Hillsborough Inquest
Discussion
desolate said:
popeyewhite said:
Yep, sorry - hold my hands up - I should have stated I was referring to the unlawful killing charge levelled at the Police. Completely amazed the Police could be held 100% to blame...but there you go - you apply enough pressure over the years and even fact can be replaced with a more favourable version of events.
The police haven't been held 100% percent to blameRead the verdict, it will only take you a few minutes.
Question 8 relates to defects in the stadium.
Questions 9 & 12 relates to the Safety Certificate and the role of Eastwood & Partners.
Question 10 relate to SWFC itself
Question 14 relates to South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service.
Nothing to do with the Police.
The 'unlawful killing' verdict required a higher threshold of proof, which may explain why the jury were split. The others were on the 'balance of probabilities', meaning the jury 'just' needed to be > 50% satisfied.
Today's events at Old Trafford probably provide a good summary of how far things have come from Hillsborough when there's a major incident.
You were happy to use the BBC when the information suited you by linking to the BBC site, but then went down the route of 'you don't know for sure' when the BBC provided information you didn't like.
Double standards.
Today's events at Old Trafford probably provide a good summary of how far things have come from Hillsborough when there's a major incident.
V8 Fettler said:
SYP giving Duckenfield the responsibility of match commander was another example of an ambush that could have been avoided by good management.
Another? One's factual, the other is your speculation. I don't know why you cannot recognise the difference. V8 Fettler said:
My basic research indicates that neither the BBC nor the SYP PCC should be absolutely trusted, but clearly you place great trust in quotes posted in the SYP PCC website.
I.e. you wanted to distract from the fact you got it wrong. It's a shame you didn't apply the same 'basic research' to what you were looking for.You were happy to use the BBC when the information suited you by linking to the BBC site, but then went down the route of 'you don't know for sure' when the BBC provided information you didn't like.
Double standards.
V8 Fettler said:
Smoke and mirrors? Again, you're flailing. Many people were fooled into accepting the SYP account of the Hillsborough tragedy at face value, this was a mistake that took 27 years to rectify, and was only rectified after the SYP account of the tragedy was revealed as smoke and mirrors.
Smoke and mirrors as above. You speak of one thing then go on a tangent about another i.e. side-step away from your speculation about one event by drawing comparisons with a factual event.Bigends said:
popeyewhite said:
Bigends said:
All the fans did was turn up for the game.
No, some rushed in which contributed to the crush. Was this someone else's fault?popeyewhite said:
I and no doubt many others at the time saw the live TV footage. Certain fans rushed forward, leading to a crush at the front. They weren't compelled to do this.
edited my original post to say:-Yawn. heard it all before for 20 odd years. load of b
ks.There is a cornucopia of evidence online - anyone that is truly interested can just use a search engine.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 16th May 00:02
popeyewhite said:
Bigends said:
popeyewhite said:
Bigends said:
All the fans did was turn up for the game.
No, some rushed in which contributed to the crush. Was this someone else's fault?The "crowd" was escaping a crush at the gates, you expect them not to rush away from that? Even if they did, how were they to know that the terrace they were already entering was overcrowded?
If they even thought about it (which I'm almost certain they didn't) they could realistically presume that the terrace they were entering was safe for their own numbers as the police had directed them in there. The police open a gate, there is a tunnel with standing clearly marked above it. What do you expect them to do?
In your world should those who rushed forward be identified from cctv and prosecuted?
Let's get one thing straight;
Even if the crowd were blind drunken hooligans intent on running towards the front of the terrace
Even if Sheffield Wednesday had installed bear traps at the front of each terrace
Even if the ambulance service had decided to bugger off on a day trip to butlins that day
South Yorkshire Police directed (by design or by fault) the Liverpool supporters down into those already overcrowded two pens on that terrace. This is indisputable. The Police sealed their fate regardless of all other circumstances and the final decision of what happened to that group of supporters is down to them.
You can argue about the supporters, you can argue about the stadium, the allocation of tickets, the inadequacies of the ambulance service, the coroners failings, the media whitewash....... All of it contributed to what happened that terrible day and in the following years.
But the buck stops with South Yorkshire Police, even if all the above still happened, if they hadn't directed those men, women and children into already overcrowded pens the deaths would not have occurred.
Edited by LaurasOtherHalf on Monday 16th May 07:42
LaurasOtherHalf said:
You can argue about the supporters, .....[All of it] contributed to what happened that terrible day and in the following years.
Thank you, that is exactly what I said:popeyewhite said:
Bigends said:
All the fans did was turn up for the game.
No, some rushed in which contributed to the crush. Was this someone else's fault?La Liga said:
V8 Fettler said:
SYP giving Duckenfield the responsibility of match commander was another example of an ambush that could have been avoided by good management.
Another? One's factual, the other is your speculation. I don't know why you cannot recognise the difference. V8 Fettler said:
My basic research indicates that neither the BBC nor the SYP PCC should be absolutely trusted, but clearly you place great trust in quotes posted in the SYP PCC website.
I.e. you wanted to distract from the fact you got it wrong. It's a shame you didn't apply the same 'basic research' to what you were looking for.You were happy to use the BBC when the information suited you by linking to the BBC site, but then went down the route of 'you don't know for sure' when the BBC provided information you didn't like.
Double standards.
V8 Fettler said:
Smoke and mirrors? Again, you're flailing. Many people were fooled into accepting the SYP account of the Hillsborough tragedy at face value, this was a mistake that took 27 years to rectify, and was only rectified after the SYP account of the tragedy was revealed as smoke and mirrors.
Smoke and mirrors as above. You speak of one thing then go on a tangent about another i.e. side-step away from your speculation about one event by drawing comparisons with a factual event.You'll note the wording used previously:
V8 Fettler previously said:
Astonishingly, it appears that the SYP PCC was unaware of the investigation into Copley at the time of Copley's appointment,
Again, I have equal levels of distrust of the BBC and the SYP PCC. Given your comments previously re: the PCC's political machinations, is it not double standards for you to now place great weight on his utterances from his own website?Yet again you're flailing. I've only spoken of one thing on this thread: the events surrounding Hillsborough. It's a pity that someone in authority didn't see through the smoke and mirrors prior to the match surrounding Duckenfield's appointment as match commander.
popeyewhite said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
You can argue about the supporters, .....[All of it] contributed to what happened that terrible day and in the following years.
Thank you, that is exactly what I said:popeyewhite said:
Bigends said:
All the fans did was turn up for the game.
No, some rushed in which contributed to the crush. Was this someone else's fault?The Taylor report showed you're wrong
The inquest showed you're wrong
The evidence shows you're wrong
The jury (who studied the facts and evidence for two years) agree that you're wrong.
Your argument is akin to trying to blame a bullet for murder, sure someone else pulled the trigger and pointed the gun but the little bit of lead still killed someone. Laughable.
Well I say laughable, but when you consider some of those who were let in through gate c (& in your crazy theory are to blame) were women and children who lost their lives, incredible crass and insensitive is probably a better description.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Of which you are entitled to do so. But you're wrong.
The Taylor report showed you're wrong
The inquest showed you're wrong
The evidence shows you're wrong
The jury (who studied the facts and evidence for two years) agree that you're wrong.
Nope, they disagree with me.The Taylor report showed you're wrong
The inquest showed you're wrong
The evidence shows you're wrong
The jury (who studied the facts and evidence for two years) agree that you're wrong.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Your argument is akin to trying to blame a bullet for murder, sure someone else pulled the trigger and pointed the gun but the little bit of lead still killed someone. Laughable.
Poor analogy, for a number of reasons.LaurasOtherHalf said:
Well I say laughable, but when you consider some of those who were let in through gate c (& in your crazy theory are to blame) were women and children who lost their lives, incredible crass and insensitive is probably a better description.
Deary me.V8 Fettler said:
Again, if no ambush over Copley then why only one day in post? Again, you're confusing "source of ambush" with "management responsibility to ensure that an ambush doesn't occur". Or are you trying to claim that it is an acceptable standard of management to place Copley in the CC position for one day?
Perhaps Copley and the PCC reflected on the changing circumstances on the day. Or the PCC made a last-minute decision etc etc. Loads of variables, most of which are unknown and should be a rather obvious sign to limit speculation. You've gradually expanded something quite specific to encompass much larger circumstances rather than just say, "I assumed the GMP were the source of the information becoming public".
I wonder if you're used to colleagues / managers whom let you get away with such an approach.
V8 Fettler previously said:
Again, I have equal levels of distrust of the BBC and the SYP PCC. Given your comments previously re: the PCC's political machinations, is it not double standards for you to now place great weight on his utterances from his own website?
Where did I say I placed great weight? I said I work off the best information (did you miss that?). The PCC and BBC website using a direct quote is the best available information. It's not complicated. It's also obvious you're trying to discredit it and rely on the improbable to sly away from the fact you were wrong. The BBC site quoted the same, the same one you were happy to use.
V8 Fettler said:
Yet again you're flailing.
Your reply whenever you don't like what you read. LaurasOtherHalf said:
popeyewhite said:
Deary me.
Excellent argument but would you care to share with the forum what evidence you have that proves otherwise?I've already stated my opinion on the matter, it's just above. As an aside you don't actually represent 'the forum', but as you seem to think it's acceptable to be rude to people for little reason other than the internet lets you get away with it, I suppose suggesting you represent everyone else on a forum is just a small step forward.
AW111 said:
Would you two mind not interrupting the V8 Fettler vs LaLiga last word contest?
I'm holding my breath here waiting for one of them to admit defeat - we must be nearly there by now.
I'm holding my breath here waiting for one of them to admit defeat - we must be nearly there by now.
popeyewhite said:
I've already stated my opinion
I didn't ask for your opinion 
You say the fans are to blame for the crush, I plainly asked what evidence you have to prove this. Do you have any?
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I didn't ask for your opinion
I didn't ask for your poor manners... .LaurasOtherHalf said:
You say the fans are to blame for the crush,
No I didn't.
I dare you to actually read what I wrote.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I plainly asked what evidence you have to prove this. Do you have any?
*sigh*Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff