Hillsborough papers free fans from blame

His closest proximity to the reality of football in all its light and darkness would be his snotty nosed attempts at the Eton and Harrow wall game.

JFT96

He can't, because he didn't write the story, just the headline. The journalist who wrote the article has said that his story mentioned the police's claims about fan behaviour as just that: claims, and that he saw McKenzie changing the front page to 'the truth'.

Generally, I wouldn't piss on a Tory if he was on fire, but Cameron spoke well today. Fair play to him.

The question remains: did Thatcher connive in this campaign of lies? The report says not, but one has to wonder...

And the whole thing, yet another demonstration of the depths that the police can go to; legalised violence. I have ever less respect for them, and ever more contempt.

It seems to me that her govt especially, which used the police heavily for quasi-political reasons (think miners strike, for example), would at best shy away from shining a torch too brightly on their actions.

My assumption is that everything in PAPER has been disclosed, as I can't see that the conservative party could conceal facts any further, or risk another cover up.

Cameron was right to apologies, and I would have found it pretty strange if he didn't. Yes, he has personal wealth, an Etonian and is privileged, but I believe his apology to be genuine. For those who want to knock him, why did it take 23 years to arrive at this point, and what the hell did brown or Blair do before him?

'Cameron spoke well, fair play to him'

Bollocks! He spoke without reading the report. He said exactly what everyone wanted to hear and people lapped it up.

The man is entirely self serving. If he thought it would get him more votes he would happily blame the fans.

Read the report for yourselves and draw your own conclusions.

Who gives a toss about some millionaire puppet dishing out an apology that isn't even his to give out. The man doesn't give a crap - don't kid yourselves.

Hopefully this brings The Sun to its knees... and that odious cretin Kelvin McKenzie ends up in jail.

The shithouses in charge of policing killed those people and should be brought to justice. This was the final nail in the Tories' eighties plan to choke Merseyside once and for all.

They took our docks, industry, and stole our dignity... long may she and all involved rot.

Phil - well, we'll have to agree to differ, won't we. But Cameron properly apologised on behalf of the government and, to repeat myself for emphasis, he is entitled to apologise on behalf of the country because he's the democratically elected PM of Britain! The fact that you and I didn't vote for him is neither here nor there. You then go on to seemingly question the right to vote of anyone who doesn't agree with you! Ouch.

I appreciate the fact that the PM issued a clear apology, and from what I've gathered so far, so do the relatives of the deceased. So, as EM Forster once wrote: "Two cheers for democracy".

His apology is contrived marketing. Pointless positioning from a man whos social peers allowed this to happen and then buried the facts.

Kev #285
Camerom is not our "democratically elected" PM, he didn't win enough seats to become PM and only did so because of the coalition with the Lib Dems, we could just as easily have had a Labour leader as PM.

That's an incredibly poor post.

There's too many people jumping on the Hillsborough campaign looking to get back at Thatcher and the "system".

"Thatchers Private Army against the working class", "Shithouses in charge of policing killed those people".

Really ?

The truth that happened is

1. 96 football supporters went to a game and never came home.
2. The police mis-managed the crowd control
3. Too many fans arrived late putting pressure at the turnstiles.
4. The police made a catastrophic error and opened the side gates.
5. The central tunnel behind the goal should have been closed.

Many errors were made that tragic day in a sequence of events which cannot be changed, those people in charge that day should and will be held to account for gross mismanagement.

No single person is to blame and we must remember that nothing can heal the wounds for the families and friends of those people who never came home.

Blaming Thatcher, the Tory Party, The Sun newspaper is not the way forward.

How about the police claiming that the poor Brazilian a policeman killed in 2005 – 2 weeks after 7/7 – had acted so suspiciously: "had a thick jacket, possibly concealing a bomb, had vaulted the turnstile at the tube station and fled like the clappers from police", followed by press reports – supplied by the police? I wonder – that he was an illegal immigrant. Not only mendacious slurs, but incompetent: they did not gather up all the CCTV evidence, which was later shown by others – not the police – that the man wore only a t-shirt and jeans, and walked calmly through the turnstiles after using his ticket. What utter scum!

That was when I really started disliking the police – possibly unfair as there will always be bad 'uns? So why the high level cover-ups? Remember the newspaper seller after the anti-IMF demo in London? Killed, followed by a dodgy coroner report, and then semi-justice only after The Guardian published a video it was sent of a policeman throwing him to the ground. Or the Tottenham riots that spilt out over London last year were sparked not by poverty or criminality, but by "another" teenager killed in police custody.

Afterwards, figures from Amnesty – I believe it was – showed that over 1,000 had died in police custody since the war: how many prosecutions of police officers? None... none

Sigh.

Ciaran (290) - that is utter nonsense. True, we vote for a party, and that party elects its own leader. We know who the leader is when we vote for a party. FFS, how is it his fault that what you call his "social peers" screwed up before he even entered politics? It simply isn't. Thatcher is the one who needs investigating, not Cameron.

I did next to nothing. And yet, I was lucky. I always remember the number 85 rather than 96. That was the last figure broadcast of the mounting number of dead before I could watch no more: some half hour later, my brother finally phoned home. He was alive.

It was half past 8, over 5 and half hours after the game was abandoned. My anguish was short, though I'd started accepting the only possible reason for brother not calling for so long was that he was dead. Horrible.

Deep respect to those families and bereaved friends.

I am afraid you are misguided at best or being deliberately disingenuous if you believe that there was no tacit involvement of Margaret Thatcher. If you have followed today’s events in any detail it has been widely reported that Thatcher was made aware that South Yorkshire Police had been deceitful and she therefore knowingly allowed the public to be misled and nullify any chance of a public enquiry at the time of the event. It’s clear now that no fans were guilty but all of the authorities engaged in a cover up that would shame the worst type of autocracy.

As for the Sun (and its owners) its relationship with the Tory Party was incestuous at the time and it took great delight at attacking the working class during the Thatcher years. Let’s be frank if it had not been for the sustained tenacity of the campaigners the establishment would have never issued an apology to any of the fans and simply swept the issue under the carpet.

I find your stance pretty disgraceful really. Hopefully there was some resolution for heartbroken families today who have not only had to contend with the loss of their loved ones, but have had to put with their characters being defamed by a tissue of lies.

It would be right and proper if we showed our support in some way on Monday to those families who have suffered this double indignity.

Ah, all this politics is very much to the point, but somehow it feels a bit unworthy right now. It's been an emotional day all round.

The families of the deceased have been vindicated and the city of Liverpool's good name has been (in a sense) restored. I'm glad about that.

Tell me, when was the last time you voted for a Prime Minister?

Who voted for Gordon Brown?

The PM is not a democratically elected position, that is a fact.

You'd make a great striker by all accounts, but as a political analyst you'd be quite lost.

The Families have done a signal service to democracy and decency in this cou

This is not the time or the place for comparing with Bloody Sunday. But you are certainly wrong in assuming it meant anything to me...

I also think it's entirely relevant to cite his social peers whenever he's pursuing the same social wasteland politics that propagated this shambles in the first place.

Sadly the British police are just that. Experts in collusion. You could quite easily remove the word 'these' from your post and it would be just as true. But this is society we live in and accept.

Also, Norman Bettison should spend the rest of his worthless life in prison.

There you have it in a nutshell - people will only believe what they want to believe - the report makes it crystal clear there was no cover up by theThatcher Government .

People wanted the 'truth' - now they have it if they could only accept it but I suspect some have their own agendas

On a separate point yes it was despicable that blood tests were taken from the dead in a bid to impugn them but that only proves that those poor guys weren't drunk - it says nothing about the 2000 or so gatecrashers who arrived late, forces a gate to be opened for them and who were at the back of crowd pushing their way forward not at the from where the majority of fatalities where.

We have all been in that situation before and know the score even if it isn't what some people want to hear

BTW for the record I fully support the prosecution of those who covered up and lied but not the playing of that dirge at Goodison under any circumstances.

"It's despicable...But" Its either fucking despicable or it isn't?

As for the "gatecrashers" ....I just don't have the words

JUST WEST YORKSHIRE SUPPORTS HILLSBORUGH FAMILILES’ CALL FOR THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF WEST YORKSHIRE POLICE TO RESIGN AND FACE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION

Following the recently published Hillsborough disaster Report by an independent panel, families of the 96 Liverpool fans who tragically lost their lives have called for Sir Norman Bettison, the current Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police to resign. JUST is calling for his knighthood to be stripped with immediate effect and criminal prosecution pursued in response to the emerging evidence around his role in what is being described as the 'biggest cover-up in history'. [1]

We condemn Norman Bettison’s statement issued on 13 September, 2012 on the West Yorkshire Police website in which he continues to blame victims behaviour for the tragedy.
“Fans behaviour to the extent that it was relevant at all made the job of the police in the crush outside Leppings Lane turnstiles harder than it needed to be.”

Reacting to his statement Margaret Aspinall, chairwoman of the Hillsborough Families Support Group, who lost her son James, 18, in the tragedy, said: “Quite frankly I am quite angry about it and I think he should resign. He is still saying the fans made the job more difficult for the police. He ought to be ashamed of himself. Do the decent thing Mr Bettison-resign.”

Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, Keith Vaz, also piled more pressure on Sir Norman by saying 'It would not be right for serving officers to stay in post,' while MPs suggested he should be stripped of his knighthood and Prime Minister David Cameron refused to give his backing to the chief constable.

The Hillsborough Independent Panel, chaired by the Bishop of Liverpool the Right Reverend James Jones, revealed the “strenuous attempts” made by the South Yorkshire Police to deflect the blame for the disaster onto innocent fans. 116 of 164 police statements were “amended to remove or alter comments unfavourable to South Yorkshire police. Officers carried out blood alcohol readings on victims, including children, in order to 'impugn their reputations.” The Panel’s Report clearly casts doubt over the original inquest ruling, revealing that 41 of the 96 victims could have potentially been saved if they had received treatment earlier. The Panel’s Report also said victims’ families were correct in their belief that some of the authorities attempted to create a “completely unjust” account of events that sought to blame the fans.
One of the most shocking aspects of the Report is the extent to which police statements were altered by South Yorkshire Police before they were submitted to the official inquiry. It came as it was revealed that junior officers present at the Hillsborough disaster who criticised its policing had their statements systematically doctored or paragraphs completely scrubbed out, new evidence has revealed. Four PCs warned of a lack of police at the Sheffield football ground and that there were little or no personal radios - but these criticisms were removed or re-worded to protect the authorities. The Report found that one police officer said he only accepted the changes because he was suffering from post-traumatic stress and that he considered it an injustice for statements to have been 'doctored' to suit the management of South Yorkshire Police.

Bettison began his police career in 1975 when he joined South Yorkshire Police as a Constable. He served through the ranks and at the time of the Hillsborough disaster he had been promoted to the rank of Chief Inspector and later Superintendent. Bettison was a member of the internal review group or liaison unit on Hillsborough and, as such, he had a key role in presenting the police in the best light while blaming fans for the disaster.

In 1993 he was appointed Assistant Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police. However he left West Yorkshire in 1998 to become Chief Constable of Merseyside Police. The appointment caused outrage among victims’ families because of the personal role he had played in the investigation. His appointment prompted several police authority members to resign in protest and was described by the Hillsborough families as "appalling and insensitive."

Bettison retired in 2005, only to controversially return two years later to head the West Yorkshire Police force following the death of the late and respected Chief Constable Colin Cramphorn.

At the time that Bettison was being instated as the Chief Constable of Merseyside, members of the Hillsborough Justice Campaign's fought against his appointment due to his alleged involvement in the Hillsborough disaster cover up. 15,000 people presented a petition to the Police Authority Appointments Committee, but Bettison stayed on in his post.

Mr. Trevor Hicks, the Chairman of the Hillsborough Families Support Group who lost two teenage daughters Sarah and Victoria at Hillsborough, said that at the time it “beggared belief” that Bettison was appointed as Merseyside’s Chief Constable in 1998.

Spokeswoman for the Hillsborough Justice Campaign, Mrs. Coleman said: "We petitioned and had a sit-in at Merseyside police authority, pleading with them not to appoint him. We now find out he was part of the Police Federation which had a strategy to blame drunken, ticketless fans and then leaked it to the MP who leaked it to the press agency and that was how Sun editor Kelvin Mackenzie got it.’’[ 2 ]

At the time of the tragedy Bettison was part of a unit of nine high ranking police officers [3] who allegedly played a key role in deflecting the blame away from South Yorkshire Police. In the House of Commons in May 1998, Labour MP Maria Eagle told parliament: the “liaison unit orchestrated what can only be described as a black propaganda campaign." [4]

The Hillsborough Report gave a detailed insight into Bettison’s role as presenting the police case after the tragedy. The Report states that Bettison was a key figure in a meeting with the police federation and MP Michael Shersby. Bettison presented the meeting with a heavily edited video of the disaster – 29 minutes "culled" from 65 hours of footage. The meeting, the Report states, was held for the South Yorkshire police federation to present evidence to Shersby that would be helpful for him to present to parliament.Bettison's accompanying video commentary stated that: "Perimeter fences were the result of hooliganism – walls demolished, missile attacks on police officers, supporters climbing perimeter fences, pitch invasion."
The meeting was informed that the crowd was "massively uncooperative". [5]

Bettison has always denied his role in any 'black' propaganda and he has defined his role in the Hillsborough investigation as running a "mail room" [6] for West Midlands police, who were conducting an independent investigation. Part of that role, he said was to remove "hearsay" and "emotional baggage" [7] from evidence, and keep senior officers informed of progress so that safety at football matches could be improved.

Mr. Cameron’s formal apology to the families of victims highlights that Bettison’s version of events has been discredited. In apologising “for this double injustice that has been left uncorrected for so long,” the Prime Minister has done little to appease the prevailing feeling that the families had been let down not just by the police but also politicians.

It is now abundantly clear that the review commissioned in 1997 by the then former Home Secretary, Jack Straw which was led by Lord Justice Stuart-Smith failed to uncover the truth. Straw’s belated expression of regret and his blaming of the Thatcher government for “creating a culture of impunity” within the police service because of the need for a “partisan service to respond to the miners’ strike and other industrial disputes” [8], whilst true, still does not absolve him of his responsibility in ensuring that the Inquiry he commissioned served victims first and foremost.
Furthermore, if he genuinely believes that the police service was “immune from outside influences and they thought they could rule the roost and that is what we absolutely saw in South Yorkshire” [9], JUST fails to understand why he is not calling for the Chief Constable’s outright resignation.

Michael Mansfield QC, who is representing the Hillsborough families, said it was “perfectly obvious” from the Report that “criminal liability – for which there is no time limit – is on the cards” and that as many as “half a dozen” people could potentially be brought to justice.

In the last few years JUST West Yorkshire has consistently expressed concerns about the leadership of West Yorkshire Police. In 2011, JUST highlighted the plight of ethnic minority officers working in the West Yorkshire Police headed by Bettison, in a speech to the National Black Police Conference (NBPA)http://www.justwestyorkshire.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Policing-Diverse-Britain.pdf

There are other cases in which the West Yorkshire Force’s integrity has been called into question over the last few years from a number of quarters:

· In 2011 the Supreme Court found that police officers from West Yorkshire Police had taken a murder trial witness to a brothel and allowed him to use drugs to ensure he co-operated. One of the Supreme Court judges, Lord Brown said a number of officers, including "several of high rank" took part in a "prolonged, persistent and pervasive conspiracy to pervert the course of justice".

· In 2011, Justice Arnold said specialist firm Forensic Telecommunications Services (FTS) - which extracts data from mobile phones - had succeeded in a“breach of confidence” claim against West Yorkshire Police.

· In 2011 West Yorkshire Police finally apologized for it’s officers unlawfully assaulting and arresting a good Samaritan.

· In 2012, West Yorkshire Police lost a landmark civil case for wrongly charging Leeds United Football Club for policing costs outside the football grounds. Following the court judgment it faces a £1million bill.

· In 2012 a former detective who made 563 indecent images of children has walked free from court. Michael Vause, 59, was working for West Yorkshire Police Force’s professional standards department, based at police headquarters, on Laburnum Road, at the time of his arrest. Mr. Vause had also worked in the Anti-Corruption Unit of West Yorkshire Police PSD.

· In 2009 West Yorkshire Police was accused of disproportionately treating its BME police officers. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5373958/West-Yorkshire-Police-accused-of-racism.html


JUST is also concerned about many of the comments made by Sir Norman Bettison in the media which show a lack of professional judgment.

· In an article for the Yorkshire Post, Bettison was quoted as having said that over-zealous health and safety officials were making the jobs of his front line officers increasingly more demanding, branding them "the health and safety Taliban". [http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/letters-and-columnists/norman-bettison-our-police-officers-are-at-the-mercy-of-britain-s-health-and-safety-taliban-1-2475230]

· He also described the conviction of the Metropolitan Police for the death of Jean Charles de Menezes as "A triumph for health and safety, a lucrative new territory for lawyers, a disaster for common sense." [ditto]

· In 2010 Bettison said Muslims must do more to identify terror suspects. His comments branded an entire community with a brush of non cooperation. http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/156806/Muslims-must-do-more-to-identify-terror-suspects-

While the chairman of the Hillsborough Families Support Group chairman Trevor Hicks rightly declares that “The truth is out today, justice starts tomorrow,” it is JUST's view that a good starting point would be for the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire police to resign and face criminal prosecution for obstructing justice and prolonging the tragedy for the families of Hillsborough victims for twenty-three years.

Finally Hillsborough families know the truth: The police lied and 41 of the 96 victims could have been saved, so JUST asks how many police officers will face prosecution?


(1) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2201898/Finally-Hillsborough-families-know-truth-The-police-lied-41-96-victims-saved-Now-justice.html

(2) http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2012/09/13/hillsborough-families-call-for-west-yorkshire-police-chief-to-step-down-86081-31827076/

(3) http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough/bettison.shtm

(4) http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/12/hillsborough-victims-families-police-resignation

(5) http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/12/hillsborough-victims-families-police-resignation

(6) http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/9925751.Keighley_businessman_calls_for_Bettison_to_resign_over_Hillsborough_revelations

(7) http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/12/hillsborough-victims-families-police-resignation

(8) Radio 4 Interview, 13 September, 2012, Today programme

(9) Radio 4 Interview, 13 September, 2012, Today programme

Kash Ahmed and Ratna Lachman

JUST West Yorkshire
Promoting racial justice, civil liberties and human rights
Unit 4, Carlisle Business Centre, Manningham, BD8 8BD
Telephone: 01274 542222
Website: www.justwestyorkshire.co.uk

I suggest you could back and read the report it states that the government including Mrs.Thatcher were aware that the South Yorkshire Police had acted in a deceitful manner. If this was the case why didnt she insist that the deaths of 96 people at a public event were worthy of an public inquiry?

Why was there no censure (or rebuttal of his statement) of one her own MPs making false statements to the press.

As for the Police behaviour regards blood tests you think that was legitmate given the circumstances including testing minors? Or that the Police took the time to invesigate whether any of the dead had any form of criminal record? Your comments denigrate the people who fought so tenaciously for justice for 23 years in the face of indifference ad denial. I wonder whether you will share your views as openly with next ardent Kopite you meet, I think not perhaps

But the idea that the Thatcher government and her paymasters at The Sun weren't somehow complicit in all of this defies any sense of history.

Mike Byrne says 'its crystal clear' that there was no involvement - where in the report does it say that? One wonders what kind of crystal he is referring to, or even using.

The report has produced too many reasons to be angry - Sheffield City Council, The FA, SY Police, and (creepiest of all) the Coroner. Plus The Sun and a Tory MP who promulgated lies. Kelvin McKenzie claims he did it in good faith. What would he know about that?

The people who died that awful day shouldn't have. And there will never be 'justice' for that -

but the people responsible for hiding the facts of what happened on for all these years should be hauled up in a court of law to account for their actions following this tragedy.

Named and shamed.

They'll never be sent down, but their nearest and dearest, and their golf club members should at least know what they did in the war.

Bold words from shed-loads of them today, apologies all over the place. Every last word from all of them knowing that absolutely sod-all will come of any of this.

Shit houses, all.

If you actually read my post you will see that I said "it was despicable that blood tests were taken from the dead in a bid to impugn them" - how you can interpret that to be "As for the Police behaviour regards blood tests you think that was legitmate given the circumstances including testing minors?" is clearly ridiculous . Just to make it clear I said IT WAS DESPICABLE - got that?

If you read it the report does say that there was no collusion by the Government - there was a view that SYP were deceitful but don't we all think that?
If we are looking for scapegoats then why not the Labour inquiry in 1997 I think it as which found the altered statements and clearly did nothing to investigate.

Or maybe attacking Labour isn't on some people's class-war agenda.

Brendan 544

What is it you don't have the words for on the ticket-less gatecrashers? There were around 2000 of them apparently, arrived late as you would if you were looking for tickets, they weren't tested for alcohol levels so no-one knows how many were drunk or not but we have all been there and it is a fair guess to say more than a few had been drinking and by general conscensus were the ones at the back pushing their way in.

Not sure what it is you are trying to say by not saying anything?

From the report:
"But in a handwritten note, Mrs Thatcher made it clear that she did not want to give the government's full backing to Lord Taylor's criticisms, only to the way in which he had conducted his inquiry and made recommendations for action.

She wrote: "What do we mean by 'welcoming the broad thrust of the report'? The broad thrust is devastating criticism of the police. Is that for us to welcome? Surely we welcome the thoroughness of the report and its recommendations - M.T."

You are right to criticise the Labour enquiry of 1997, they are just as guilty as brushing clear evidence under the carpet.

Ticketless gatecrashers?

From the report:
"It is evident from the disclosed documents that from the outset SYP sought to establish a case emphasising exceptional levels of drunkenness and aggression among Liverpool fans, alleging that many arrived at the stadium late, without tickets and determined to force entry.

"Eight years after the disaster it was revealed publicly for the first time that statements made by SYP officers were initially handwritten as 'recollections', then subjected to a process of 'review and alteration' involving SYP solicitors and a team of SYP officers.

"Some 116 of the 164 statements identified for substantive amendment were amended to remove or alter comments unfavourable to SYP."

I remember playing Aston Villa in the League Cup semi-final 1984; we all arrived late because of traffic on the motorway, we all got pushed into the pen on the left side of the Witton End of the ground and the centre and right side pens were empty. We had to jump out into the Paddock that night... it could have been a mini-Hillsbourgh.

JUSTICE FOR THE 96

"The report makes it "crystal" clear that Thatcher instructed Douglas Hurd to only welcome Taylors, findings and to avoid criticising SYP " - how on earth do you read that from the report? .

Of course a report highlighting failures isn't to be welcomed as this would be the same as welcoming the failures themselves - what she clearly said from the quote from the report you provided was "Surely we welcome the thoroughness of the report and its recommendations - M.T." . No mention of supporting SYP only a mention of the thoroughness of the report and welcoming it's recommendations.

Exactly what you would expect!!!!

Don't see how the changing of various statements invalidates what I said about ticket-less gate-crashers? There were undoubtedly a big of number of these and that's why the gate was opened with it's tragic consequences - what was your point?

She was instructing Hurd to avoid any reference to the criticism of SYP, which he did.

The rumours about ticketless, drunken, violent fans were just that, and given false credence by fabricated statements from various members of SYP, the panel found NO evidence to substantiate any of these claims.

I read it as saying that devastating criticism should not welcomed as it its as a result of failings and failings should never be welcome - she went on to say that the recommendations to overcome them should be welcomed - exactly what I have would have said if say an audit of any of my work divisions was critical - ie I don't like the findings but let's work to correct them

If there were no late-comers/ ticket-less gatecrashers then why was there a need to open the gate? It wasn't just on a rumour/fabrication.

You know that's bollocks, it is a clear instruction not to criticise SYP. You only have to look at what Bernard Ingham {briefed by Thatcher} was saying at the time to know what her stance was on this tragedy.

"If there were no late-comers/ ticket-less gatecrashers then why was there a need to open the gate? It wasn't just on a rumour/fabrication."

Well I'll take your word for it then, your opinion is obviously more informed than a panel who have spent two years reviewing every document, audio tape, cctv image, police camera images, broadcast images, witness statements etc. etc. they've obviously missed out on your superior knowledge of events on the day, you should have turned up on the first day the panel sat, it would of saved them a lot of time.

I'm afraid the balance of probabilities comes down very heavily on the majority interpretation. Not yours.

This happened at every big game in the country by supporters of every club - it doesn't make it right.

The legacy of the police cover up and the Sun's heinous piece means it's now verbotten to mention the fans.

Is ignoring this true justice or is it just too much of a hot potato ?

"They also demonstrate how the SYP Police Federation, supported informally by the SYP chief constable, sought to develop and publicise a version of events that focused on several police officers' allegations of drunkenness, ticketlessness and violence among a large number of Liverpool fans. This extended beyond the media to Parliament.

"Yet, from the mass of documents, television and CCTV coverage disclosed to the panel there is no evidence to support these allegations other than a few isolated examples of aggressive or verbally abusive behaviour clearly reflecting frustration and desperation."

Your statement, like Mikes "apparently 2000" remark above is purely anecdotal, the panel found no evidence to support yours or Mikes theory, I choose to believe them.

If a new inquiry is to be raised shouldn't this be part and parcel, how many other people know of people who went without tickets?

What evidence is there in the TV footage?

What evidence is there from fans and police officers present?

People forget that during the ensuing days liverpool fans were on telly saying they'd had enough and weren't going the match anymore because of the fans behaviour.

It won't happen of course because it's off limits now - doesn't mean it's "justice" in my book.

Without having the nerve to put it in these words - because the evidence doesn't support it - you are saying that:

"Ticketless fans charged the gates, thus forcing the police to take the decision to open them; the ticketless fans then pushed through the tunnel into the pen causing the crush which led to 96 deaths."

Incredible.

Do you think it is just that the families who have lost loved ones had their memories defamed by deliberate mis-information? Do you think it is right that their supporters were demonised in the national press based upon false information from the Police and passed on by aTory MP?

Barry you are being nonsensical you are asking for more evidence when those entrusted with upholding law and order (the SYP) systematically altered the evidence. One of the key aspects of Police work is ensuring the integrity of the evidence is beyond reproach.

You are coming over as a very bitter blue you stated earlier that you have mates who went to the game, lots of us did and some never came back. Save your ire for those culpable.

Now that's incredible.

Perhaps that's because during those ensuing days, they were being fed lies about the behavior of their fans, and not just from the Sun, all of the tv news channels were reporting the Police "official" version of events ie: fans storming the turnstiles, drunkeness, ticketlesness, violence, unsurprising then, that it would be hard to find anyone defending that sort of behavior.

I think you will find those who analysed the 400,000 plus documents and endless of video footage are more likely to have a more accurate judgement than a couple of your mates. If the report had concluded that fan behaviour on the day was equally to blame for what happened I would have accepted it. The evidence that has been analysed does not draw that conclusion does it? It does not blame fan behaviour at all.

I really wish that we could have trusted the Police, Government and Press but all of them played a significant role in ensuring that a major peace time tragedy was a travesty of justice.

NO, Lenny, where to start is to read what the Panel said!!! NOT, they said, drunk or ticketless fans! FFS haven't you read the papers or previous posts in this thread?! The media haven't ignored drunk, ticketless fans - because the Panel looked at over 400,000 pieces of evidence and concluded NOT drunken, ticketless fans!

That was police's job / responsibility and they failed at it. Subsequent lies were to avoid admitting that.

"Their behaviour may not have been good .."

What if it had been good?

What if they were in orderly queues?

What if the numbers were more manageable? ie just those who had tickets.

When criminal proceedings kick off be sure these questions will be raised.

There is an agenda here being conducted by the Cameron and co.

I find it amazing after so many years of believing one thing that so many can change their viewpoint overnight. Just because a group of faceless individuals you don't even know, ie the Media and report writers tell you otherwise. Ridiculous. Mike and Barry earlier were hammered unneccasarily by you fellows on here earlier for not swallowing hook line and sinker what has been fed through the news outlets in recent days..

What is equally amazing is the fact that many here would have sampled the dubious behaviour of fans over the years like Mikes point earlier about gate jumpers. And yet have apparent memory loss and ignore the possibility of such a thing and refer back to this highly biased and agenda-filled report.

The complete truth is out there and one day it will be revealed...

How on earth are they expected to understand (and I don't mean this in any derogatory way at all) the match day mentality of a fan on a big game esp one who didn't have a ticket and was desperate to see his team in a semi-final.

How the frustrations build as you can't get a ticket, going from pub to pub for any spares, couple of pints in each one, in desperation going to the ground maybe to pick one up or to jump a gate. (or even as they did in one of the European finals to snatch them from their own kind on the way to the ground)

Then the relief at kick-off when, tragically, a gate is opened and all those without tickets pile in, pushing their way on to the top terraces forcing those already there to move forward with the terrible consequences we saw on that day.

The police were undoubtedly criminally negligent, despicable in seeking to blame the 96 who had tickets and by taking alcohol levels and doing police checks on them and criminal in seeking to achieve a mis-carriage of justice with their lies and cover ups

It wasn't the 96 who were pushing from the back though – the survivors weren't tested and no-one knows the true ticket-less number but I would not be at all surprised to find it was near the anecdotal 2000 or so which, incidentally, came from Liverpool fans comments in the days following the tragedy.

Not surprisingly no red is going to say I was one of those ticket-less who got into the ground so it is no surprise to see the panel couldn't find any but there will undoubtedly have been some.

I doubt we will ever get the full truth...

Agenda driven?
The board was at pains to point out that they have only presented the evidence that they found, they make no recommendations nor give any advice about what to do or how to procede from this point on.

Driven by Cameron?
The independent panel was set up by a Labour administration and only came about through the strong lobbying of Everton season ticket holder Andy Burnham.

The panels report?
Two years, 450'000 documents, the full co-operation of all the public agencies involved and all the private agencies bar one {RSA} Chaired by the Bishop of Liverpool.

But fair comment, every ones wrong bar a couple of people on this thread !

I'll be straight with you, I respect Barrys opinion even though we disagree on this thread, because reading other posts of his on other subjects, he usually knows his stuff, likewise with Mike Byrne, but I've got to say that you just come across as an idiot or, perhaps it's your agenda just to be a wum.

And to doubt the credibility of an investigation chaired by the Bishop of Liverpool no less, covering 450,000 documents and completely exonerating the fans even more so.

And that includes Mike Byrne's contributions. Not being RC, I'm not too clear on sins of omission, but Mike seems to use this 'logic' as evidence that because ticketless drunks are no longer being cited as the cause of the disaster, this must be a conspiracy. Perhaps on the scale of the established WYP's seemingly clear perversion of the course of justice.

Many of the deaths, not all of them apparently, were certainly 'a disaster waiting to happen' and it could easily have been the supporters of any club, yours or mine, who suffered. What is criminal beyond that is the systematic lying of the people who are paid - very well - to uphold the law.

And then there is Lenny Kingman. Speaking of conspiracy, Mike takes great succour from his support. One suspects if they may be members of the same lodge, but such conjecture is unnecessary.

Lenny says we are talking about a "highly bias and agenda filled report". No marks for style, or grammar, come to think of it Mr Kingman. Try again next time.

Some people can do sarcasm and some can't - you, unfortunately, are one of the latter

Never heard such utter bollocks in my life - 'sins of omission' , 'conspiracy' with someone I hadn't heard of before this thread, lodges but worst of all thinking that this report did not have it's own agenda. Acknowledging support from someone is not the same as taking great succour - you are as guilty of twisting things as SYP are.

WTF are you are on?

Last word on this from me - if you think the scenario I described earlier didn't happen in each and every away match in the 70s and 80s esp big matches like cup semi-finals at neutral grounds then you either weren't there or are living in cloud-cuckoo land.

Even more so if you think for one minute that any member of the panel ever experienced this - if you or they had ever experienced you would know.

That is why I fully accept the lies, deceit, smearing the report exposes but it is written by those who have no match day experiences certainly not like those in 80s and who do not appreciate what really happens at these games.

More fool you for not realising this

Its his position, not the individual, who made the apology on behalf of the state to Merseyside. So it certainly was his to give.

If he didn't of course then you'd be up in arms about it.

I take it as you're so aware that politicians say what people want to hear you don't nod your head and agree when Labour come out with 'nasty party, complacent, no plan B, posh boys, tax cut by millionaires for millionares... etc etc' nonsense?

Just because drunken ticket-less fans force their way into a ground regularly (for example) doesn't mean the police are automatically totally to blame when something goes wrong

You wanker.

That a police force felt justified in protecting itself by breaking its own laws (and remember many officers were bussed in from down south when local beat officers objected to what was going on) is because of the times they lived in.

The people responsible for the atmosphere that caused the Hillsborough cover-up are those that directed the political actions of the day – the buck stops at Thatcher and her government. At a guess, they justified it to themselves by reasoning that the police must not be discredited and weakened when they were holding the `thin blue line`. The next step would have been the army on the streets with all the dangers that incurs (Bloody Sunday being one famous example).

The reputation of Liverpool and her people were deemed less important than keeping public order. Football fans were an easy target and Liverpool is a football city.

Thankfully they were underestimating us and a truth is now out there.

Congratulations to all involved, you were magnificent and the innocent victims would have been immensely proud of you all.

Proud to be a scouser.

Some shockingly idiotic posts above.

You're a million miles off thinking Thatcher would place soldiers on the street anywhere but N.I. As she said to Regan it would be 'political suicide'.

"Some people can do sarcasm and some can't".

OK, Mr Expert - tell us who can.

Mike Byrne, etc - if drunken, ticketless fans were the main cause here, why did so many police notes at the time initially point to errors in organisation and policing? and why did their superiors then conspire with the Police Federation to have those notes rewritten?

Idiots are people who believe everything that is put in front of them, without for one moment wondering or questioning whether some things may have been overlooked. Or even choosing to ignore the obvious. That would make you the idiot.

On the agendas.I would say that andy burnham as a top line politician has most certainly got his eye on the labour leader post. This event will do him no harm im sure you'll agree. Or maybe not. He does have his heart in it though.
Cameron is looking to be winning votes over this. Smooth apology making wont do him any harm in this instance. Wetting his tonsils for battles to come.
Lawyers and big compensation claims will have agendas all of their own. 450000 documents worth. The families of the deceased deserve to be recompenced big time.. However there will be queues from here to christmas of less deservng cases now the flood gates are well and truly open.

Anyhow, the airbrushing from history by this report of any wrongdoing by reds fans at the leppings lane gate is frankly ridiculous and most on here should know that.. But they seem to have gone into collective denial and have selective amnesia over the matter. The rebirth of the reputation of the city as a whole may be the reason and to leave it as done and move on. Its not the fact it didnt happen, it did. As Mike was pointing out but being ignore and mocked..

The question of personal resposibility of the fans has been bypassed completely and the full blame attached mainly to the bungling bobbies.

For whatever reason the report has not pursued the possibiliy of any misbehaviour at the gate as a cause of the disaster. The police opening the gate yes. The reasons they panicked and did so, no.
But Mike knows these facts as I believe Barry does. Fair play to you Mike for going against the party line on this and at least making the doubters think a little if only momentarily.

Anyway I will not waste any more of my valuable time on this tabboo subject. No point trying to wake up the sleeping. You lot believe what you want to and so will I. This report is on its way to the history books and history never lies. So, we move forward.

Sadly, I don't believe the culprits will receive the justice they deserve; prison sentences as a minimum for the ranking officers at the time. For decades the city was tarnished not just those involved as drunken yobs wallowing in their own pity trying to deflect blame from themselves. In simplistic terms men, women and children went to a football game and lost their lives through the mismanagement and gross incompetency of the Police force, the ensuing cover up is a shameful chapter of the time that has been perpetuated for over two decades.

The rest of the stuff in your last post is bollocks, factually incorrect, and does nothing to make me reconsider my opinion that you're an idiot.

We can only hope that due process (or 'witch-hunt' as these people would no doubt term it) delivers some justice. In the normal course of events, 'Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice' is one of the most serious crimes in the book. It will be interesting to see if it will be used.

Brent Stephens 900 – show me where I said drunk ticketless fans were the main cause. Another one who sees everything as black and white – there are numerous shades in between – maybe you need to look a little bit closer and you will also see I regard the police and authorities' subsequent actions in lying, defaming and covering up as totally despicable and I would dearly love to see them do time for it.

Is that black and white enough for your simple little mind (oh btw, that's sarcasm)?

Cut the 'idot' and 'WUM' stuff please. Just address what's posted without that abusive nonsense.

Thank you.

What I am really objecting to is the way a very tiny minority can even raise those issues given what the report said about them. I don't think anybody is denying that drunken, ticketless fans there might have been. But the report says that was not a significant factor in what went wrong. So why, on this momentous of occasions, when after 23 years the report reveals the truths it has revealed, do you want to drag that up?

One, I don't think I've said anything which demonstrates that I see things as black and white.

Two, you abuse me by saying I have a simple little mind (plenty of evidence to counter that which I don't wish to divulge here).

I ask that, even though you try to excuse the comments by reference to "sarcasm".

I hope not.... that's actually the Reds' catchphrase as well, isn't it?

Respect and sympathy to anyone affected by Hillsborough but I hate that song with a passion, a passion mostly to do with Liverpool FC... and also a little bit because it's shit... but mainly because of the toss that their fans usually speak before ending their thoughts with 'YNWA'... as if to make it all correct. 'Suarez is an impeccable human being of great standing, YNWA'... save it for the village people, hey lads?

I really really hope this doesn't happen, but I do hope that the memories are respected in the best possible way. Personally I think this is such a controversial idea it wouldn't be the best way to respect them... and a huge part of me is thinking that the club wouldn't ever even consider it.

Respect.

Who is good at sarcasm? It's only you has set yourself as an expert in this matter.

So, come on, and tell us who does it best.

Baroness Thatcher perhaps?

"Are you a Yorkie by any chance - perhaps employed by SYP - I think we should be told if you are!"

Careful now - I'm fairly sure my legal representative would would look at that statement as a possible case of attempting to 'blacken my character' as I believe they say it in courts these days.

I guess you are shiny white in every deed you ever do.

You must feel so sorry for the rest of us.

You may well have plenty of other evidence to demonstrate you don't have a simple little mind but I didn't see any of it here. if you have shown it elsewhere then I am happy to retract that comment and offer an apology.

Keith - where do I begin with you? I haven't set myself up as an expert - you have twice said I am - I simply said you couldn't do sarcasm which you are continuing to show you can't.

And as for getting your legal representative involved then please feel free - they will just do as I did - laugh at you.

Firstly - it was a question not a statement - questions are not defamatory in law

Secondly - you would have to prove that being a member of SYP blackens your character - it is you who are making that association not me

See you in court?

I did actually apologise if you have demonstrated you don't have a simple little mind elsewhere - see the last sentence 2 happy to retract and offer an apology"?

Stand by that

I quote from your posts

- One wonders what kind of crystal he is referring to, or even using.
- 've had a chance to read the whole thread now and am glad that I did - I feel wiser.
And that includes Mike Byrne's contributions
-Speaking of conspiracy, Mike takes great succour from his support. One suspects if they may be members of the same lodge
-OK, Mr Expert - tell us who can.
- So, come on, and tell us who does it best.

Baroness Thatcher perhaps?

Just a few examples from your posts on thread

Contacted your legal representative yet?

It all seems a long way away from your initial statement -

"it says nothing about the 2000 or so gatecrashers who arrived late, forces a gate to be opened for them and who were at the back of crowd pushing their way forward not at the from where the majority of fatalities where."

Sir Norman Bettison could hardly have put it better himself, except that his command of spelling and grammar may have been checked by a literate underling.

And to say that to read all the way through this thread makes me 'wiser' is a sarcastic statement is a slur on everyone who has contributed.

Apology? About as likely as a copper going down.

It does seem a long way since the first post but I guess that this the norm on a forum

Can't say I had noticed but maybe it is because, unlike you, I try to answer all the points others have made.

I have asked you many questions in response to your comments to me but all you have done is respond and with snide comments - so far you have accused/insinuated that I am libellous, blackening your character, an expert in sarcasm, illiterate, a mason and a conspiracy freak.

I did not say you were being sarcastic when you said you were wiser by reading through all the comments - it was the 'even Mike Byrne's' bit that was sarcastic or had you forgotten that bit? Your selective memory again?

What was that about an apology - I never asked from you and certainly wasn't expecting one as I don't think it is in your nature?

Fully agree it is as unlikely as a copper going down for this - at last something we can agree on.

Looking forward to hearing from your legal representative or mbe even you responding to some of the points I have raised but then again that is as likely as a copper going down for this.