Hillsborough police chief David Duckenfield cleared of manslaughter

dowie

dowie

dowie

Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
59,129
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50592077
Hillsborough match commander David Duckenfield has been found not guilty of the gross negligence manslaughter of 95 Liverpool fans in the 1989 disaster.

The former South Yorkshire Police chief superintendent, 75, was in charge of the FA Cup semi-final in which 96 fans were fatally injured.

Men, women and children were crushed on the Leppings Lane terrace.

Mr Duckenfield, of Ferndown, Dorset, was cleared after a seven-week retrial at Preston Crown Court.

Due to the law at the time, there can be no prosecution over the death of the 96th victim, Tony Bland.

This is because he died more than a year and a day after his injuries were caused.

The jury at Mr Duckenfield's original trial earlier this year failed to agree a verdict.

There were gasps in court as the seven women and three men on the jury returned the verdict, following 13 hours and 43 minutes of discussions.
Click to expand...

I guess this verdict wasn't necessarily going to be a dead cert either way despite there being some polarised views on the matter. On one hand it does seem to be a bit off to lay all the blame on this guy, on the other hand he was the man in charge of the police operation and someone in a leadership role like that ought to be accountable for their actions.
 
omnomnom said:
If he wasnt responsible...who is? Shocked by that verdict tbh
Click to expand...

I don't know that you can conclude from the verdict that he's not in some part responsible still - I mean:

"A spokeswoman for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the verdict did not affect the findings of the Hillsborough inquests, which ruled the victims had been unlawfully killed."

I'm not necessarily shocked by it, I guess actually convicting him of manslaughter is a bit of a bigger step than attributing some level of blame to him given the multiple factors involved.
 
dowie said:
I don't know that you can conclude from the verdict that he's not in some part responsible still - I mean:

"A spokeswoman for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the verdict did not affect the findings of the Hillsborough inquests, which ruled the victims had been unlawfully killed."

I'm not necessarily shocked by it, I guess actually convicting him of manslaughter is a bit of a bigger step than attributing some level of blame to him given the multiple factors involved.
Click to expand...

So, hoping not to be censored by the mods again on this topic - last time a certain individual was actively deleting my replies just because he didn't like them - the problem is that nobody has the stones to mention what the elephant in the room is in regards to one of those multiple factors. They just won't do it. So unfortunately this matter is never really going to be closed. They'll never apportion all of the blame to the police or those who ran the stadium because other factors will always be apparent.
 
I'm not surprised by this as laying guilt to one man for 95 deaths was always going to be difficult in a fair trial.

One thing is certain in that those who continually fight for justice after 30 years certainly get my admiration and I hope they get answers.
 
omnomnom said:
Theres been an independent inquest into this. This is absolute garbage. Do your research.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is that you have to work on the assumption that the inquest was fully independent and there was no element of political appeasement. I don't believe that to be the case however I do have faith in the judicial system to correctly apportion guilt. The families of the victims and some people who for some reason are far too attached to this are looking to hear a certain answer, and won't rest until they hear it. They want an individual to blame. A boogeyman. Unfortunately there were multiple factors that combined to give the outcome on the day (and afterwards for those who passed later) and no one individual was responsible.

You could have had the worst police presence ever and it wouldn't have happened.

You could have had the most poorly designed stadium ever and it wouldn't have happened.

You could have had fans starting a riot and it wouldn't have happened.

You could have had ten times the capacity of fans and it wouldn't have happened.

However, if you had the correct combination of factors you have the outcome that occurred.


****The ticketless fans theory was balls though.****
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
The ticketless fans argument was disproven in the Taylor report in 1990. The arguement is and always has been complete and utter *******s.
Click to expand...

True enough. My post was more of a general comment on taking the investigations since at face value. I'll edit though to make it clearer.
 
This thread will go the same way as the others, locked.

This far on, people’s opinions on what happened are unlikely to change and it still cuts very deep for those associated with the families and the club. I can’t imagine many juries would pin manslaughter of all those individuals on one, now 75yr old man.
 
Nasher said:
Crowd mentality is to blame.

But people always want an individual to point the finger at.
Click to expand...
Crowd mentality didn't open an exit gate, crowd mentality didn't fail to close the entrance to the central pens, crowd mentality didn't begin spreading lies about those two issues as people were dying in the stands, to cover their arse, instead of doing something to save lives.
 
A fair and just result imo.

The state of Safety in Sports grounds is very good today. It was very bad in the eighties. It was very bad for numerous reasons and that can’t be dropped on one mans shoulders.

The very fact that the improvement in safety has literally been astronomic must tell you how bad safety ‘was’ and yet here we are today trying to judge 30 year old standards with modern eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom