Hillsborough Inquest Finds 96 Liverpool Fans Were 'Unlawfully Killed'

[Wymsey]

The 96 who were unlawfully killed and Kenny Dalglish awarded Freedom of Liverpool.

 

A heart-warming touch and respect from a bad tragedy.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-37433343

[stripeyfox]

15 hours ago, Wymeswold fox said:

The 96 who were unlawfully killed and Kenny Dalglish awarded Freedom of Liverpool.

 

A heart-warming touch and respect from a bad tragedy.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-37433343

Nice touch.

 

Dalglish was an absolute rock for the families in the aftermath by all accounts.

 

[ramboacdc]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-40419819

 

manslaughter charges bought against duckenfield and others. Charges include misconduct in public office for the lies after the event.

 

I am so glad the fans had their names cleared and now the families get their day in court. 

 

 

[stripeyfox]

Duckenfield should have been held to account for this decades ago. He is / was guilty of total deriliction of duty. He failed to plan for the event (his job to do so), failed to put in measures to manage the crowd and then when it all went tits up he froze, made an ill thought out reactionary decision (opening the gate without closing the tunnel) and then as people lay dying on the pitch in front of him then told one of the most bare faced lies possible.

 

and still, after all this time, someone I work with is still trotting out the "pissed up, ticketless Liverpool fans" rhetoric....

 

 

 

[stripeyfox]

Former Ch Supt David Duckenfield faces being charged with the manslaughter of 95 people at the Hillsborough disaster.

Mr Duckenfield was the South Yorkshire Police (SYP) match commander at the FA Cup semi-final when 96 Liverpool fans were fatally injured in a crush.

He faces the charge of manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 fans. Former SYP Ch Insp Norman Bettison will be charged over alleged lies in the aftermath.

Four others will also be prosecuted. Victims' relatives have been informed.

Last year, new inquests into the disaster at the Liverpool v Nottingham Forest match in Sheffield concluded the fans had been unlawfully killed.

For legal reasons, Mr Duckenfield cannot be charged over the death of the 96th victim Tony Bland, as he died four years after the disaster, prosecutors said.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) must apply to the High Court to lift an order imposed after he was prosecuted privately in 1999, which must be removed before he can be charged.

The full list of individuals facing charges are:

• Mr Duckenfield faces manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 men, women and children.
• Sir Norman faces four charges of misconduct in a public office relating to alleged lies he told in the aftermath about the culpability of fans
• Graham Mackrell, former Sheffield Wednesday Club Secretary, will be accused of breaching Health and Safety and Safety at Sports Ground legislation
• Peter Metcalf, who was a solicitor acting for SYP, is charged with perverting the course of Justice, relating to changes to witness statements
• Former Ch Supt Donald Denton is accused of perverting the course of justice
• Former Det Ch Insp Alan Foster is charged with perverting the course of justice

No organisation will face corporate charges. No-one from the ambulance service will face charges, CPS chief Sue Hemming revealed earlier.

[kushiro]

The key points from the head of the CPS:

 

Following thorough investigations and careful review of the evidence in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, I have decided that there is sufficient evidence to charge six individuals with criminal offences.

 

I have found that there is sufficient evidence to charge former Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield, who was the Match Commander on the day of the disaster, with the manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 men, women and children. We will allege that David Duckenfield's failures to discharge his personal responsibility were extraordinarily bad and contributed substantially to the deaths of each of those 96 people who so tragically and unnecessarily lost their lives. The offence clearly sets out the basis of those allegations. We are unable to charge the manslaughter of Anthony Bland, the 96th casualty, as he died almost four years later. The law as it applied then provided that no person could be guilty of homicide where the death occurred more than a year and a day later than the date when the injuries were caused. In order to prosecute this matter, the CPS will need to successfully apply to remove the stay imposed by a senior judge (now retired) at the end of the 1999 private prosecution when David Duckenfield was prosecuted for two counts of manslaughter by gross negligence previously. We will be applying to a High Court Judge to lift the stay and order that the case can proceed on a voluntary bill of indictment.

 

Graham Henry Mackrell, who was Sheffield Wednesday Football Club's company secretary and safety officer at the time, is charged with two offences of contravening a term of condition of a safety certificate contrary to the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975 and one offence of failing to take reasonable care for the health and safety of other persons who may have been affected by his acts or omissions at work under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. These offences relate to alleged failures to carry out his duties as required.

 

Peter Metcalf, who was the solicitor acting for the South Yorkshire Police during the Taylor Inquiry and the first inquests, is charged with doing acts with intent to pervert the course of public justice relating to material changes made to witness statements. Mr Metcalf, an experienced solicitor, was instructed by Municipal Mutual Insurance to represent the interests of the force at the Taylor Inquiry and in any civil litigation that might result from the Hillsborough Disaster. He reviewed the accounts provided by the officers and made suggestions for alterations, deletions and amendments which we allege were directly relevant to the Salmon letter issued by the Taylor Inquiry and for which there appears to be no justification.

 

Former Chief Superintendent Donald Denton and former Detective Chief Inspector Alan Foster are similarly charged for their involvement in the same matter. It is alleged that Donald Denton oversaw the process of amending the statements and in doing so, he did acts that had a tendency to pervert the course of public justice and we will say that Alan Foster was central to the process of changing the statements and took action to do so.

 

Former Chief Constable Norman Bettison is charged with four offences of misconduct in public office relating to telling alleged lies about his involvement in the aftermath of Hillsborough and the culpability of fans. Given his role as a senior police officer, we will ask the jury to find that this was misconduct of such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder.

 

The defendants, other than David Duckenfield, will appear at Warrington Magistrates' Court on 9 August 2017.

 

May I remind all concerned that criminal proceedings have now commenced and of the defendants' right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.

 

In relation to six other police officers who were referred as suspects in respect of their conduct in planning for the match or on the day, there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. I have concluded that whilst there is evidence of failure to meet the standards of leadership rightly expected of their respective ranks, there were no acts or omissions capable of amounting to gross negligence manslaughter or 'an abuse of the public's trust' to the required criminal standard for an offence of misconduct in public office. I also considered administration of justice offences against some of these officers. However, the evidence did not establish either a tendency to pervert the course of public justice, nor an intention to pervert the course of public justice to the required criminal standard. Neither did the material considered establish sufficient evidence, as required for the purposes of perjury, that statements were made on oath which the author knew to be false or did not believe to be true.

 

I have decided not to prosecute the company which was the legal entity of Sheffield Wednesday Football Club at the time as it only now exists on paper. There are no directors or others listed who form the company and therefore no-one who can give instructions to answer any criminal charge or enter a plea. Even if the company were to be prosecuted and found guilty in these circumstances, there could be no penalty as it does not have any assets with which to pay a fine.

For legal reasons, we cannot prosecute the South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service and there is insufficient evidence of a criminal offence against the two most senior employees referred for consideration. There is, however, sufficient evidence of a health and safety breach against one junior ambulance employee, although it is 'non causative' which means that it cannot be directly connected to any particular death. As we cannot prosecute the ambulance service or the more senior employees and the offence carries a maximum penalty of a fine, I have decided that it is not in the public interest to prosecute the junior officer after this significant period of time when the likely outcome would be a nominal penalty.

 

Finally, in relation to Operation Resolve, the Football Association (FA) was also considered in relation to the day's events. Its conduct was assessed against the Safety of Sports Grounds Act and the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. While I considered that it was a 'responsible person' for the purposes of the Safety of Sports Grounds Act, there was insufficient evidence to establish that any breach of the safety certificate could be placed within the responsibility of that organisation, and thereby raise a burden on it as a defendant to establish a due diligence. Equally, for the purposes of the Health and Safety at Work Act, the evidence did not establish that, in the conduct of its undertaking, the FA contributed to a material risk to safety. As a result, in each instance, there was not a realistic prospect of a conviction against them. In the particular circumstances, it also followed that there was insufficient evidence against any employee of that organisation under either Act.

 

[Super_horns]

Final bit of justice for those fans who died and their families (hopefully)

[MPH]

A huge step towards justice...

[Wymsey]

Some people will never learn not to be distasteful about the tragedy..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-42555106

[stripeyfox]

On 03/01/2018 at 14:34, Wymeswold fox said:

Some people will never learn not to be distasteful about the tragedy..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-42555106

What a bellend!