Hillsborough

[Richard E]

When commenting on this thread please bear in mind that the matter is now sub judice pending trials taking place.

[Hopadop]

Perhaps I was too harsh because it touches a close nerve with me. I still hold him responsible for starting to implement "The fix" from the outset, telling porkies in the immediate aftermath and at the first enquiry, and not having the common decency to apologise and admit his errors for donkeys years after. And he did hurl shit. Like the fans breaking down the gates and being compliant with the Police and Government in the subsequent cover up. I don't think it was my best worded post but that is where it was coming from. And I still have zero compassion for him.

Compassion or not, I think you may be getting him confused with others now alleged to have perverted the course of justice?

[Hopadop]

When commenting on this thread please bear in mind that the matter is now sub judice pending trials taking place.

Always good advice, but it's going to be a stretch for everyone to pretend the massively reported and celebrated findings of the inquest jury never happened.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

When commenting on this thread please bear in mind that the matter is now sub judice pending trials taking place.

Always good advice, but it's going to be a stretch for everyone to pretend the massively reported and celebrated findings of the inquest jury never happened.

For clarity, are you saying we could be endangering the forthcoming trials simply by discussing Hillsborough here, even though, as you say, a lot of the information is already widely known? In which case, can we be clear about what is or isn't allowed?  I know nowt about law and this is important. Thanks for the reminder, Richard.

[Hopadop]

I'm afraid clarity is one thing you won't get. The law's got a lot of catching up to do, if it ever can, when it comes to social media.

As a starting point, Sue Hemming (CPS) when announcing the charges said, "Criminal proceedings have now commenced and the defendants have a 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."

"Could in any way" is obviously very broad. A few years ago the then Attorney General said he didn't want legislation to unduly curb free speech, so there's obviously a balance. It's only really been used to go after obvious and flagrant contempts like the naming of the complainant in the Ched Evans case and Tommy Robinson recently.

As you say, when it comes to Hillsborough it's all out there. I doubt there's a football forum in the country that hasn't reported and argued over it at massive length, and the findings of the jury in 2016 obviously received enormous coverage, including by the PM in the commons. I said what I thought about it on here at the time, as did many others. No doubt it will be the subject of the abuse of process application in August.

In reality I don't think there's much of a danger of anyone on here publishing something that could prejudice the trial but the simple answer is now proceedings have commenced contempt is a live issue, and if in doubt don't say it. It would be a shame, but if this was my site I'd be tempted to lock the thread until the end of the trial.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

Thanks Hopadop. In light of your response I too am wondering whether the thread ought to be locked to stay on the safe side (that said, there's nothing stopping people mentioning the subject on other threads, so maybe that wouldn't achieve much). I guess the best thing is for everyone to remain cautious and to think hard before posting.

[cheltenhamlion]

Can I quickly call Duckenfield, Mackrell, Kelvin McKenzie and the Thatcher government a bunch of ****** then before the lock?

[Dave Cooper please]

Perhaps I was too harsh because it touches a close nerve with me. I still hold him responsible for starting to implement "The fix" from the outset, telling porkies in the immediate aftermath and at the first enquiry, and not having the common decency to apologise and admit his errors for donkeys years after. And he did hurl shit. Like the fans breaking down the gates and being compliant with the Police and Government in the subsequent cover up. I don't think it was my best worded post but that is where it was coming from. And I still have zero compassion for him.

Compassion or not, I think you may be getting him confused with others now alleged to have perverted the course of justice?

Difficult to believe that Dukinfield didn't know (and therefore keep quiet about) the, for instance, altering of police notebooks. Those perverting the cause of justice were doing it to keep him out of the shitstorm because ultimately he was in charge of those doing the acts.
 I have absolutely no sympathy for him, he put the families and thousands of survivors through hell for decades, fuck him.

[wittonwarrior]

Think it’s fair to say the strategy for dealing with the aftermath came from the top. I believe the denials, editing out of notes etc was way above the direction of individual police officers

[UK Redsox]

Norman Bettison - charges dropped

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-45258766

[Richard E]

Duckenfield’s application for a stay of the proceedings fails so the trial goes ahead in January.

[Richard E]

Trial due to start tomorrow.

[UK Redsox]

Prosecution case outlined

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-46878778

[Damo70]

Prosecution case outlined

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-46878778

Have they entered a plea? That article seems to suggest Mackrell is pleading not guilty but doesn't indicate Duckenfield's plea.

[Nev]

Follow David Conn on Twitter, he is reporting from the courtroom.