SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Don't buy the S*n - Justice for the 97 - The Biggest Cover-up in British Legal History

160K views 819 replies 115 participants last post by  Howie_P 
#1 ·
Anyone else noticed the scumbag rag advertising on the Liverpool forum.

Any chance that they can be f*cked off this forum?

 
See less See more
1
#145 ·
The Observer

Hillsborough: Labour calls for police officers to be forced to give evidence

Inquiry must have powers to conduct a 'comprehensive and criminal investigation into the cover-up'

Link

Labour will tomorrow demand emergency legislation to compel serving and retired police officers to appear before the Hillsborough inquiry amid doubts that it lacks the necessary power to fully investigate the cover-up into the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans.

During a special House of Commons debate on the 1989 disaster, shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper will offer to work with the government to ensure that vital witnesses – including police whose original statements were changed – can be summoned to what is being billed as the biggest-ever inquiry into police malpractice.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said recently that it would conduct a wide-ranging investigation into allegations of police misconduct raised by the Hillsborough independent panel report published last month. It will consider new evidence unearthed by the 395-page report and 450,000 supporting documents. It will be able to recommend criminal charges or disciplinary action against the individuals concerned.

The independent panel found that none of the emergency services had effectively mobilised a major incident plan and disclosed that 41 of the victims could have survived had the response been better.

It also highlighted how police statements made by officers at the time had been doctored as a part of a systematic cover-up by the authorities that aimed to deflect blame on to Liverpool fans.

Last week the government also opened the way for fresh inquests when attorney general Dominic Grieve announced he would apply to the High Court to have the original verdicts of accidental death overturned. The families are pressing for charges of manslaughter against those whose mistakes contributed to the deaths.

While the families have welcomed the belated reopening of inquiries, there is concern, however, that the IPCC's remit and powers still leave it unable to compel serving police officers to attend interviews if they are not suspected themselves of criminality or misconduct. It also cannot compel former police officers to give evidence at all. The IPCC has said such limits on its power "seriously undermine public confidence in IPCC investigations".

"The inquest will be immensely important," Cooper said. "But we also need a comprehensive and criminal investigation into the cover-up. And I am concerned that much more still needs to be done to strengthen the inquiry arrangements.

"The inquiry will need to get to the bottom of why so many police statements were altered. Yet although the IPCC can pursue officers it believes have committed crimes, it doesn't have the powers to compel serving or former officers to be interviewed as witnesses. Nor can it compel civilians to give evidence. Everything possible should be done now to remove these obstacles to justice for the Hillsborough families. We can't let further inquiries drag on for years because they didn't have the powers or resources to get results."

It has also emerged that retired police officers are not liable for any misconduct sanction, raising concerns that former officers involved in any cover-up over Hillsborough will escape all justice.

In written evidence recently submitted to the home affairs select committee, the IPCC raised concerns about its inability to summon officers who are not under suspicion of criminal activity. In such cases, its investigators can only seek information through written questions to officers via their solicitors or other representatives.

The IPCC said: "Not only can this seriously undermine public confidence … it can also impact on the overall effectiveness and timeliness of investigations. Relying on the written submission and response of questions is generally a much longer and less satisfactory process than conducting a face to face interview, particularly when investigators need to follow-up answers provided by officers.

"The commission believes that all public servants – including police officers – should be accountable for their actions. "Where a fatal or serious incident following police contact occurs, the public are right to expect that those officers directly involved, or those who witnessed the incident, should be required to provide a detailed account to the body charged with investigating the matter.

"It is anomalous that regulations require a police officer to attend an IPCC interview if misconduct is alleged (which could include, for example, a speeding offence or an allegation of discriminatory treatment), but not if he or she is involved in or witnesses a death or serious injury."
 
#147 · (Edited)
The Independent

Hillsborough: Now CPS is under fire

Senior prosecutor was at 1990 meeting that decided not to read all the eyewitness evidence

Link



One of the most senior officials at the Crown Prosecution Service –which will decide whether South Yorkshire Police should be put in the dock over the Hillsborough disaster – was present when prosecutors decided in 1990 that they did not need to read all of the evidence before ruling out criminal charges.

Mike Kennedy, operations director at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), warned colleagues at the time that it could be "particularly embarrassing" if the public found out that the body had failed to read all the witness statements before reaching their momentous decision on who should be blamed for the tragedy, in which 96 Liverpool fans died.

The Independent on Sunday understands that the CPS did not consider all the witness statements so they could reach a "speedy conclusion", during a meeting in London nine months after the crush. Rather, they allowed the police to choose the evidence on which prosecutors based their decision.

Minutes of the meeting, released to the Hillsborough Independent Panel, reveal that: "Mr Kennedy indicated that he would be unhappy if that were to occur, particularly as there was a possibility of being discovered at a later stage [that not all the statements had been seen] … this might be particularly embarrassing if a decision not to prosecute was reached." A subsequent legal ruling recorded that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) was sent "approximately 11 per cent" of the Hillsborough witness statements.

The revelations put the legal establishment in the spotlight over the official failure to get to the truth of what happened when 96 people died at the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest on 15 April 1989. They also raised questions over whether Mr Kennedy should have any involvement in discussions over what happens next.

The present DPP, Keir Starmer, ordered a fresh inquiry this month after the panel revealed police had changed scores of statements in an attempt to push blame on to the fans. More than 200 serving and former officers are expected to be investigated.

But the CPS "Joint Opinion", issued in August 1990, ruled out charges against any organisations or individuals. The advice, from the late Lord Justice Williams and Peter Birts QC, has been used as a reference point ever since. The Hillsborough panel's report, released last month, stated that the Joint Opinion "was accepted by the CPS, apparently without further consideration".

Minutes from the meeting between Mr Birts, police officers and the CPS in January 1990, state: "There was considerable discussion to whether all the documentation, ie statements should be submitted to counsel [Mr Birts]." The document adds: "Mr Birts indicated he would be quite happy to read everything." The minutes also state that police should be told to "edit out superfluous material" from the statements.

A CPS spokeswoman last night insisted that a fresh team, not including Mr Kennedy, would review Hillsborough. She added: "There were no criticisms of the CPS in the panel report, and we are not specifically reviewing the previous decision-making. The DPP at the time took the advice of two highly distinguished counsel, Peter Birts QC and Gareth Williams QC … However, if when reviewing the material disclosed by the panel we reach different conclusions to those arrived at by the CPS previously, we will inevitably assess how and why any earlier decisions were taken."

Sheila Coleman, of the Hillsborough Justice Campaign, said the revelations about the original CPS review were "absolutely disgraceful". She added: "To only go through 11 per cent of the witness statements – it's unbelievable." Neither Mr Birts nor Mr Kennedy was available for comment yesterday.
 
#150 ·
Daily Post

Norman Bettison "boasted" about smearing Liverpool FC fans in aftermath of Hillsborough disaster, MPs told

Link

West Yorkshire Police Chief Constable Sir Norman Bettison "boasted" about smearing Liverpool FC fans in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster, a senior Labour MP has claimed.

Shadow transport secretary Maria Eagle claimed Sir Norman, who was a chief inspector with South Yorkshire Police at the time of the 1989 tragedy, revealed he had been asked to help "concoct" the force’s version of events.

She used parliamentary privilege to make the allegations which were based on new evidence from a witness who discussed the disaster with Sir Norman.

Ms Eagle, a Merseyside MP, said Sir Norman had "always denied any involvement in the dirty tricks campaign".

But she alleged he was behind the "black propaganda" campaign.

She quoted from a letter from John Barry, who was at Hillsborough for the FA Cup semi-final tie that led to the death of 96 Liverpool fans.

The letter, written in 1998 to a solicitor for the Hillsborough Family Support Group, was copied to Ms Eagle in 2009 and she has been given permission to make it public.

Ms Eagle said Mr Barry was studying part-time at Sheffield Business School where one of his fellow students was a "middle-ranking police officer".

Mr Barry wrote: "Some weeks after the game, and after I had been interviewed by West Midlands Police, we were in a pub after our weekly evening class.

"He told me that he had been asked by his senior officers to put together the South Yorkshire Police evidence for the forthcoming inquiry.

"He said that ’we are trying to concoct a story that all the Liverpool fans were drunk and we were afraid that they were going to break down the gates so we decided to open them’."

Ms Eagle said: "Mr Barry confirmed to me in the covering letter in 2009 that the middle-ranking police officer to whom he referred is Norman Bettison.

"He has agreed to swear a statement to that effect and I have put him in touch with the families’ solicitors.

"Here we have an account of a contemporaneous conversation in which Norman Bettison boasted he is engaged in a South Yorkshire Police plot to fit up the Liverpool fans and deflect blame from the force.

"That is indeed what happened subsequently, so what Sir Norman denies in public he boasts about in private conversations."

Sir Norman, who has announced he will retire in March, faces two investigations by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

The senior officer was referred to the IPCC over claims that he gave misleading information in the wake of the Hillsborough disaster and that he tried to influence West Yorkshire Police Authority’s decision-making process in relation to the referral.

West Yorkshire Police declined to comment.
 
#151 ·
Liverpool Echo

Margaret Thatcher’s former aide refuses to apologise for Hillsborough press briefing



Link

A KEY aide to Margaret Thatcher refused to apologise for allegedly briefing the media that a “tanked-up mob” of Liverpool fans was to blame for the Hillsborough tragedy.

Confronted by the ECHO at Westminster, Sir Bernard Ingham – the former prime minister’s press secretary – ducked a series of questions about his role in the spinning of the false story.

However the 80-year-old did agree to give evidence to any further investigations into the Hillsborough cover-up.

Sir Bernard had previously revealed South Yorkshire police officers told Lady Thatcher and him the day after the disaster that “a tanked-up mob” of fans outside the football ground were to blame.

Ever since he has faced accusations that journalists were encouraged to pursue that explanation as the Thatcher government sought to deflect attention from the police.

Yesterday the ECHO attempted to quiz Sir Bernard after he gave evidence to a Commons select committee inquiry.

But asked if he regretted anything about the way he briefed the media in the days after the 1989 tragedy he refused to answer.

But asked if he would, if required, give evidence, he said: “Of course I will.”
 
#152 ·
From the Echo -

Robbie Williams bids for Christmas number one with Hillsborough record

ROBBIE Williams will lead an all-star cast in an attempt to land a Christmas number one to raise money for the Hillsborough fight for justice.

Liverpool MP Steve Rotheram, Liverpool Legend Kenny Dalglish and renowned music producer Guy Chambers launched the plan to re-release ‘He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother’ by The Hollies.

The song was played during an emotional tribute to the 96 who died at Hillsborough at Goodison Park last month after the release of the independent panel’s report.

Robbie will be joined by Paloma Faith, Mel C, Rebecca Ferguson, Beverley Knight, and Shane McGowan.

Mick Jones from The Clash, Peter Hooton of The Farm, Pete Wylie, The Justice Tonight band, Richard Hawley, Chris Sharrock of Oasis, and Ren Harvieu are also in the line-up as are Dave McCabe from The Zutons, Paul Heaton of the Beautiful South, Hollie Cook, Jon McClure of Reverend & The Makers, John Power from Cast and Gerry Marsden.

Mr Rotheram, Labour MP for Walton, said: “For 23 years the bereaved Hillsborough families have carried the eternal flame of hope that we would one day see those responsible brought to justice. All profits from this CD will go towards assisting with any legal costs incurred in that fight. The families have suffered enough.

"Guy is going to produce something that is a fantastic piece of music.

"Hopefully the costs of the inquests will be taken care of, but there are no guarantees."

Last week attorney general Dominic Grieve said he would apply to the High Court to quash the “accidental death” inquest verdicts, which was based on lies. But it has not yet guaranteed that the families will not have to meet their own legal costs at the inquests.

He said if the government did agree to fund the inquests the money would be used towards any other legal costs.

The Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra will also perform on the single and a video will also be produced featuring celebrities such as comedian John Bishop.

The record will be released on December 17 with the aim of beating the X Factor to the Christmas number one.
Article continues here - http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/live...one-with-hillsborough-record-100252-32106381/
 
#153 ·
I still would never trust The Scum on anything. Even more loathsome was the way they hacked into the mobile of a murdered teenager.
Also while my brother( Sunderland supporter) gets The Scum, I always wonder how he would feel if a similar disaster happened to his team and they printed lies about drunken mackems and Geordie troublemakers.
 
#154 ·
The Independent

Up to 2,444 police officers from 20 different forces to be investigated over their role in the Hillsborough disaster

Link

The number of police officers to be investigated over their role in the Hillsborough disaster and its cover up is set to reach at least 2,444 from 20 different forces.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission said that up to 1,000 more officers were likely to feature in the inquiry than it had originally announced.

Chief executive of the IPCC Jane Furniss, told MPs at a meeting of the Home Affairs Select Committee that forces across the country had contacted the authority to volunteer names of staff either present at the match or involved later.

Investigators will then seek to establish which of those will be questioned as part of the inquiry into police conduct in the wake of the tragedy.

The final number is expected to be considerably smaller although the majority will be from South Yorkshire, which was responsible for the policing of the 1989 semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forrest in which 96 fans died, as well as from the West Midlands which was charged with leading the ensuing investigation into South Yorkshire Police.

A further 18 forces are also expected to be drawn into the investigation which MPs were earlier told by the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, could lead to prosecutions for perverting the course of justice.

Three of those forces are said to be involved in a significant way.

Ms Furniss also revealed that not all the documents relating to the disaster were passed to the Hillsborough Independent Panel whose devastating report has seen a new investigation launched into possible wrongdoing following the tragedy and new inquests into the deaths likely to be announced.

She said: “Because of the level of contact we are now having with families, bereaved families, and survivors we are already hearing quite significant members of the public who were at the match who said I tried to make a statement and wasn't allowed to, or I made a statement and that (which) is on the website isn't the statement I made, or I was bullied into withdrawing information.”

Ms Furniss said the Home Secretary had assured the IPCC that it would have sufficient resources to investigate the tragedy. Mr Starmer said no timetable had been set for the investigation.
 
#155 ·
The Observer

Hillsborough police accused of sexually harassing survivor

Young woman pestered by officer according to fresh allegations into the conduct of the authorities following the tragedy

Link


Police officers sexually harassed a vulnerable Hillsborough survivor and threatened others with criminal charges if they did not alter statements, according to fresh allegations into the conduct of the authorities following the tragedy.

One officer pestered a young woman for sex only weeks after the disaster, while other witnesses were reportedly threatened with jail if they did not change accounts that portrayed the police in a negative light.

Speaking publicly for the first time, Diane Lynn, 45, has described how a West Midlands officer grabbed her and repeatedly asked her to come back to his hotel for sex following an official witness interview a few weeks after the disaster that killed 96 people in April 1989.

Lynn, then a 22-year-old student nurse who was suffering from severe shock after witnessing the fatal crush, said she had not come forward previously because she thought no one would believe her. However, the recent findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, which exposed the extent of the police cover-up, had persuaded her that her account would be taken seriously.

In May 1989, plainclothes West Midlands officers, appointed to investigate the role of the South Yorkshire force at Hillsborough, interviewed Lynn and her brother as they collected statements from supporters present at the FA Cup semi-final. She said: "Afterwards they said, 'Do you want to show us around Liverpool?', and I said, 'No problem at all'. I thought it was a friendly thing to do, I love my city."

Although still traumatised, Lynn hoped that going out might assist a return to normality. "The officer was 40-odd, I was 22 – that was why I felt safe; plus I don't get drunk ever," she said.

However, later when she was showing the officer where to catch a taxi, his mood changed. Lynn said: "He started putting his arm around me, saying, 'Come back to my hotel, come back.' I knew he had a wife because he had mentioned it earlier in the conversation, but he said, 'My wife will never know.' I felt very uncomfortable, extremely uncomfortable, I just had to get out and ran. He wasn't happy."

Lynn, now married and a nurse living in Liverpool, said: "I was still in shock at the time, I was in a very bad place. Everything was not right. It wasn't until December [that year] that I realised I had post-traumatic stress. I still cry about it a lot, the way people were treated.

"I felt no one was listening to us, I never told anyone about it because people just think you've led them on, it's not what I'm like. In those days no one was going to believe you against the police."

At the time the police cover-up was under way, with recently disclosed evidence indicating that West Midlands police were part of a broader plot to blame the supporters and disguise the failings of the South Yorkshire force. Meanwhile, further fresh allegations reveal that West Midlands officers threatened survivors with criminal charges if they refused to retract statements that criticised police.

Chartered accountant Nick Braley, 43, said: "[The lead investigating officer] told me he would be checking if I had a criminal record and that I would be charged with wasting police time."

During his interview Braley, then a 19-year-old student at Sheffield City Polytechnic, refused to agree he had seen Liverpool fans breaking into the ground. He told West Midlands officers that police were helping push fans over the fence to alleviate a crush outside the stadium.

Braley said: "He spent a long time contesting my assertion that I had not witnessed 'unauthorised entry'. Later he wrote 'witnessed unauthorised entry' on my statement without my consent – that was absolutely not what I said."

In addition, Braley says his official police statement also omits several of his key assertions, including how police pushed fans back into the fatal crush and that the tenor of the interview was overtly political.

"The main interviewer decided early on in my interview that I was a "leftwing agitator who was out to get the police. He questioned if I was in the Socialist Workers' party or the Workers' Revolutionary party," he said.

The officer questioned whether Braley– an Ipswich fan who went to the match as a neutral with friends who were Liverpool supporters – was even at the game. "He disputed my attendance, saying my lack of injuries – bruised ribs and arm – were not enough given the greater injuries of other fans."

Since the Observer reported that survivors were bullied to change their statements as well as police, it has emerged that "significant" numbers of fans at Hillsborough have come forward to warn investigators that their witness statements were altered. Both the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, are conducting inquiries into possible crimes committed by police.

Parliament heard last week that the IPCC has been given a preliminary list of names of 1,444 officers currently serving with South Yorkshire police, although officials admit the true figure is likely to be nearer 2,444.
 
#156 ·
Be interesting to see how West Midlands police come out after all this. I was at Hillsborough with a friend on the Leppings Lane terrace. Our two other friends were in the seats above us. West Midlands police interviewed my two friends in the seats but not me and my friend despite being given our contacts. I've often wondered why. Too near to the truth maybe... Though reading the accounts above perhaps I was lucky not to be interviewed by these threatening police officers.
 
#157 ·
I was sat in the stands to the left, looking out of the Leppings Lane terrace.

I was interviewed and as far as i can remember the two coppers where quite fair with me, they did mention alcohol a lot but i had driven that day so it wasn't an issue.

Would i be able to find the transcript of my interview? i've often wondered about it because i was never given a copy.
 
#161 ·
So there will be no justice, those at the top are being protected like Bettison and Duckenfield who so happened to be retired, sickening, so much for British justice. Even when they're caught red handed they still have the audacity to change the rules and let the guilty get away with it.

Only serving police officers must answer Hillsborough investigation questions under new law

ONLY serving police officers - not those that have retired - will be compelled to give evidence to an investigation into the Hillsborough cover-up, it emerged yesterday.

A fast-track law will be passed by Christmas, enabling the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to begin quizzing witnesses early in the New Year, the Home Secretary said.

But ministers are believed to have decided it is better to act swiftly than to be dragged into a dispute about whether the powers can be extended to former officers, who are now civilians.

Whitehall sources said ex-officers would be expected to attend an interview as would any "conscientious member of the public" - given the huge importance of the investigation.

And they did not rule out toughening up the law further next year, if it emerged that further action was needed to ensure no-one involved in the cover-up escapes justice.

Announcing the Police (Complaints & Conduct) Bill - revealed by the ECHO yesterday - Theresa May said: "I made a commitment to ensure that the IPCC has the powers and resources it needs to carry out its investigations into the Hillsborough disaster.

"This commitment was made in the knowledge that the families of the victims and the survivors have waited 23 years for the truth about the disaster to be revealed.

"The IPCC has indicated that as part of its ongoing investigations, it will likely be in a position to call witnesses early in 2013."

The Bill will also allow the IPCC to probe any matter previously investigated by its predecessor, the Police Complaints Authority, the Home Secretary added.

Labour - which first pushed for the IPCC's powers to be strengthened - is believed to agree that it is better to get a simpler Bill through
parliament quickly.

However, it will continue to push for the appointment of a 'senior lead investigator' to pull together all the Hillsborough inquiries and ensure
they do not drag on for years.

The investigator would co-ordinate inquiries by the IPCC, by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and an expected probe by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

The landmark findings of the Hillsborough Panel have left the IPCC carrying out the largest inquiry ever into police conduct in the UK.

It is examining the role played by up to 2,444 police officers, who served at 25 different forces - not including South Yorkshire Police.

The Bill published yesterday will cover officers who have moved to a different force since the 1989 tragedy, as well as current civilian
employees.


Read more: Liverpool Echo http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/live...71&siteid=100252-name_page.html#ixzz2CyBPENJt
 
#166 ·
absolutely brilliant,
really emotional ending.

Pre-order the single for mobile download by texting ‘JUSTICE’ to 80010.
just £1.
 
#167 ·
A reminder that the single goes on sale tomorrow. It doesn't matter whether you purchase on-line from iTunes, Amazon, etc, or in-store at HMV, Tesco, Sainsbury's or Morrison's, it will still count towards the chart, and most importantly, the proceeds still go to the families.

JFT96.
 
#168 ·
The Guardian

Hillsborough families move another step closer to justice

23 years after disaster, inquest verdicts are quashed as new police investigation is announced

Link

Since the Hillsborough independent panel published its report on 12 September, blowing away the myths and police lies about how 96 people died at the FA Cup semi-final on 15 April 1989, there has been a sense that consequences are falling almost naturally into place.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is conducting an inquiry into the South Yorkshire force's mismanagement of the event that day, the alteration of 116 of their own officers' statements to blame supporters' misbehaviour and deflect culpability from themselves, and the West Midlands police's investigation of the disaster.

The director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, is examining whether any criminal charges should be brought over what happened at Hillsborough and its aftermath. A new police investigation, into the failures which caused so many people to die at a football match on a sunny spring day in the 1980s, was announced just as court 5 on the Strand was preparing for the application to quash the inquest verdict.

So even the bereaved Hillsborough families, who lost their loved ones and have ever since battled the legal processes which failed to deliver the truth and justice, had to remind themselves of the historic significance of this day. The inquest into the Hillsborough disaster, whose conduct, attitude, procedures and verdict of accidental death they always considered an outrage, has been quashed, 21 long and terrible years since it concluded.

The families have fought with unshakeable determination for exactly this, legal recognition that the inquest's assumptions about Hillsborough were flagrantly wrong, but in truth they doubted for years if they would ever see it happen. In 1993, a judicial review application on behalf of six families to overturn the inquest verdict was turned down by this same high court. The families' campaign over two decades was widely ignored, smothered by a general acceptance of the police lies that drunk and misbehaving supporters were to blame, and the injustice of those smears, and of the way the inquest was conducted, were not generally understood.

Anne Williams, whose 15-year-old son, Kevin, died in the horrors of Hillsborough, contested the medical evidence accepted by the Sheffield coroner, Dr Stefan Popper, that all the victims had received their fatal injuries, and could not have been saved, after 3.15pm on the day of the disaster. Two people who attended to Kevin had told West Midlands police he had a pulse, and said "Mum", before dying at 4pm. Those witnesses said they were subsequently pressured by West Midlands police officers to change that evidence. Williams has over these many years made three separate "memorials" – applications to the attorney general for Kevin's inquest verdict to be quashed – but was refused each time.

Until the panel, chaired by James Jones, the bishop of Liverpool, produced its report, substantially authored by Prof Phil Scraton of Queens University Belfast, the families could not see any route to justice that they had not already exhausted.

Yet here they were, cramming into the wood panelling and neo-gothic vaults of the Royal Courts of Justice, hearing Igor Judge, the lord chief justice, calmly reading as a judgment much of what they argued themselves, to no avail, all those lost years.

This most senior judge, flanked by Mr Justice Ian Burnett and the chief coroner, Mr Justice Peter Thornton QC, recorded their admiration for the families' fight, and expressed great sympathy for what they had endured.

"Notwithstanding its falsity," he said, "the tendency to blame the fans was disappointingly tenacious and lingered for many years."

Because of the reputation football supporters had for hooliganism in the 1980s, he said disapprovingly, "there was fertile ground for the acceptance of rumour, gossip and deliberate misinformation, attributing the deaths to drunken misbehaviour by the fans".

As Lord Justice Taylor found in his official report in August 1989 and the panel confirmed 23 years later, recorded by Judge, there was no incidence of drunk or misbehaving fans contributing to the disaster, however hard and insistently the South Yorkshire police pushed that tale.

Judge described his four grounds for quashing the inquest as new evidence, based on the panel's report and analysis of 450,000 documents relating to Hillsborough, but in fact their essentials have been known, and central to the families' campaign, in the 21 years since the inquest verdict of March 1991.

First was Popper's conclusion that all the victims of Hillsborough had received fatal injuries by 3.15pm on the day of the disaster, from which no medical assistance could have saved them. That finding, based on pathologists' views then, is "not sustainable", Judge ruled. The 3.15pm "cut-off" of evidence, imposed by the coroner, prevented any examination of the disaster response by the police and ambulance services. The panel did analyse it, finding it was chaotic, and there was "clear and repeated evidence of failures in leadership and … co-ordination".

Now, a review of the medical evidence by Dr Bill Kirkup, the panel's medical expert, and the pathologist Prof Jack Crane, has established that at least 58 of the 96 victims might have been saved after 3.15pm had proper medical aid been administered.

Next was the emphasis on alcohol, the police case entertained at the inquest, profoundly resented by the families and all of Liverpool since the stories were first spread. The attorney general, Dominic Grieve QC, who made his application in person, said allowing that argument to be run, and noting the alcohol levels in the blood of those who died, breached the legal principle not to "wrongly stigmatise the deceased".

Third was the now notorious alteration by the South Yorkshire police of junior officers' statements, to deflect blame for the disaster from their own failures. These statements emerged in 1997, yet the families' cry, that this was evidence of a cover-up effort by the police, was denied for another 15 years. Judge described the operation in court as "reprehensible".

Fourth was the wretched state of Sheffield Wednesday's Hillsborough ground, its catalogue of safety failures, and crushes at that Leppings Lane end in 1981 and 1988, which Lord Justice Taylor itemised in his official report 23 years ago. The panel went into further detail, stating that the previous crushes were "unheeded warnings", and the disaster crush of 1989 was "foreseeable". Judge ruled that this area of the disaster "merits close consideration" in a new inquest.

The families, having suffered such dreadful loss, were plunged into a legal system which, Judge acknowledged with regret, had been "unbearable, dispiriting and prolonged". Even that was an understatement: for them, Margaret Aspinall, the chair of the Hillsborough Family Support Group (HSFG), who lost her 18-year-old son, James, says repeatedly, it was "a disgrace".

Since full disclosure of the Hillsborough documents was called for by the Labour then ministers Andy Burnham and Maria Eagle, and agreed by the then prime minister, Gordon Brown, the families have experienced a different British establishment, giving Rolls-Royce service. The panel of eight experts chaired by Jones produced a formidably rigorous report, supported by a small civil service secretariat working with unflappable efficiency.

The wheels of justice have turned quickly since; few believed the hearing to quash the inquest verdict would possibly be held this side of Christmas. Having listened to Grieve's application and QCs Michael Mansfield and Pete Wetherby representing the families, the three judges retired for just four minutes before returning to quash the inquest. After a 23-year campaign, the hearing took an hour and a half.

All of these elements: the state of Sheffield Wednesday's Hillsborough ground with its out-of-date safety certificate, Sheffield city council's failure to properly oversee safety, the Football Association's decision to hold its semi-final there nevertheless, the South Yorkshire police's conduct on the day and subsequently, and that of the South Yorkshire ambulance service, will now be examined fully in a new inquest. Judge said this time it should not to be "adversarial", and should be held without unnecessary delay.

"The families of those who died will be vindicated and the memory of those who died will be respected," Judge said.

That is the least to which British people, already propelled into their worst nightmare, were entitled, yet respect was absent from the treatment the families endured until the tide turned on the 20th anniversary in 2009.

That passage of time is one of the further tragedies of Hillsborough.

"We were all young people when this started," shrugged Trevor Hicks, president of the HFSG, who was at the match himself, with his then wife Jenni, at which their two teenage daughters, Sarah and Victoria, died in the Leppings Lane. Several bereaved parents who fought the long battle alongside the others have now themselves died. Many others are unwell, all are approaching 24 years older than they were when they waved their children off to that football match.

Williams, to see an application to quash the verdict finally granted the fourth time around, arrived on the Strand frail, pushed in a wheelchair. Shortly after the panel report did provide the families with their vindication, Williams was diagnosed with terminal cancer. She has moved to a hospice in Southport, but was determined she would see this day. Outside afterwards, she said of the police: "Why did they go to such extremes? Why didn't they give us the truth? We could have mourned our children, not had to spend 23 years fighting the system."

Quiet, but still indomitable, she said: "This is what I fought for. I was never going to give up."
 
#171 ·
Excellent news re the Justice Collective single, although somewhat disappointing that there is still ignorance on its cause from sections of the media who should know better. ITV's lunchtime news said all proceeds would go to the Hillsborough Justice Campaign which isn't the case as there are 3 different Hillsborough groups and some of the 96's next of kin aren't affiliated to either. The proceeds I as In understand it (although I'll welcome any correction/clarification) will be administered independently i.e. by somebody not connected to any group and any family can apply for some of it. Even though the direct legal costs are now being met by the government there's plenty of others that need meeting such as travel to inquests/potential loss of earnings etc.
 
#172 ·
Irvine Patnick, the Sheffield MP who partook in spreading some of those malicious lies, has died. I have no doubt that he was under a lot of stress following the publishing of the panel's report and the greater scrutiny into his involvement in the events of 1989. I also have no doubt that having to hear "He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother" went some way towards adding to that stress. He's avoided a trial, is all I'll say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20872924

Former MP Sir Irvine Patnick dies

The former Conservative MP Sir Irvine Patnick has died, his family has said in a statement.

He represented Sheffield Hallam between 1987 and 1997, the constituency now held by the Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg.

Sir Irvine was the only Conservative MP in South Yorkshire, and was also a Conservative government whip.

He was criticised in the Hillsborough Independent Panel's report on the Hillsborough disaster.

Ninety-six Liverpool fans died after the crush at Sheffield Wednesday's stadium during the 1989 FA Cup semi-final with Nottingham Forest.

September's report confirmed him as the Sun newspaper's source for a story which smeared Liverpool fans after the disaster.

It found that the sources for the story which had the headline "The Truth" was a news agency reporting conversations with South Yorkshire Police and Sir Irvine.

Sir Irvine had apologised for his comments, saying he was "deeply and sincerely sorry" and insisted he had been given "wholly inaccurate" information by police officers.
 
#174 ·
The Independent

Sir Irvine Patnick - source for Sun story that smeared Liverpool fans after Hillsborough disaster - dies, aged 83

Link

The former Conservative MP who helped smear Liverpool fans after the Hillsborough disaster has died.

Sir Irvine Patnick, who was a source for a Sun story criticising the supporters' behaviour in the tragedy, died yesterday aged 83.

He was the MP for Sheffield Hallam from 1987 to 1997. A successful businessman before becoming an MP, he was knighted in 1994.

There had been calls for him to be stripped of his knighthood since his role in The Sun's coverage of the disaster was made clear by the Hillsborough Independent Panel in September.

Amid widespread revulsion at the police cover-up which sought to shift the blame for the tragedy to the fans, Sir Irvine said in September he was "deeply and sincerely sorry" about his role. He said he had passed on police information that was "inaccurate, misleading and plain wrong".

Ninety-six Liverpool fans died in the crush at Sheffield Wednesday's stadium during the 1989 FA Cup semi-final with Nottingham Forest.

A statement issued by his family to the BBC said: "Sir Irvine Patnick OBE, died peacefully on 30 December 2012, aged 83, in Sheffield.

"He was a much loved husband of Lynda and father of Suzanne and Matthew.

"He'll be sadly missed by his brothers and by all his family and friends."

Alan Ryder, former deputy chairman of the Sheffield Hallam Conservatives, said Sir Irvine always did his best for the city.

Mr Ryder said: "He was a very good councillor in Sheffield and he was also a local MP at a time when obviously, when he was on the council and in government, he was very much a minority in this area, being only one of a very small band of Tories.

"He always did his best for Sheffield, his record over the years shows that, and I'm sure everybody who knew him would say the same."
 
#175 ·
The Guardian

Hillsborough families find new, stronger voices in their fight for justice

Claim that West Midlands police did not conduct an independent inquiry into the tragedy has gathered strength

Link

Lord [Geoffrey] Dear, the chief constable of West Midlands police when his officers conducted the investigations into the Hillsborough disaster, considers it a high point of his career, arguing the force did an outstanding job in a short time for Lord Justice Taylor's official inquiry.

That glowing view is bitterly disputed by families of the 96 people who died at Hillsborough, and by many who survived the disaster and gave their testimony to Dear's officers. Since the Hillsborough Independent Panel published its report on 12 September, families and survivors are increasingly coming forward to complain that the West Midlands force did not conduct a truly independent investigation. They argue that the West Midlands police were complicit with South Yorkshire police's campaign to evade its own officers' responsibility for the disaster, and seek to falsely shift the blame onto the Liverpool supporters themselves.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is investigating West Midlands for several issues highlighted by the report, including whether officers "put pressure on three witnesses to change their statements." Five officers are individually under investigation, including Dear himself, and Mervyn Jones, who as assistant chief constable headed West Midlands' Hillsborough operations, according to Dear. The IPCC said it is examining: "General concerns in the report about inadequate investigation [by West Midlands police] and failure in its direction and control."

Further allegations against the West Midlands police have since been made to the IPCC. They include that officers pressured other witnesses to withdraw criticisms of South Yorkshire police; that they concentrated on and sympathised with South Yorkshire police's discredited account that supporters were drunk and misbehaving; failed to conduct an investigation rigorous enough to result in criminal or disciplinary proceedings against anyone, and played a central role in the failings of the Hillsborough inquests which have now been quashed.

The Hillsborough Family Support Group and Hillsborough Justice Campaign have also called on the IPCC to investigate the role of Detective Superintendent Stanley Beechey. He was under investigation himself in 1989-1990 over the multiple malpractice of the West Midlands serious crime squad, of which he was a former head. With 49 other serious crime squad officers, Beechey was stated by Dear to have been transferred to "non-operational duties". However, internal documents show that Beechey played a central, senior operational role in the West Midlands criminal investigation into Hillsborough, reporting to the Director of Public Prosecutions, then working for the coroner at the inquest.

Family members whose children died at Hillsborough also believe their home telephones were tapped by West Midlands police. Hilda Hammond, whose 14-year-old son, Philip, died in the fatal crush in Hillsborough's Leppings Lane end, is haunted by an episode of interference on her phone the following spring, 1990. She was at home in Aigburth, Liverpool, talking to her friend who lived near Llanberis, north Wales. Their conversation was suddenly interrupted by the voice of another mother, Jenni Hicks, whose teenage daughters, Sarah and Victoria, died at Hillsborough. Hicks was at home in Pinner, Middlesex, talking to one of Sarah's friends in Liverpool, a conversation Hilda Hammond and her friend could clearly hear.

Hicks's then husband, Trevor, was the HFSG chairman, contesting the South Yorkshire police version of Hillsborough and calling for prosecutions. Phil Hammond, Hilda's husband, was an active HFSG member and later the chairman. Hilda Hammond is convinced their phones were tapped.

"There is no other explanation for it – what are the chances of interference on the line, and it is another Hillsborough family?" she said. "It was horrible. All these years I have considered it the ultimate betrayal."

The HFSG has formally requested the IPCC to conduct a full, transparent investigation into the allegation by Hammond, Hicks and others, of phone tapping. Dear told the Guardian it is "nonsense" to allege that families' phones were tapped: "I would have had to make the application personally," he said.

West Midlands police were formally appointed by South Yorkshire police themselves to investigate Hillsborough, on 16 April 1989, the day after the disaster. When Taylor was asked to conduct the official inquiry, the evidence gathered by West Midlands was "made available" to him, as well as for South Yorkshire police's "internal purposes."

Documents disclosed as part of the panel process are renewing suspicions that the West Midlands police were sympathetic to the South Yorkshire force. West Midlands officers used a standard questionnaire and checklist when interviewing witnesses, including Liverpool supporters who survived the appalling horror of the Leppings Lane "pens" 3 and 4, with people dying all around them. The checklist was heavily weighted towards the South Yorkshire police narrative, which sought to blame supporters' misbehaviour for the fatal crush. Under a heading of "Investigation," the possible categories were all aimed at supporters: "forged tickets, forcing gates, unauthorised access, alcohol" and "disorder". There was no list of possible misconduct by police or any other body. When witnesses gave evidence of police inaction, negligence, assault or abuse, as many survivors did, they had to be noted in a catch-all section headed: "Any category not specified."

The questionnaire, while it did include questions about police control, asked in six separate places about whether supporters were drinking, fighting, gaining "unauthorised entry," and "disorder."

Some survivors, wholly vindicated by the panel, are recalling with greater confidence their discomfort at how West Midlands officers interviewed them. Young men who had gone to support Liverpool in the FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest but found themselves in a hellish experience, were told their parents did not need to be present at the interviews.

Similar stories are emerging, of West Midlands officers telling survivors they were not in pens 3 or 4 where they said they were, that their story was not particularly bad or was irrelevant. One survivor of pen 3, who did not want to be named, says pressure was put on him, quite forcefully, to amend and withdraw criticism of South Yorkshire police officers. He has given a detailed account to the IPCC. No explanation was ever given to these witnesses about who would be called to give evidence to Taylor.

Despite the South Yorkshire police's relentlessly made case that fans' drunkenness and misbehaviour caused the disaster, almost no evidence was found to support their story. Taylor cut through to the safety failures by Sheffield Wednesday and Sheffield City Council, and previous crushes in the Leppings Lane end. He identified the South Yorkshire police's loss of control outside the ground, then the decision to open an exit gate to allow a large number of supporters in, and the failure to close off the tunnel leading to the already overcrowded central "pens," as the prime causes of the disaster.

Dear regards Taylor's findings as vindication for the West Midlands police inquiry. He points to the tribute Taylor paid in his introduction to the West Midlands police for "their speed and dedication in gathering the evidence," and to similar approval given by the Football Supporters Association.

After Taylor's critical findings about the disaster's causes, on 16 August 1989 South Yorkshire police themselves asked West Midlands police to investigate whether any criminal charges should follow.

West Midlands police were also reporting to the Police Complaints Authority who would decide whether policemen should face disciplinary action.

On 16 August 1989, Dear was asked if West Midlands police would conduct those investigations. Just two days earlier, Dear had disbanded his serious crime squad, after a string of miscarriages of justice and collapsed prosecutions. It had emerged that West Midlands officers had habitually fabricated evidence, including inserting confessions into suspects' statements.

Questions about the squad dated back to 1975 when the "Birmingham Six" were convicted of the two pub bombings; they spent 16 years in prison before forensic tests revealed parts of their statements had been fabricated.

The PCA and DPP announced investigations into these alleged malpractices within West Midlands police. Dear stated he was transferring 50 serving and former serious crime squad officers to "non-operational duties." That was widely understood to mean the officers would have no involvement in criminal investigations, given the allegations about malpractice. Dear later described the postings as "non-jobs."

DS Beechey was a former head of the serious crime squad, at the time deputy head of West Midlands CID. While other senior officers were posted to research, personnel and road safety talks in schools, Beechey's posting was for "studying technical aspects of Hillsborough". Dear has said that involved examining fuzzy video footage.

Beechey's "non-operational duties" lasted from 14 August 1989, when the serious crime squad was disbanded, until he was cleared of wrongdoing and returned to "operational duties" on 30 November 1990.

Bereaved families at the Hillsborough inquest found him during that period playing a senior role at the now discredited "mini-inquests," held to give limited summaries of what had happened, which began in April 1990. The families were contacted by George Tomkins, a Liverpool man who claimed he had been framed by Beechey for a crime of which he was acquitted. Beechey was himself interviewed under caution about this allegation on 20 June 1990. He was never disciplined or prosecuted for any misconduct, but Tomkins sued for malicious prosecution, which West Midlands police settled, paying Tomkins £40,000.

The families have been concerned about Beechey's role ever since the inquest, and the HFSG and HJC have asked the IPCC to investigate.

Documents released to the panel, however, reveal that Beechey's role was more central than has been understood for 22 years. While on "non-operational duties" and under investigation himself, Beechey was in fact working as a senior detective in the West Midlands team investigating Hillsborough on behalf of the DPP. He liaised directly with the DPP and PCA – which was investigating him at the time. He was described in August 1990 as third in command of the West Midlands police's Hillsborough investigation team, working from the Nechells Green police station in Birmingham.

West Midlands police have never acknowledged this, and in 2009 described Beechey as "a later addition" to the Sheffield coroner's team, his role: "Of a limited, overseeing nature". In fact he was appointed inquest manager, the second most senior police position, in April 1990, at the beginning of the inquest process.

Attention has always focused on allegations of culpability among the senior officers who were in command at Hillsborough, Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield and Superintendent Bernard Murray. But witnesses' statements reveal many different complaints were made about police officers' conduct. Several supporters gave accounts of a mounted policeman outside the ground swearing at and punching supporters; of police officers inside punching fans, swearing and being abusive, and assaulting or pushing fans back into the pens when they tried to escape to safety. There were many accounts of fans in the pens screaming for their lives, for the police officers around the pitch to open the gates at the front to allow people out, but failing to do so until dozens of people were already dead.

In an initial report to the DPP, West Midlands police had decided to interview Duckenfield, Murray, Superintendents Marshall and Greenwood and just two junior officers, of whom the report said it was "very difficult to imagine" they ought to be prosecuted. The West Midlands investigators considered they should examine: "The extent to which the effects of alcohol played a part," and said "the role of supporters may not have been given sufficient prominence [by Taylor]".

Thus, the panel noted: "While Taylor had dismissed the issues of drunkenness and ticketless fans as contributing factors to the disaster, the report put them back on the agenda."

One of Beechey's key roles in the Hillsborough criminal investigation was to re-interview survivors who had criticised police officers' conduct, to see if they wanted to translate these into official complaints. The Guardian has seen 28 statements, from September 1989 to early 1990, in which Beechey personally interviewed witnesses.

One was Eddie Spearritt. He was with his 14-year-old son, Adam, and was deeply traumatised by being unable to save Adam, who died, while Eddie suffered crushing injuries but lived. Spearritt maintained to Beechey a complaint against an officer, who he said refused to open the gate "despite my loud appeals directly to him and his close proximity to our position."

Just one other witness's testimony was gathered to that officer's alleged failure to open the gate. The officer did not face charges for neglect of duty, or any other criminal or disciplinary offence. Another survivor, Damian Kavanagh, then 20, had described police refusing to open the gate at the front of pen 4 despite people screaming and shouting. He saw the gate opened briefly and two or three people get out, then: "They were pushed back in by the police and the gate was shut again."

When the gate was finally opened, Kavanagh managed to scramble to it over people's heads. When he reached the gate, he had said a police officer: "Grabbed hold of me by my shirt and said: 'You fucking ****,' and tried to push me back in."

Kavanagh managed to push past the officer and get onto the pitch, where he helped carry bodies on advertising hoardings across the Hillsborough pitch. On 3 November 1989, Kavanagh was visited at work by Beechey. He made a second statement, largely repeating his first, except it did not include the observation of people getting out then being pushed back into the pen. Beechey returned a week later, with a video showing the officer who had sworn and grabbed Kavanagh. Making a third statement, Kavanagh said in it: "I do not wish to make a specific complaint against this officer." The statements note Kavanagh "withdraws complaint".

Kavanagh recalls he did not feel pressured to withdraw the complaint. However, he says he was not even made aware that West Midlands police had moved on to a criminal investigation He does not recall Beechey explaining the significance of making a formal complaint.

"I didn't understand why he had come back for me to tell him everything a second time," Kavanagh said.

"Now I feel very uneasy, I feel they were happy they had ticked me off, and there wasn't going to be a complaint against that officer."

On 19 February 1990, Beechey met the Conservative MP Irvine Patnick at the House of Commons. Patnick was spreading stories of supporters' drunkenness and misbehaviour. He had been given by White's news agency, the source of the false allegations infamously published by The Sun, extracts of sworn statements by stewards, police officers and an ambulance officer. These included allegations against fans – although they also included observations of supporters attending to the injured and dead. Patnick wrote to Beechey, sending these statements, on 21 February 1990. He also enclosed a report by Michael Shersby MP, who was assisting South Yorkshire police's campaign against the supporters and the Taylor report findings.

Patnick wrote to Beechey: "I do think that the South Yorkshire police's evidence was not fully taken into account at the [Taylor] inquiry and … I do so –hope something can be done to rectify this."

It is not known if Patnick's briefing against the Liverpool supporters informed Beechey or the West Midlands investigation for the DPP. There is no record of Patnick being challenged about how White's had copies of sworn statements. Now, nearly 23 years later, the IPCC is investigating whether West Midlands police officers themselves "inappropriately" provided the statements to White's.

Of Beechey's role, Dear says it still fell within his definition of "non-operational duties" and "non-jobs".

"The main purpose of non-operational duties was to keep officers away from day-to-day detective work in the West Midlands, where they would have the 'fluidity' to potentially interfere with the investigation into themselves," Dear said.

However, Dr Tim Kaye, who as a Birmingham University law professor conducted an independent investigation into the serious crime squad's activities, concluding in May 1991 that they were "alarming," rejected that outright: "'Non-operational duties' should not include carrying out interviews, because fabricating confessions was an endemic problem within the squad," Kaye said.

"West Midlands police said Beechey was on 'non-operational duties', 'studying technical aspects of Hillsborough'. Since we now know that Beechey was interviewing witnesses, these statements sound like weasel words."

While there is no evidence that Beechey did anything improper on the Hillsborough investigation, the HFSG and the HJC are calling for a thorough investigation into his activities and why he was given so prominent a role. Dear told The Guardian he agreed that the IPCC should fully investigate.

On 30 August 1990, the DPP concluded "there is no evidence to justify any criminal proceedings" against South Yorkshire Police, Sheffield Wednesday, Sheffield City Council and "insufficient evidence to justify proceedings against any officer of the South Yorkshire police or any other person for any offence".

The PCA considered 17 complaints from members of the public, brought to them by West Midlands police. They dismissed 15, then decided Duckenfield and Murray should be charged with neglect of duty. Duckenfield retired on medical grounds on 10 November 1991, then the PCA decided not to proceed against Murray alone.

Dear asserts that the West Midlands investigations were "scrupulous" and he will be cleared of any fault by the IPCC.

However, the Liverpool Labour MP Maria Eagle says she has always found it highly significant that South Yorkshire police appointed the West Midlands police to investigate Hillsborough, and were given all the documents when the investigation concluded.

"South Yorkshire police were seeking to exonerate themselves for their own failings and blame supporters for the disaster," Eagle said: "My overriding impression is that West Midlands police were working not as independent investigators, but on behalf of South Yorkshire police."

West Midlands police declined to comment, or explain its description of Beechey's role, while the IPCC investigation continues.
 
Top