Hillsborough Inquest

[Red 4]

La Liga said:

have no dispute with any of the conclusions or evidence from the inquest. It's the politics, with-hunting and opportunism beyond the inquest I object to. Whether that be people talking about cultures when they're in no position to, or suspending Chief Constables for no rational reason.

OK, let's look at why David Crompton has been suspended;

In 2012 he accepted the findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel.
This inquiry concluded that the Liverpool fans neither caused or contributed to the deaths of the 96.
It also said that a contrived, manipulated, spiteful and vengeful attempt to divert the blame onto the fans was undertaken by South Yorkshire Police.
The findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel led to the previous verdict of accidental death being quashed at The High Court and new inquests ordered.
At that time, David Crompton apologised unreservedly to the families of those killed and accepted that the blame lay squarely at the door of South Yorkshire Police.

However, he then sent an internal e-mail to senior officers at SYP.
This e-mail said "One thing is certain - the Hillsborough Campaign for Justice will be doing their version ... in fact their version of events has become the truth, even though it isn't".
"I just have the feeling that the media machine favours the families and not us, SO WE NEED TO BE A BIT MORE INNOVATIVE IN OUR RESPONSE to have a fighting chance otherwise we will just be roadkill".

The new inquests started in March 2014.
Despite Crompton's public acceptance of the findings of The Hillsborough Independent Panel and the public apology he issued in 2012, South Yorkshire Police continued to defend their actions.
This resulted in the inquests lasting for 2 years - the longest jury case in British legal history.

There is more ....
But, just taking these facts into account, why do you consider that Mr Crompton should remain in post ?

[anonymous-user]

carinaman said:

Was it predictable?

Hasn't it been reported that Duckenfield was put in charge of that match without any real hand over from the officer that had previously done the task at that stadium? Was there some kind of spat or internecine bickering within SYP over him being given that task?

Wasn't it a case of sink or swim, get on with it?

Airline pilots train in simulators. Oil Tanker skippers used to train in scale model, two seater convertible pretend oil tankers?

It's like the majority of car accidents? An unfortunate combination of contributory factors, some of which could have been prevented and were entirely foreseeable.

SYP were playing games. Playing games like cuts have consequences.

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 30th April 11:49

Duckenfield had ample opportunity to familiarise himself with match day procedure.

He didn't attend what was supposed to be the pre match briefing choosing to do something else - he now can't remember what.

[BrownBottle]

Interesting thread, I've read it all and learned a lot.

I never realised the extent of the cover up and smear campaign carried out by the authorities, truly disturbing and despicable behavior. Someone linked a video earlier highlighting the lies starting as the event was unfolding, the commentators reporting a broken or forced gate entered by ticketless fans. They linked the first part which I watched but I also watched a bit of the 2nd part

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Am6vmX9SuOY

At 8.30 Des Lynam talks to a couple of fans down at the pitch and even in the immediate aftermath of what must have been a chaotic and shocking event for them both they called it absolutely perfectly.

[ninja-lewis]

NeMiSiS said:

He was due to be put out to pasture in November anyway, so his early suspension just gave him a good reason to go and sun himself at his Portuguese Villa a little earlier than expected.

His contract was due to expire in November although whether he planned to extend it is unknown. What is known is that the Hillsborough families' solicitor informed the Home Office privately on 16 March that they intended to call for Crompton's resignation once the inquest verdict was returned. Crompton announced his retirement at the end of his contract on 23 March, age 52. That was the same day the devastating report on SYP's handling of child sex exploitation in Rotherham was published.

[carinaman]

desolate said:

Duckenfield had ample opportunity to familiarise himself with match day procedure.

He didn't attend what was supposed to be the pre match briefing choosing to do something else - he now can't remember what.

Thank you.

[anonymous-user]

Red 4 said:

OK, let's look at why David Crompton has been suspended;

In 2012 he accepted the findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel.
This inquiry concluded that the Liverpool fans neither caused or contributed to the deaths of the 96.
It also said that a contrived, manipulated, spiteful and vengeful attempt to divert the blame onto the fans was undertaken by South Yorkshire Police.
The findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel led to the previous verdict of accidental death being quashed at The High Court and new inquests ordered.
At that time, David Crompton apologised unreservedly to the families of those killed and accepted that the blame lay squarely at the door of South Yorkshire Police.

However, he then sent an internal e-mail to senior officers at SYP.
This e-mail said "One thing is certain - the Hillsborough Campaign for Justice will be doing their version ... in fact their version of events has become the truth, even though it isn't".
"I just have the feeling that the media machine favours the families and not us, SO WE NEED TO BE A BIT MORE INNOVATIVE IN OUR RESPONSE to have a fighting chance otherwise we will just be roadkill".

The new inquests started in March 2014.
Despite Crompton's public acceptance of the findings of The Hillsborough Independent Panel and the public apology he issued in 2012, South Yorkshire Police continued to defend their actions.
This resulted in the inquests lasting for 2 years - the longest jury case in British legal history.

There is more ....
But, just taking these facts into account, why do you consider that Mr Crompton should remain in post ?

1) It's perfectly possible to accept the independent findings and still have specific issues with what the 'other side' are saying. You don't know the specific parts in which he is referring to so have no idea whether or not he's accurate. Again, why butcher the quote? You missed the, "We keep it purely factual and always refer to the source document" part of the quote. It's part of his job to look after the perception and reputation of the force and if there are things to be challenged then he should do something about it.

Both the IPCC and Home Office (who even managed to pick up he wasn't being specific on the 'falsehoods') concluded there were no misconduct matters from the email.

2) The idea that the Chief Constable is responsible for the legal strategy, when there were so many retired officers with their own representation (which Burnham made reference to) is comical. Or as if it's some simplistic assessment when all the legal implications and risks to the organisation and individuals could be made.

There's no allegation of misconduct or any specifics regarding his involvement with the legal strategy.

So you're left with nothing tangible, just 'finger-in-the-air' reactionary sentiment, driven by the Labour party and executed by a Labour PCC. The result is you cause disruption and harm the residents of SYP, and also hinder the fixing he was doing of the CSE failings. Well done, politics.

ninja-lewis said:

NeMiSiS said:

He was due to be put out to pasture in November anyway, so his early suspension just gave him a good reason to go and sun himself at his Portuguese Villa a little earlier than expected.

His contract was due to expire in November although whether he planned to extend it is unknown. What is known is that the Hillsborough families' solicitor informed the Home Office privately on 16 March that they intended to call for Crompton's resignation once the inquest verdict was returned. Crompton announced his retirement at the end of his contract on 23 March, age 52. That was the same day the devastating report on SYP's handling of child sex exploitation in Rotherham was published.

It was rather bad timing on his part given he had nothing to do with the failings the report spoke of and should have realised stupid / cynical people would make an unjustified connection.

What Drew actually said about Crompton and his team was, “I believe that the police response to safeguarding children and young people from child sexual exploitation is now adequate. Indeed, some recent work undertaken by South Yorkshire police appears to me to be of high quality.” This also corroborates what the HMIC have said.

So basically the chap who was bold enough to help bring an appalling state of affairs up to scratch has been shafted.

I hope he has a long, wealthy and happy retirement.

[Red 4]

La Liga - you say there were no misconduct proceedings in relation to the email sent in 2012.
Whilst that is true, what the IPCC actually said was that Crompton's email was "at best ill judged, at worst offensive and upsetting".

You say that I am not specific in identifying what untruths Crompton is accusing the Hillsborough Campaign for Justice of and imply that I am being unfair to him.
Well, I haven't got a crystal ball, nor am I blessed with mind-reading powers.
I do think that's irrelevant though - and a silly argument on your part because you don't know either.
However, the crux of message is there for all to see;
Whilst publicly apologising for the failures of SYP following the Hillsborough Inedpendent Panel findings and the ruling in The High Court, he was still plotting behind their backs to discredit them and wanted "innovative" ways of doing that.
Further - if Crompton thinks he did no wrong by sending the email then why did he publicly apologise for it ?
I'm guessing here that you are South Yorkshire Police.

Perhaps you should check out Crompton's deeds whilst at West Yorkshire Police (he was the deputy to Norman Bettison - there's also a connection between Bettison and Crompton's father, Sir Dan Crompton; make of that what you will, but Sir Dan has also publicly criticised the victims' families, accusing them of being "vexatious" in the past).
It's a riveting and enlightening read !

Edited by Red 4 on Saturday 30th April 18:40

[s3fella]

Ironic the spineless plank suggested in 2012 the Media Machine favoured the families! Only took them 23 years of believing his Force's version.

[davidball]

So La Liga hopes that Crompton has a long, wealthy and happy retirement. I too hope he has a long retirement to reflect on his behavior. As to wealth, I hope that all officers involved in the cover-up throughout the 27 years are made to bear some of the huge costs involved in getting to the truth. A large bite out of their pensions seems fair.

[cardigankid]

RottenIcons said:

The two posts above give the reason a generation has passed with no proper account being made. Inability, then error followed by realisation and fear compounded by lies and finally corruption was the devilish spiral here. A helter-skelter of human failings. One thing that is absolutely to be taken from this (but won't happen) is that the Police in any major event cannot be allowed to investigate themselves ever again. I have advocated for a long time that what should happen is an 'Investigative Jury' of 12 good men and women should be drawn from the registered retired to act as the guiding hand in such events. It's cheap, it's simple and it brings a focus and drive toward the truth.

Just extend the Jury idea toward an Investigative one.

If you have seen a jury in action you may be less convinced of the merits of that as they are easily manipulated by the various lawyers.

To my mind there are three issues here, in each case we will see if 'lessons are learned'.

First the depth and determination behind the cover up.

Second the propensity within the police force to promote individuals beyond a level which their intelligence and ability justify. I believe that this has improved in the years since Hillsborough.

Thirdly, the tendency in this country, and particularly the police force, to treat the public like cattle. Again I do not think this as bad today but still evident. The Trafpol in particular are an awful lot better than they used to be.

At the same time the abandonment of outdated traditions like standing terraces and improvements in stadia make that kind of thing much less likely today, but have the same lessons been taken on board at other events like pop concerts. There is also an effort been made to turn this into revenge for breaking the miners strike under Thatcher, which to my mind is totally bogus. That was a war.

[RottenIcons]

I have done jury service. Overall I thought we were scrupulously fair and we all took everything said and gave it weight. All of us wanted to 100% sure either way. 2 days deliberation after a 3 day case. I believe we got the verdict right.

[saaby93]

BrownBottle said:

Interesting thread, I've read it all and learned a lot.

I never realised the extent of the cover up and smear campaign carried out by the authorities, truly disturbing and despicable behavior. Someone linked a video earlier highlighting the lies starting as the event was unfolding, the commentators reporting a broken or forced gate entered by ticketless fans. They linked the first part which I watched but I also watched a bit of the 2nd part

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Am6vmX9SuOY

At 8.30 Des Lynam talks to a couple of fans down at the pitch and even in the immediate aftermath of what must have been a chaotic and shocking event for them both they called it absolutely perfectly.

It's got just about everything in that....

The claim about the broken gate but not sure about how it was broken, the ticket less fans, i.e. the things we know didnt happen
The fans came on saying about the police opening the gate, which weve seen Duckensfield, the police and the fans knew
At the end it also has the bit about the police opening the gate due to trying to avoid an incident outside.
i.e. just about everything the Jury just found

So if it was all there why did it take this long to state it properly???

[anonymous-user]

look at pedos, this, people high up in power make sure decades pass before the truth comes out and the fires of anger are still there, but much weaker.The justice becomes impotent.

Edited by The Spruce goose on Sunday 1st May 00:39

[anonymous-user]

Red 4 said:

La Liga - you say there were no misconduct proceedings in relation to the email sent in 2012.
Whilst that is true, what the IPCC actually said was that Crompton's email was "at best ill judged, at worst offensive and upsetting".

It's certainly not in 'PR' shape, but it was never intended for the public. Could it have been worded better? Of course, but then it's between people whom regularly communicate and can interpret and draw inferences that go beyond the face value.

Red 4 said:

You say that I am not specific in identifying what untruths Crompton is accusing the Hillsborough Campaign for Justice of and imply that I am being unfair to him.
Well, I haven't got a crystal ball, nor am I blessed with mind-reading powers.
I do think that's irrelevant though - and a silly argument on your part because you don't know either.

And I bet Burnham and the PCC don't, either. Therefore making assumptions and decisions based upon key unknowns is stupid.

Red 4 said:

However, the crux of message is there for all to see;
Whilst publicly apologising for the failures of SYP following the Hillsborough Inedpendent Panel findings and the ruling in The High Court, he was still plotting behind their backs to discredit them and wanted "innovative" ways of doing that.
Further - if Crompton thinks he did no wrong by sending the email then why did he publicly apologise for it ?
I'm guessing here that you are South Yorkshire Police.

Or the crux is he was looking to challenge aspects that weren't the truth. Or is there no possibility that anything the 'other side' could be anything but the truth?

Red 4 said:

Perhaps you should check out Crompton's deeds whilst at West Yorkshire Police (he was the deputy to Norman Bettison - there's also a connection between Bettison and Crompton's father, Sir Dan Crompton; make of that what you will, but Sir Dan has also publicly criticised the victims' families, accusing them of being "vexatious" in the past).
It's a riveting and enlightening read !

Is that the rather boring Liverpool Echo article about who was Chief where and whom assessed whom? If so, wow, what a smoking gun...

davidball said:

So La Liga hopes that Crompton has a long, wealthy and happy retirement. I too hope he has a long retirement to reflect on his behavior.

I expect he's done a rather a lot more to keep society safe in his 30+ years than you, so yes, he may well reflect on all the work / behaviour (including all the CSE work I've mentioned) he has done.

He is / was the ACPO lead for homicide investigation which is why I know a bit about him, and I'm aware of the good work he's done with that 'portfolio'.

[Red 4]

La Liga said:

Is that the rather boring Liverpool Echo article about who was Chief where and whom assessed whom? If so, wow, what a smoking gun...

No, I didn't get my info from the Liverpool Echo - the link between Bettison and Crompton's father was well known on Merseyside, but it has been reported in the press lately.

For many, Bettison was not a popular choice for Chief Constable of Merseyside due to his alleged connections with Hillsborough - the "Let's Jettison Bettison" campaign on Merseyside grew quickly following his appointment.

It was Crompton's father who really rubber stamped Bettison's suitability for the post (Dan Crompton was an Inspector with HMIC at the time) and he rubbished the claims of the victims families in no uncertain terms. I wonder how he feels about that today ...

The Hillsborough fiasco was about the old boys' club closing ranks.

As far as that goes, my opinion is that not much has changed and David Crompton's comments/ behaviour - 27 years after the event - only serve to reinforce that view.

My overwhelming opinion of the majority of the very senior ranks in the police service is that they could not give one jot about policing/ the public/ or even the truth.
They only care about themselves.
Hillsborough gave people an insight into that.

Edited by Red 4 on Sunday 1st May 01:31

[Pommygranite]

272BHP said:

The campaign by the Justice for the 96 group has to go down as one of the successful ever on these shores. They have done what I would have never thought possible in this country, which is to completely bend and bully the entire media to their will. No other opinion is allowed to exist in the public domain except 'the truth' and any one who has dared to question any of the findings over the years is professionally and publicly assassinated.

None of that sits well with me.

Bullied the media? Not sure you're right there chap. This was the media that vilified the victims straight away and for years propagated what has now been absolutely proven incorrect.

The Sun and the Telegraph didn't even acknowledge the verdict when it was announced.

These families have had to endure some pretty awful behaviour by the police and media (phone taps, being followed, blood tests in the mortuary even on the children etc) and they fought and fought and fought and their fight got the inquiry which resolved this finally.

What shouldn't sit well with you is blatant lies by those in position of public trust not the group of families that wouldn't give up when all was against them.

[anonymous-user]

Red 4 said:

No, I didn't get my info from the Liverpool Echo - the link between Bettison and Crompton's father was well known on Merseyside, but it has been reported in the press lately.

For many, Bettison was not a popular choice for Chief Constable of Merseyside due to his alleged connections with Hillsborough - the "Let's Jettison Bettison" campaign on Merseyside grew quickly following his appointment.

It was Crompton's father who really rubber stamped Bettison's suitability for the post (Dan Crompton was an Inspector with HMIC at the time) and he rubbished the claims of the victims families in no uncertain terms. I wonder how he feels about that today ...

The Hillsborough fiasco was about the old boys' club closing ranks.

As far as that goes, my opinion is that not much has changed and David Crompton's comments/ behaviour - 27 years after the event - only serve to reinforce that view.

It all reads like lots of A to C without B, conspiracy / speculation.

1) None of us know whether or not each person mentioned wasn't the best candidate for each role they gained and came top of the respective processes.

2) None of us have anything other than a glimpse into the long careers of each officer mentioned and therefore can only make very superficial judgements.

Naturally, that doesn't stop many people filling in the gaps with whatever they want to be true. This is a more convenient option than realising the limitations information available.

Red 4 said:

My overwhelming opinion of the majority of the very senior ranks in the police service is that they could not give one jot about policing/ the public/ or even the truth.
They only care about themselves.

Having been one and known loads of staff officers to various SCTs, I reach the opposite conclusion.

[Luther Blisset]

272BHP said:

The campaign by the Justice for the 96 group has to go down as one of the successful ever on these shores. They have done what I would have never thought possible in this country, which is to completely bend and bully the entire media to their will. No other opinion is allowed to exist in the public domain except 'the truth' and any one who has dared to question any of the findings over the years is professionally and publicly assassinated.

None of that sits well with me.

Wouldn't you rather know the truth than have an opinion?

[V8 Fettler]

La Liga said:

I hope he has a long, wealthy and happy retirement.

Scuttling away at 52? I thought the early retirement nonsense by plod had stopped. Couldn't he stay and perform useful tasks for the taxpayer?

[V8 Fettler]

Red 4 said:

In the post-op debrief on 15 April 1989, police officers were also ordered not to make notes in their pocketbooks of the events of that day.

Instead, senior officers wanted officer's "recollections of the day" recording on blank sheets of paper - not MG11s (statement forms, which would have been the norm).

The arse- covering started quickly, it seems.

Edited by Red 4 on Friday 29th April 21:28

Contemporaneous notes are a very influential record of events and can be referred to in the witness box. Did not officers protest at this order? Perhaps via the Federation?