six football fans who died as a result of a crush in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the inquests have concluded.
The jury found match commander Ch Supt David Duckenfield was "responsible for manslaughter by gross negligence" due to a breach of his duty of care.
Police errors also added to a dangerous situation at the FA Cup semi-final.
After a 27-year campaign by victims' families, the behaviour of Liverpool fans was exonerated.
The jury found they did not contribute to the danger unfolding at the turnstiles at the Leppings Lane end of Sheffield Wednesday's ground on 15 April 1989.
Nine jurors reached unanimous decisions on all but one of the 14 questions at the inquests into Britain's worst sporting disaster.
The coroner Sir John Goldring said he would accept a majority decision about whether the fans were unlawfully killed - seven jurors agreed they were.
Hillsborough Inquests: What you need to know
Read the inquest questionnaires or download them here
1. Basic facts of the disaster: Do you agree with the following statement: "Ninety-six people died as a result of the disaster at the Hillsborough stadium on 15 April 1989 due to crushing in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, following the admission of a large number of supporters to the stadium through exit gates."
Jury's answer: Yes.
2. Police planning for the semi-final match: Was there any error or omission in police planning or preparation which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed on the day of the match?
Jury's answer: Yes
"We feel there were major omissions in the 1989 operational order".
3. Policing of the match and the situation at the turnstiles: Was there any error or omission in policing on the day of the match which caused or contributed to a dangerous situation developing at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The police response to the increasing crowd at Leppings Lane was slow and uncoordinated.
"The road closure and sweep of fans exacerbated the situation. No filter cordons were place in Leppings Lane. No contingency plans were made for the sudden arrival of a large number of fans.
"Attempts to close the perimeter gates were made too late".
4. Policing of the match and the crush on the terrace: Was there any error or omission by commanding officers which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?
Jury's answer: Yes
"Commanding officers should have ordered the closing of the central tunnel".
5. The opening of the gates: When the order was given to open the exit gates at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium was there any error or omission by the commanding officers in the control box which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?
Jury's answer: Yes
"Commanding officers did not inform officers in the inner concourse prior to the opening of Gate C.
"Commanding officers failed to consider where fans would go.
"Commanding officers failed to order the closure of the central tunnel prior to the opening of Gate C".
6. Unlawful killing: Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed? To answer 'yes' to this question, the jurors must be sure of the following:
Firstly, that Ch Supt David Duckenfield owed a duty of care to the 96 who died
Secondly, that he was in breach of that duty of care
Thirdly, that the breach of Mr Duckenfield's duty of care caused the deaths
Finally, the jury must be sure that the breach which caused the deaths amounted to "gross negligence."
Jury's answer: Yes
7. Behaviour of the supporters: Was there any behaviour on the part of the football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
Jury's answer: No
8. Defects in Hillsborough stadium: Were there any features of its design, construction and layout which were dangerous or defective and which probably or may have caused or contributed to the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The design and layout of the crush barriers in P 3 and 4 were not fully compliant with the green guide.
"The removal of barrier 144 and the partial removal of barrier 136 would have exacerbated the waterfall effect of pressure towards the front of the pens.
"The lack of dedicated turnstiles for individual pens meant that capacities could not be monitored.
"There were too few turnstiles for a capacity crowd.
"Signage to the side pens was inadequate".
9. Licensing and oversight of the stadium: Was there any error or omission in the safety certification and oversight of Hillsborough Stadium that caused or contributed to the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The safety certificate was never amended to reflect changes to the Leppings Lane end of the stadium. Therefore capacity figures were not updated".
10. Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC before the day of the match: Was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff in the management of the stadium and/or preparation for the semi final match on 15 April 1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation which developed on the day of the match?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The club did not approve the plans for dedicated turnstiles for each pen.
"The club did not agree any contingency plans with the police.
"There was inadequate signage and inadequate and misleading information on the tickets".
11. Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC on the day of the match: Was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff on 15 April 1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?
Jury's answer: No
11a If "no", was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff on 15 April 1989 which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?
Jury's answer: Yes
"Club officials were aware of a huge number of fans still outside at 14:40. They should have requested a delay in kick off.
12. Conduct of Eastwood and Partners (SWFC engineers): Should they have done more to detect and advise on any unsafe or unsatisfactory features of the stadium which caused or contributed to the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
Eastwood and Partners did not make their own calculations when they became consulstants for SWFC, therefore the initial capacity figures and all subsequent calculations were incorrect.
Eastwood and Partners failed to recalculate capacity figures each time changes were made to the terraces.
Eastwood and Partners failed to update the safety certificate after 1986.
13. Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Police: After the crush in the West Terrace had begun to develop was there any error or omission by the police which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The police delayed declaring a major incident so appropriate emergency response was delayed."
14. Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service (SYMAS): After the crush in the west terrace had begun to develop, was there any error or omission by the ambulance service SYMAS which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"They failed to ascertain the nature of the problem at Leppings Lane.
"The failure to recognise and call a major incident led to delays in responding to the emergency."
Hillsborough cover-up worse than first thought' - Jonathan Brown Friday 12 July 2013 - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cri...06527.html
The scale of the alleged police cover-up over the Hillsborough disaster was even more wide-ranging than originally believed, it emerged today.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission said it had uncovered evidence that a further 55 officers had amended their statements following the stadium crush which left 96 Liverpool FC fans dead.
The new discovery is in addition to 164 altered accounts - 116 of which were changed to make them appear more favourable to the police - identified by the Hillsborough Independent Panel last year and which prompted an official public apology by the Prime Minister to the dead fans, their families and the survivors of Britain's worst sporting tragedy.
Among its shocking disclosures, which included the suggestion that 41 of the victims might have survived if they had received adequate medical care on the day of the crush, the panel found evidence that South Yorkshire Police carried out a systematic cover-up to exonerate senior officers and took part in a smear operation to put the blame on fans for being drunk and violent.
In her latest update into the inquiry into the behaviour of South Yorkshire Police, IPCC deputy chair Deborah Glass said investigators would begin interviewing officers later this month. More than 1,000 officers from 20 different forces are expected to feature in the inquiry.
She said the investigating team had been contacted by members of the public identifying potentially significant individuals. It had received 230 pieces of correspondence of which 50 referred to police statements.
"The IPCC knows the people who have contacted us are the tip of the iceberg. Therefore preparations are ongoing for an appeal for witnesses to the disaster and this is expected to be conducted in the autumn," she said.
As well as reviewing the allegations surrounding amendments to statements made by South Yorkshire Police officers who were on duty at the Sheffield Wednesday ground in 1989, the inquiry will examine the role of West Midlands Police which led the original investigation into the disaster.
The probe into the policing of the Hillsborough disaster is the biggest ever undertaken in the history of the IPCC. The police watchdog expects to recruit up to 100 staff to work on the investigation.
A separate team led by former Durham Chief Constable Jon Stoddart is investigating a range of organisations involved in the preparation for the event and what happened on the day.
Fresh inquests into the deaths of the 96 victims are set to begin by March 31 next year in the north west of England. Verdicts of accidental death from the original inquest in March 1991 were quashed last year.
The IPPC said a further two sets of documents not seen by the Hillsborough panel had been located at West Midlands Police headquarters. The force is now carrying out a further trawl of its archives to ensure there are no other records which have yet to come to light. It also emerged that the Home Office had identified a number of other organisations which did not contribute documents to the independent panel and investigators are now seeking to confirm whether they are relevant to the inquiries.
Ninety-six football fans who died as a result of a crush in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the inquests have concluded.
The jury found match commander Ch Supt David Duckenfield was "responsible for manslaughter by gross negligence" due to a breach of his duty of care.
Police errors also added to a dangerous situation at the FA Cup semi-final.
After a 27-year campaign by victims' families, the behaviour of Liverpool fans was exonerated.
The jury found they did not contribute to the danger unfolding at the turnstiles at the Leppings Lane end of Sheffield Wednesday's ground on 15 April 1989.
Nine jurors reached unanimous decisions on all but one of the 14 questions at the inquests into Britain's worst sporting disaster.
The coroner Sir John Goldring said he would accept a majority decision about whether the fans were unlawfully killed - seven jurors agreed they were.
Hillsborough Inquests: What you need to know
Read the inquest questionnaires or download them here
1. Basic facts of the disaster: Do you agree with the following statement: "Ninety-six people died as a result of the disaster at the Hillsborough stadium on 15 April 1989 due to crushing in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, following the admission of a large number of supporters to the stadium through exit gates."
Jury's answer: Yes.
2. Police planning for the semi-final match: Was there any error or omission in police planning or preparation which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed on the day of the match?
Jury's answer: Yes
"We feel there were major omissions in the 1989 operational order".
3. Policing of the match and the situation at the turnstiles: Was there any error or omission in policing on the day of the match which caused or contributed to a dangerous situation developing at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The police response to the increasing crowd at Leppings Lane was slow and uncoordinated.
"The road closure and sweep of fans exacerbated the situation. No filter cordons were place in Leppings Lane. No contingency plans were made for the sudden arrival of a large number of fans.
"Attempts to close the perimeter gates were made too late".
4. Policing of the match and the crush on the terrace: Was there any error or omission by commanding officers which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?
Jury's answer: Yes
"Commanding officers should have ordered the closing of the central tunnel".
5. The opening of the gates: When the order was given to open the exit gates at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium was there any error or omission by the commanding officers in the control box which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?
Jury's answer: Yes
"Commanding officers did not inform officers in the inner concourse prior to the opening of Gate C.
"Commanding officers failed to consider where fans would go.
"Commanding officers failed to order the closure of the central tunnel prior to the opening of Gate C".
6. Unlawful killing: Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed? To answer 'yes' to this question, the jurors must be sure of the following:
Firstly, that Ch Supt David Duckenfield owed a duty of care to the 96 who died
Secondly, that he was in breach of that duty of care
Thirdly, that the breach of Mr Duckenfield's duty of care caused the deaths
Finally, the jury must be sure that the breach which caused the deaths amounted to "gross negligence."
Jury's answer: Yes
7. Behaviour of the supporters: Was there any behaviour on the part of the football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
Jury's answer: No
8. Defects in Hillsborough stadium: Were there any features of its design, construction and layout which were dangerous or defective and which probably or may have caused or contributed to the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The design and layout of the crush barriers in P 3 and 4 were not fully compliant with the green guide.
"The removal of barrier 144 and the partial removal of barrier 136 would have exacerbated the waterfall effect of pressure towards the front of the pens.
"The lack of dedicated turnstiles for individual pens meant that capacities could not be monitored.
"There were too few turnstiles for a capacity crowd.
"Signage to the side pens was inadequate".
9. Licensing and oversight of the stadium: Was there any error or omission in the safety certification and oversight of Hillsborough Stadium that caused or contributed to the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The safety certificate was never amended to reflect changes to the Leppings Lane end of the stadium. Therefore capacity figures were not updated".
10. Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC before the day of the match: Was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff in the management of the stadium and/or preparation for the semi final match on 15 April 1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation which developed on the day of the match?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The club did not approve the plans for dedicated turnstiles for each pen.
"The club did not agree any contingency plans with the police.
"There was inadequate signage and inadequate and misleading information on the tickets".
11. Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC on the day of the match: Was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff on 15 April 1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?
Jury's answer: No
11a If "no", was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff on 15 April 1989 which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?
Jury's answer: Yes
"Club officials were aware of a huge number of fans still outside at 14:40. They should have requested a delay in kick off.
12. Conduct of Eastwood and Partners (SWFC engineers): Should they have done more to detect and advise on any unsafe or unsatisfactory features of the stadium which caused or contributed to the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
Eastwood and Partners did not make their own calculations when they became consulstants for SWFC, therefore the initial capacity figures and all subsequent calculations were incorrect.
Eastwood and Partners failed to recalculate capacity figures each time changes were made to the terraces.
Eastwood and Partners failed to update the safety certificate after 1986.
13. Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Police: After the crush in the West Terrace had begun to develop was there any error or omission by the police which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"The police delayed declaring a major incident so appropriate emergency response was delayed."
14. Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service (SYMAS): After the crush in the west terrace had begun to develop, was there any error or omission by the ambulance service SYMAS which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?
Jury's answer: Yes
"They failed to ascertain the nature of the problem at Leppings Lane.
"The failure to recognise and call a major incident led to delays in responding to the emergency."
Hillsborough cover-up worse than first thought' - Jonathan Brown Friday 12 July 2013 - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cri...06527.html
The scale of the alleged police cover-up over the Hillsborough disaster was even more wide-ranging than originally believed, it emerged today.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission said it had uncovered evidence that a further 55 officers had amended their statements following the stadium crush which left 96 Liverpool FC fans dead.
The new discovery is in addition to 164 altered accounts - 116 of which were changed to make them appear more favourable to the police - identified by the Hillsborough Independent Panel last year and which prompted an official public apology by the Prime Minister to the dead fans, their families and the survivors of Britain's worst sporting tragedy.
Among its shocking disclosures, which included the suggestion that 41 of the victims might have survived if they had received adequate medical care on the day of the crush, the panel found evidence that South Yorkshire Police carried out a systematic cover-up to exonerate senior officers and took part in a smear operation to put the blame on fans for being drunk and violent.
In her latest update into the inquiry into the behaviour of South Yorkshire Police, IPCC deputy chair Deborah Glass said investigators would begin interviewing officers later this month. More than 1,000 officers from 20 different forces are expected to feature in the inquiry.
She said the investigating team had been contacted by members of the public identifying potentially significant individuals. It had received 230 pieces of correspondence of which 50 referred to police statements.
"The IPCC knows the people who have contacted us are the tip of the iceberg. Therefore preparations are ongoing for an appeal for witnesses to the disaster and this is expected to be conducted in the autumn," she said.
As well as reviewing the allegations surrounding amendments to statements made by South Yorkshire Police officers who were on duty at the Sheffield Wednesday ground in 1989, the inquiry will examine the role of West Midlands Police which led the original investigation into the disaster.
The probe into the policing of the Hillsborough disaster is the biggest ever undertaken in the history of the IPCC. The police watchdog expects to recruit up to 100 staff to work on the investigation.
A separate team led by former Durham Chief Constable Jon Stoddart is investigating a range of organisations involved in the preparation for the event and what happened on the day.
Fresh inquests into the deaths of the 96 victims are set to begin by March 31 next year in the north west of England. Verdicts of accidental death from the original inquest in March 1991 were quashed last year.
The IPPC said a further two sets of documents not seen by the Hillsborough panel had been located at West Midlands Police headquarters. The force is now carrying out a further trawl of its archives to ensure there are no other records which have yet to come to light. It also emerged that the Home Office had identified a number of other organisations which did not contribute documents to the independent panel and investigators are now seeking to confirm whether they are relevant to the inquiries.
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."