Hillsborough Inquest

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Red 4 said:

Zoobeef said:

You could say a direct cause is thousands of fans pushing and shoving into an enclosed space.

You could. You have.
What caused that ?

Impatience. Desperation not to miss the match? Why didn't the crushed fans spill on to the pitch. Fences? So were they the direct cause?

Whatever the reason, it's still an opinion as to what was the direct cause, not a fact.

[Bacon Is Proof]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Red 4 said:

That is not a quest for truth. It is stating facts.
If I have given an opinion I have stated it is an opinion.

Red 4 said:

However, it is a matter of fact that the opening of Gate C and failing to close the tunnel caused the crushing and the deaths.

No it's not, it's a matter of opinion.

From the documentary linked to by Red 4, seems like the opening of Gate C and failing to close the tunnel simply moved the inevitable crushing and deaths from outside the stadium to inside.

[Pat H]

Zoobeef said:

You wont admit to facts that dont support your mission.
Hence you wont admit to the fact some fans were drunk and some didn't have tickets. Or that the people at the back of the crowd were pushing with little to noone behind them and therefore had a choice to stop. Or that by absolving all fans it's being said that in large crowds you can push and shove to you're hearts content as the institute will take responsibility for your actions.

The findings of the inquest jury are that the behaviour of the football supporters did not cause or contribute to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles.

The findings of the criminal trial jury are that Duckenfield is not guilty of gross negligence manslaughter.

As the respective juries considered vast amounts of evidence, I am of the view that we should respect those verdicts.

This bloody pantomime has gone on too long.

The reason why it has dragged on is largely a result of the actions of SYP in seeking to cover up their failings and their cynical attempt to divert blame to the very victims of the tragedy.

The journalists at The Sun also have a lot to answer for, as does the arrogant and unapologetic Bernard Ingham. That Letter remains nothing short of contemptible.

I hope there is sufficient evidence for a criminal prosecution for perverting the course of justice, as there seems to be plenty of evidence that police officers' statements were altered with intent to undermine the first inquest.

And I hope it happens quickly.

And then, regardless of the outcome of any such trial, this tragedy should be laid to rest. It is time to move on.

[Gone a bit AMG]

I’ve posted recently on the Liverpool thread about this and I’ve a mate who was there on the day in the pen. He finds it incredibly difficult still to talk about.

He holds both the police and some of the fans responsible. The fact is if the fans hadn’t pushed their way in there wouldn’t have been a crush. If there’s a gate open you do not have to walk through it yes it was also poor stadium design.

To say fan behaviour didn’t contribute to the tragedy is a stretch to say the least. Football at that time was an awful place to go to. We’d had heysel a few years before and no lessons were learnt. Was that also the stadium and nothing to do with the fans? Is it a coincidence that it was the same club? Yes it is. But it could have been any club back then. The behaviour of the fans lead to football grounds being like zoos. Because a significant number of fans behaved like animals. But on this occasion they were angels and walked calm to the standing areas?

No one wins, if there is to be a sliver of positivity from this tragic accident waiting to happen it is now that on the whole football is now a safe family friendly day out.

Your making good points red 4 but a refusal to accept the fans were blameless is your opinion not a fact. Others are allowed their’s.

[Red 4]

Gone a bit AMG said:

Your making good points red 4 but a refusal to accept the fans were blameless is your opinion not a fact. Others are allowed their’s.

Are you saying the verdict of The Inquests was wrong ?
Do you have any evidence to support that ?
Round and round and round we go ...

[Blue62]

Zoobeef said:

What I'm getting at is that anything official that supports Red 4's conquest is fact and if questioned is subject to abuse on that poster about not knowing the "facts". Yet is if it doesnt support the outcome he (for some reason) wants, then it's wrong, or the evidence wasnt looked at properly or questioned enough. Therefore has a bias in his quest for truth.

Any change in the report putting any kind of blame onto the fans simply will not happen now. The attempted cover up and lies told are too big. Could you imagine the outcry if they suddenly decided they wanted that "fans had nothing to do with it" changed? So that part of this whole saga will never be looked into again.
Yet anything else, no let's keep banging that drum and wasting more of my money.

It’s a strange rant, banging drums and wasting your money sounds like most teenage boys to me. It would help to calm poor old Red if people were not cognisant of the reports findings and conclusions, it is highly damning of SYP.

You didn’t answer the neutral objectivity question but I sense it’s just word salad.

[Zoobeef]

Red 4 said:

Are you saying the verdict of The Inquests was wrong ?
Do you have any evidence to support that ?
Round and round and round we go ...

Yawn

[Zoobeef]

Blue62 said:

It’s a strange rant, banging drums and wasting your money sounds like most teenage boys to me. It would help to calm poor old Red if people were not cognisant of the reports findings and conclusions, it is highly damning of SYP.

You didn’t answer the neutral objectivity question but I sense it’s just word salad.

How is someone neutral that ignores certain findings but constantly displays findings that support his opinion?

Like the inquest that took place after the 20 year reunion infront of 30000 fans was ever then going to put any blame on the fans at all. It would be career suicide.

[ChevyChase77]

Gone a bit AMG said:

I’ve posted recently on the Liverpool thread about this and I’ve a mate who was there on the day in the pen. He finds it incredibly difficult still to talk about.

He holds both the police and some of the fans responsible. The fact is if the fans hadn’t pushed their way in there wouldn’t have been a crush. If there’s a gate open you do not have to walk through it yes it was also poor stadium design.

To say fan behaviour didn’t contribute to the tragedy is a stretch to say the least. Football at that time was an awful place to go to. We’d had heysel a few years before and no lessons were learnt. Was that also the stadium and nothing to do with the fans? Is it a coincidence that it was the same club? Yes it is. But it could have been any club back then. The behaviour of the fans lead to football grounds being like zoos. Because a significant number of fans behaved like animals. But on this occasion they were angels and walked calm to the standing areas?

No one wins, if there is to be a sliver of positivity from this tragic accident waiting to happen it is now that on the whole football is now a safe family friendly day out.

Your making good points red 4 but a refusal to accept the fans were blameless is your opinion not a fact. Others are allowed their’s.

He's not alone. Even if you suggest the Liverpool fans were 0.01% to blame they refuse to accept it.

Back then there was a lot of sh!thousery with football fans, and there's still sh!thousery today. Granted sh!thousery wasn't just or isn't just confined to Liverpool fans - I've seen 'lads' get together of a weekend and high jinx, a few beers and they act in a way they don't for the majority of the week. I've seen people move carriages on trains due to fans f*ing and blinding and generally just being arses. It's a cultural/tribal thing. What some football fans think is acceptable really isn't.

[Red 4]

Zoobeef said:

Blue62 said:

It’s a strange rant, banging drums and wasting your money sounds like most teenage boys to me. It would help to calm poor old Red if people were not cognisant of the reports findings and conclusions, it is highly damning of SYP.

You didn’t answer the neutral objectivity question but I sense it’s just word salad.

How is someone neutral that ignores certain findings but constantly displays findings that support his opinion?

Like the inquest that took place after the 20 year reunion infront of 30000 fans was ever then going to put any blame on the fans at all. It would be career suicide.

You need a dictionary. Failing that get someone to explain words and their meaning to you.
It will help you - trust me.
This is a neutral observation and opinion - but it is based on facts.
When you've done that may I suggest that you research what actually happened following the 2O year anniversary.
Your facts and knowledge are severely lacking.
Do you think another inquest was just ordered following the events at Anfield ?
Clue; it wasn't. Do some research. It is easy if you try.

[Pat H]

Zoobeef said:

Like the inquest that took place after the 20 year reunion infront of 30000 fans was ever then going to put any blame on the fans at all. It would be career suicide.

Whose career?

A jury heard the evidence and a jury made a finding of fact based on that evidence.

One of those findings was that the fans were not to blame.

Some people may find that hard to swallow. Some people don't like the fact that it contradicts their received wisdom that the fans must be at least partially responsible.

But unless you sat through a couple of years worth of evidence, I am not sure you can suggest the jury got it wrong, any more than you could suggest that Duckenfield was not entitled to be acquitted.

[Gone a bit AMG]

Pat H said:

The findings of the inquest jury are that the behaviour of the football supporters did not cause or contribute to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles.

When I’ve more time I’ll address this point properly. And for Red 4 produce evidence. But just how many people died at the turnstiles? There are lots of very cleverly worded statements in the verdicts that appear to exonerate fans. The above is an example. No one died outside.

The fact that Red 4 persists that fans were whiter than white on that day makes reasoned debate impossible. No public figure wants to publicly criticise the fans on that day as it would be career ending due to the sensitivity of the event and appalling behaviour of public figures and those in control at the time both police and press.

[Red 4]

Gone a bit AMG said:

When I’ve more time I’ll address this point properly. And for Red 4 produce evidence. But just how many people died at the turnstiles? There are lots of very cleverly worded statements in the verdicts that appear to exonerate fans. The above is an example. No one died outside.

The fact that Red 4 persists that fans were whiter than white on that day makes reasoned debate impossible. No public figure wants to publicly criticise the fans on that day as it would be career ending due to the sensitivity of the event and appalling behaviour of public figures and those in control at the time both police and press.

AMG - I have not said that the fans were whiter than white.
I have said that fan behaviour played no part in the deaths of 96 people.
I appreciate it is difficult for some people to understand the distiction - that is not aimed at you specifically - but it is important.

I look forward to your evidence.

[Zoobeef]

Red 4 said:

You need a dictionary. Failing that get someone to explain words and their meaning to you.
It will help you - trust me.
This is a neutral observation and opinion - but it is based on facts.
When you've done that may I suggest that you research what actually happened following the 2O year anniversary.
Your facts and knowledge are severely lacking.
Do you think another inquest was just ordered following the events at Anfield ?
Clue; it wasn't. Do some research. It is easy if you try.

I was going by the documentary that YOU posted saying it told the facts.
It states that after that reunion "from that moment on, we got alot more than we ever had" and "it convinced Andy Burnham that he had to push this personally along and set up the Hillsborough independent panel".
More selective bullst from you then?

[Red 4]

Zoobeef said:

Red 4 said:

You need a dictionary. Failing that get someone to explain words and their meaning to you.
It will help you - trust me.
This is a neutral observation and opinion - but it is based on facts.
When you've done that may I suggest that you research what actually happened following the 2O year anniversary.
Your facts and knowledge are severely lacking.
Do you think another inquest was just ordered following the events at Anfield ?
Clue; it wasn't. Do some research. It is easy if you try.

I was going by the documentary that YOU posted saying it told the facts.
It states that after that reunion "from that moment on, we got alot more than we ever had" and "it convinced Andy Burnham that he had to push this personally along and set up the Hillsborough independent panel".
More selective bullst from you then?

No. You specifically mentioned The Inquests and stated the proceedings were not impartial.
You stated it would be career suicide ( for who I am not sure ) if fans were found to be to blame.
Do you understand how the legal system works in this country ?
What happened after the 20 year anniversary ?
You have missed many important bits out.
Support your assertion that The Inquests were rigged.
Evidence please. Evidence.

Edited by Red 4 on Wednesday 4th December 16:11

[Bacon Is Proof]

Red 4 said:

I have said that fan behaviour played no part in the deaths of 96 people.

Of course it did.
A large number of people tried to cram into a space that was not big enough for them.
People, with or without tickets, arrived at the stadium with the intention of cramming into pens 3 and 4.

It's all in the doc. you linked to.

[Gone a bit AMG]

Red 4 said:

Are you saying the verdict of The Inquests was wrong ?
Do you have any evidence to support that ?
Round and round and round we go ...

I note you’ve not addressed my point that my mate, who was in the pen, blames both the police and the fans. Perhaps I’ll ask him to join PH and you’ll listen to him.

Anyway I’m off for a pint before I go to watch United in my incredibly safe seat with no barriers preventing me from invading the pitch and escaping a crush because fan behaviour has improved beyond measure. We no longer need the fans to be caged over here as we learnt our lessons and changed behaviour. Despite the fans on that fateful day behaving impeccably. As once through the turnstiles they were crushing against, they walked calmly into an already packed pen. Because crushes happen when people calmly walk into a confined space....

[Zoobeef]

Red 4 -
"fans played no part" - fact, definite fact.
"Duckenfield found not guilty" - meh, cps failings etc etc.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Red 4, surely you must see that the opening of the gate and failing to close the tunnel being the direct cause of the crush is an opinion rather than a fact. I'm amazed you continue to argue this.

There are no doubt some crackpots who would say the direct cause was legalising abortion and homosexuality, and the crush was the wrath of god. They blame earthquakes on the same thing. And AIDS. They say it's a fact, based on the bible. But it's not, it's their op[inion, agreed with by some and laughed at by most.

Your opinion may well be right, but it's still just an opinion. Because other factors were in play.

[Red 4]

Bacon Is Proof said:

Red 4 said:

I have said that fan behaviour played no part in the deaths of 96 people.

Of course it did.
A large number of people tried to cram into a space that was not big enough for them.
People, with or without tickets, arrived at the stadium with the intention of cramming into pens 3 and 4.

It's all in the doc. you linked to.

What caused the crush ?
Clue; it wasn't ticketless fans who arrived late.
Are you Lord Justice Stuart-Smith ?