Quite simply one of the most harrowing things I've ever read..

I'm actually in tears. Seriously.

http://www.theguardian.com/football...uest-survivor-adrian-tempany?CMP=share_btn_tw

Hillsborough - the docu-drama is on ITV in half an hour too.

 

The only verdict that they have got wrong in my opinion is the answer to question 7.

Q7: “Was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?”

If your answer to the question above is “no”, then was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

Jury’s answer: No.


I know it will be an unpopular opinion but I believe that the jury here was looking at the supporters as one person not as individuals and that there has been so much pressure applied over the years that they simply darent rule that even one or two fans behaved badly.

It is admitted that SOME fans turned up without tickets (but no more than at other games) so with that in mind those minority of fans HAVE to had contributed to the situation. They simply had to.

I also feel that the behaviour of fans not even at Hillsborough on that day led in part to the chaos. The behaviour of some Liverpool fans, SOME fans of all clubs, and yes SOME fans of Barnsley led to the way police treated football fans which in turn led in part to the way fans were treated in that day.

For the above reasons I simply can't fathom how they can rule that fans didn't in any way contribute, other than to say they have been pressured for years to come to that conclusion because of the over the top criticism of the fans at the time.

 

Kinel.

 

Did you read all my post or just the first couple of lines?

 

I suspect that a jury that has been presented with 2 years worth of evidence is in a far better position to answer this question that you are.

 

For me it is extremely simple. Was there ANY supporters without tickets in the crush? Yes or no?

It is accepted that yes there was. Therefore they contributed. There is no grey area, they were present and added to the number added to the weight and therefore contributed. Secondary to that, it is widely accepted that police were heavy handed with supporters around that time due to the hooligans that existed around then. If you accept that then it must be accepted that behaviour of supporters in general (not even on the day in question) contributed to the policing style adopted. That doesn't make it acceptable but do we not all accept that was the case?

As I say, I feel that the jury and inquest in general was looking at supporters as a whole which I feel is even shown in the wording of the question. Surely the question should have said did SOME supporters? But no it, just like the police on the day actually, lumps all supporters together.

 

You've quoted the question incorrectly - it refers to 'the supporters' not just supporters which to me is very different in the context of the question and it's quite clear that's it's about actions on the day, not what happened the day before or the week before or the year before.

As for fans without tickets - this has been discounted as a reason ever since the Taylor report was written so christ knows why people keep going on about it.

 

Because surely any fans without tickets contributed even if it was simply their additional weight crushing those unfortunate people at the front. People have in the past claimed that those without tickets were to blame, I am saying that they weren't to blame but certainly contributed to the situation. They simply have to have. The problem is that the jury was asked specifically whether a SIGNIFICANT amount of supporters were without tickets and in my opinion that is a very different question and one which quite deliberately removes their ability to rule open and honestly

 

Problem is with or without tickets they didn't decide to open the gate and then lie about that fact for the best part of 30years. Regardless it's still SYP failure to police the game correctly.

 

Of course it is but I thought the whole idea of the inquest was to once and for all determine EVERYTHING that led to and contributed to the tragedy

 

The jury was also asked in the second part of question 7 whether the supporters may have caused or contributed to the disaster. 'May' is a very general word and it does not mean significant - the jury said no based on the evidence they heard -99% of which I'd imagine that neither you or i have read therefore I suspect their findings are more accurate than your thoughts.

The jury weren't asked anything specifically about tickets, they were asked about behaviour - there's no evidence that ticket less fans were there or that they contributed in any way yet this line still gets peddled out - the propaganda of syp still lives on.

 

The Taylor report says that a small number of fans were without tickets but no more so than at other similar games. Which is what I said

 

Maggie again.

 

I've tears streaming down my face now as I've had from about three paragraphs into that article. In a right state.

Just for this moment I could not give a **** if we get into the play offs or not.

I don't know whether I'm more angry at at Thatcher for making it happen, the police for covering it up, or proud of my people for fighting for justice.

Either way, Adrian Tenpenny, that's some of the most powerful writing I've ever seen. Thanks Whitey for posting. You owe me a new box of tissues.

 

Completely specious argument. On that basis you could equally say that because some misguided "scientist" in the 19th century wrote a book on racial types, he was directly responsible for the Holocaust.

The police have a DUTY (not an option mind) to protect the public and as far as I know football supporters are included in the term "public".

 

Fact: perimeter fencing such as at Hillsborough existed because of football hooligans.
Fact: this perimeter fencing prevented the escape of victims and was a huge factor in the disaster.

Therefore it is a fact that hooliganism in football contributed to the disaster.

That isn't laying any blame on the Liverpool fans there that day, it is a general comment that the actions of a lot of football fans around that time and before it contributed to 96 people losing their lives. Of course the police must take ultimate responsibility because it was they who were supposedly in control that day and it was they who made decisions but there are also a hell of a lot of people up and down the country who are in denial about how their disgusting behaviour in the 70s and 80s contributed to the worst disaster in British sporting history.

 

Fact: perimeter fencing such as at Hillsborough existed because of the Police's inability to deal with football hooligans without treating the rest of us law abiding ordinary people like animals.
Fact: this perimeter fencing prevented the escape of victims and was a huge factor in the disaster not helped by the police telling dying people to "F*** off".

 

Then we are in agreement. Hooligans of the past contributed

 

It comes to summat if football hooligans and drunks etc were responsible for my safety .

 

Do we really need another Hillsborough thread?