Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hillsborough
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
The jury in the Hillsborough inquests has been told they can reach a majority verdict on the question of whether the 96 victims of the disaster were unlawfully killed.
Coroner Sir John Goldring told the nine jurors today that he would accept a majority decision on question six of their questionnaire.
He said: “You have indicated that you cannot reach a unanimous decision on question six.
“You should, please, continue to try to do so.
“If you cannot, I can accept a majority decision.
“That means a decision in which at least seven of you agree.”
On Wednesday the court heard the jury had reached decisions on all but one topic.
The court, in Birchwood Park, Warrington, was then adjourned until this morning.
The jury have to complete a general questionnaire of 14 questions and record times and causes of deaths for each of the 96.
Question six of the general questionnaire is: “Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed?”
The jurors retired to consider their decisions on Wednesday, April 6, more than two years after the inquests into the 96 deaths at the 1989 semi-final began.
-
I'm rather surprised that they have answered the questions so quickly. There was a lot of evidence to get through and I hope they are not just looking to get it over with and get back to their normal lives. Nothing to support that thought but just hoping it is not the case.
Leave a comment:
-
I don't think that there's any point speculating about which question that might be? It's good that this is drawing to a conclusion whatever the outcome. The inquiry has been thorough and the families need to somehow draw a line underneath everything. It's appalling that they had to wait so long for such a thorough inquiry, I'm not sure what form of "justice" would be considered appropriate or satisfactory? I've been following the inquiry every day in the Echo and there were failures on so many levels that I just wonder how any person or organisation could be singled out? I'm glad that I don't have to make that decision.
Leave a comment:
-
Hmmm...The topic which the jury raised was not mentioned in open court, while the jury was present.
Leave a comment:
-
From David Conn's twitterOriginally posted by meffin View PostReally? From a quick look, im not seeing anything like that?
[ame]https://twitter.com/david_conn/status/717663020273561600[/ame]
[ame]https://twitter.com/david_conn/status/717663275173937152[/ame]
[ame]https://twitter.com/david_conn/status/717663752343199744[/ame]
[ame]https://twitter.com/david_conn/status/717664014550048768[/ame]
Leave a comment:
-
They have something like 15 specific questions to answer don't they? The ones I read from a police culpability point of view seemed a no brainer. I'd imagine they can deliberate for as long as they see necessary.
Edit - its 14.
Here they are...
1. Basic facts of the disaster: Do you agree with the following statement: ""Ninety-six people died as a result of the disaster at the Hillsborough stadium on 15 April 1989 due to crushing in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, following the admission of a large number of supporters to the stadium through exit gates."
2. Police planning for the semi-final match: Was there any error or omission in police planning or preparation which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed on the day of the match?
3. Policing of the match and the situation at the turnstiles: Was there any error or omission in policing on the day of the match which caused or contributed to a dangerous situation developing at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
4. Policing of the match and the crush on the terrace: Was there any error or omission by commanding officers which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?
5. The opening of the gates: When the order was given to open the exit gates at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium was there any error or omission by the commanding officers in the control box which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?
6. Unlawful killing: Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed? To answer 'yes' to this question, the jurors must be sure of the following:
Firstly, that Ch Supt David Duckenfield owed a duty of care to the 96 who died
Secondly, that he was in breach of that duty of care
Thirdly, that the breach of Mr Duckenfield's duty of care caused the deaths
Finally, the jury must be sure that the breach which caused the deaths amounted to "gross negligence."
7. Behaviour of the supporters: Was there any behaviour on the part of the football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles? If yes was that behaviour unusual or unforseeable?
8. Defects in Hillsborough stadium: Were there any features of its design, construction and layout which were dangerous or defective and which probably or may have caused or contributed to the disaster?
9. Licensing and oversight of the stadium: Was there any error or omission in the safety certification and oversight of Hillsborough Stadium that caused or contributed to the disaster?
10. Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC before the day of the match: Was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff in the management of the stadium and/or preparation for the semi final match on 15 April 1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation which developed on the day of the match?
11. Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC on the day of the match: Was there any error or omission by SWFC and its staff on 15 April 1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?
12. Conduct of Eastwood and Partners (SWFC engineers): Should they have done more to detect and advise on any unsafe or unsatisfactory features of the stadium which caused or contributed to the disaster?
13. Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Police: After the crush in the West Terrace had begun to develop was there any error or omission by the police which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?
14. Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service (SYMAS): After the crush in the west terrace had begun to develop, was there any error or omission by the ambulance service SYMAS which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?Last edited by Buzzo; 07-04-16, 01:00 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
How long will the deliberations take? To summarise two years' worth of evidence seems an almighty task - even though we know it is an open and shut case.
Leave a comment:
-
Really? From a quick look, im not seeing anything like that?Originally posted by ukfootballfan101 View PostOne of the jurors has discharged on medical grounds. From some of the comments by the judge (see David Conn's twitter) it sounds like there's been quite a bit of tension within the jury.
Leave a comment:
-
One of the jurors has discharged on medical grounds. From some of the comments by the judge (see David Conn's twitter) it sounds like there's been quite a bit of tension within the jury.
Leave a comment:
-
In case anyone did not see the news today the summing up has finished and the Jury are now deliberating their verdict
Leave a comment:
-
I think it's a good decision as long as everyone has been consulted! And not just the HFSG deciding but I doubt they have.
The service is getting a bit silly in places, more and more ipad clutching beauts turning up just to get close or get a picture of the players, it's not a Liverpool FC open day for **** sake.
Leave a comment:
-
I suppose there gets to be a stage where people need to be able to grieve privately, there must be a lot of pressure on the families each year at the large scale memorial service.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: