Hillsborough: Anatomy Of A Government Cover-Up

[Kellydandodi]

Not to spin gold out of a tragedy, but surely the network of implicated police, local government and government parties exposed in the new report give the lie to any scoffing at conspiracy theory which suggests no large group could have been puppeteered into conspiring. Impuning the names of the dead and clearing the reputations of those in charge on the day seemed the sole goal of an entire machine of government and media causing many to question what they had in fact seen with their own eyes.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Not to spin gold out of a tragedy, but surely the network of implicated police, local government and government parties exposed in the new report give the lie to any scoffing at conspiracy theory which suggests no large group could have been puppeteered into conspiring. Impuning the names of the dead and clearing the reputations of those in charge on the day seemed the sole goal of an entire machine of government and media causing many to question what they had in fact seen with their own eyes.

There's a distinction to be drawn between those conspiracy theories being scoffed at and cover-ups, of which this is a perfectly good example. I've never heard anyone say, scoffer or not, that cover-ups don't happen. Where people do tend to scoff at conspiracy theories it involves some level of planning the actual event to be later covered up.

The Hillsborough tragedy required considerably fewer plotters to conceal the truth than it would have to have commissioned and executed the disaster from the beginning. It only required corruption from those already implicated and waiting to be found wanting, quite a different proposition from accepting the challenge of pre-planned mass murder.

Of course, Thatcher's role in it all is intriguing:


Hillsborough Tragedy: Margaret Thatcher's Concern Over 1989 Report That Contained 'Criticism' Of Police

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09 ... 78520.html

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Have to agree with Ted on this one. I hesitated to devote a thread to this story, while I decided on the best way to handle it. This isn't the usual conspiracy theory, this turns out to be a massive cover-up, in the wake of an unmitigated police cock-up on a disastrously vast scale, of which many people have had a good idea of the outline, but where the newly disclosed details are both revealing and shocking.

A criminal conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, a cover-up at the bottom of which is not just a case of astonishing incompetence, but the possibility of serious criminal charges of culpability and criminal negligence. Not just a heartless, cold blooded attempt to shift the blame for the disaster on to the victims, but a truly shocking, mind numbing revelation, that around forty of the ninety victims who died might well have been saved, if things had been better organised, even some who were lying in the temporary morgue.

Truly, truly, mind numbing.

As to the Thatcher connection, beyond the possible collusion of the local Tory MP at the time, there's also the close symbiotic relationship between the police, the media and the Government that developed through the way the police and media were mobilised to deal with the likes of the Miners' strike and Greenham Common, during the Eighties, as an arm of Government policy. It could be argued that a certain callousness, conflict of interests and loyalties, might have developed, when it came to dealing with the public.

 

[Quake42]

As to the Thatcher connection, beyond the possible collusion of the local Tory MP at the time, there's also the close symbiotic relationship between the police, the media and the Government that developed through the way the police and media were mobilised to deal with the likes of the Miners' strike and Greenham Common, during the Eighties, as an arm of Government policy. It could be argued that a certain callousness, conflict of interests and loyalties, might have developed, when it came to dealing with the public.

Definitely. And football fans, particularly Liverpool football fans, were not popular at the time (not without reason, in fairness). Claiming that drunken, aggressive fans had caused the crush was always going to be an easy sell to the public.

What is surprising about these revelations is the sheer scale of the cover up.

 

[dannycheveaux1]

Definition of Conspiracy:
a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal or harmful act, esp with political motivation; plot

An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

I think this topic counts as the coverup involved orchestrated illegal acts such as the changing of statements etc

Many would have regarded the idea that the police, government, FA etc would ever act in this way as a "conspiracy theory", now it's shown to be "The Truth"

Even after all this, some will still believe what they read in the papers. It should also be obvious that people in authority have their own agendas and personal or political bias and it's naive to accept the "official line" on any controversial subject or event without question

cheers
Dan

 

[Quake42]

It should also be obvious that people in authority have their own agendas and personal or political bias and it's naive to accept the "official line" on any controversial subject or event without question

It may be naive to accept the "official line" on every event without question - but it's also silly to look for conspiracies everywhere and to cling to beliefs in demented theories about (say) holographic planes and Illuminati symbolism.

In the Hillsborough case, the only really new material of significance was the extent of the police damage limitation exercise; the fact that the fans were largely blameless, that the police had failed to deal with the crowds properly and had incorrectly opened the gates, and the attempts to smear the fans as being drunk, were all identified in the Taylor Report a few months after the event.

 

[ChrisBoardman]

There was a panorama documentary about this on Monday, it's probably still on iPlayer.

One thing I learned is that the police officers did not change their statements. What happened was they were all asked to write their observations on paper, these were then typed up with the anti-police observations missing and given back to the police officers to sign. So less people were involved in the corruption than we first thought.

 

[Cochise]

There is no doubt that a conspiracy was involved after Hillsborough to cover up the police and emergency services failings, and it has indeed changed my views on the likelihood of large scale conspiracies being successful

I grant the distinction between conspiring to deflect blame or cover up an embarrassing event, and a conspiracy to create an event (the whole False Flag nonsense) but was there not an element of conspiracy at Hillsborough even before the tragedy, with the ground repeatedly allowed to get away with no safety certificate, and with major events continuing to be held there?

Also, you have to question, had the political climate of the 1980's created a culture of conspiracy or cover up in the South Yorkshire Police, especially in regard to manipulation of the coverage of events at Orgreave?

Very striking on the Panorama documentary was the level of trust one police force had in another. I would assume that level of trust is necessary in their normal dealings, but of course the result of a conspiracy is that such trust is lost for a long time. Or maybe people just blank it and pretend it couldn't happen, which must be pretty near to the definition of naivety.

This leads us to a point raised elsewhere, that these acts of irresponsibility by some of the people in this country entrusted with the most responsible posts are feeding into a wider process of destroying our trust in our nation's basic institutions.

And now people know that at least some of the conspiracies really did happen (the concealing of the true picture regarding the EU/EEC by the Heath and Wilson governments is another, confirmed by documents released under the 25 year rule) then unless genuine efforts are made to restore trust by actually prosecuting offenders, I can only see the loss of trust continuing.

 

[ChrisBoardman]

The thing about disasters like this, is that they have to happen before we learn the lessons from them. If the police had closed the gate to the central pens when they opened the exit gate, then no one would have died that day. And so no lessons would have been learned.

So at some subsequent game there would have been an identical disaster, caused by very similar circumstances.

I suppose Hillsborough was the Titanic of the football world.

 

[McAvennie]

The thing about disasters like this, is that they have to happen before we learn the lessons from them. If the police had closed the gate to the central pens when they opened the exit gate, then no one would have died that day. And so no lessons would have been learned.

So at some subsequent game there would have been an identical disaster, caused by very similar circumstances.

I suppose Hillsborough was the Titanic of the football world.

True, but in the time it took to coordinate the message from the exit gate to the stewards manning the entrance to the central pen there is every chance that the crush outside the ground would have escalated to dangerous and tragic levels.

Anyone who has ever been to a football match, especially a big high-profile one, and has been held up outside for whatever reason after the game has kicked off knows how quickly frustrations can boil over into pushing and shoving to get in as quickly as possible. Had the police, in the eyes of the fans stuck outside, seemingly wasted more valuable time sending messages around to get stewards to seemingly close the visible entrance to the terraces do you think that would have been taken well by the fans eager to get into the ground as quickly as possible?

All hypothetical, but what happened was a terrible, terrible accident and as much as this is taboo to consider, blame can be found on ALL sides.

Yes, of course, the police and authorities after the event have looked to try and cover their backs and avoid taking the full blame for their mistakes on the day but ask anyone who regularly went to big games in the early to mid-80s and they will tell you that Hillsborough could have happened on any number of occasions before. The German street parade incident just a few years back goes to show that it can still happen with the best of organisation and planning.

I've been caught up myself several times in the last couple of years here in Paris in events that could so so easily have turned tragic. A few years back after the Bastille Day parade on the Champs Elysees the spectators all made to leave pretty much en masse, the barriers which had been set up to pen in spectators were not removed or pushed back and where the cafes and brasseries jutted out on to the pavement the crowds bottlenecked. Despite the obvious fact that a crowd on people 10 wide cannot get through a space 5 people wide at the same time seemingly intelligent adults continued to push and shove and try to force themselves through all at once. Women and children were being pushed and shoved about by seemingly law-abiding citizens and all it would have taken was one unfortunate to lose their step. I am 6'4' yet at one point I could feel myself beginning to be lifted almost onto tiptoes by the crush and unable to free one of my arms from my side, in the end a gap opened up enough for me to get out and drag my girlfriend out with me and we just climbed up onto a ledge and observed until the throng eventually died down.

The point of that ramble is that in those situations sensible people do stupid things, things that seem obvious from a long way off are not as straightforward and cut and dried in the heat of the moment. I'm just not sure what the constant search for justice and blame does for anybody. A lot of people fucked up on that day and it was horrific what happened but does reliving it again and again trying to determine who was precisely to blame and who should have done this and who should be reviled for doing that get anybody anywhere?

 

[Stormkhan]

I found the Panorama programme quite fascinating, especially with the repeated "whitewashing" that was done - as soon as one avenue for getting to the truth was opened, a bloody great bureaucratic barricade was put in place.

This whole sorry affair hasn't really "convinced" me of the practicality of any major conspiracy, if only for this being my perception of the Hillsborough disaster:

Hypothesis Alpha
A senior politician turns around to a few high-ranking policemen (who by-and-large are more politically-motivated than the rank and file coppers) and says "Look, lads, we need a lethal disaster at a public event - don't ask why.
"Now, at this given moment we want these gates open. Our boffins say the crush will be enough to kill as many as we need. We need you to make sure there's little ambulance coverage and, when the dust settles, you can doctor your bobbies statements to make it look like the fans were to blame. Any inquest we've got sewn up and the journo's can be bought of easy.
"Play ball and you get a decent promotion or early retirement before you have to answer any damn fool questions.
"So ... you in or what?"

Hypothesis Beta
A senior politician approaches a few high ranking policemen and says "Look, lads, you've made an almighty feck-up here! Don't care who actually did the deed but we can't have a 'nobody to blame' situation here. The public will want heads off here, and unless you play ball, it'll be yours! This is what we'll do ...
"Communication is already a bloody shambles there, and one commentator was told that the exit gates were opened - he assumed the crowds outside pushed 'em in so we're running with that for the mo'. By the time the street press get to the ground, every witness still there will be either dead, in shock ... or paid by us! So, word will be drunken yobs broke in and 'accidentally' started a crush.
"We'll cover the press - we've got friends in low places, if you see what I mean - and we can pootle about with any enquiry. All you've got to do is make sure your bobbies statements don't conflict with the official line. Do this and you'll do all right - you'll keep your jobs, your pensions ... and your heads.
"So ... you in or what?"

Now Alpha may be popular with conspiracy theorists, thriller writers and so on but in practical terms it still doesn't convince. Regardless of the motives behind the organising group, they still have to rely on the cooperation of a large number of 'organisers' to move the actual 'workers' around. And you have to rely on the 'organisers' absolute trust in you to come up with a reason for them to play ball - the bigger the crime (mass murder, say), the bigger the bloody incentive! After all, this isn't letting some philandering politician off the hook for beating up a prostitute.
Beta, on the other paw, is perfectly feasible (if morally reprehensible): You are offering a way out of a terrible situation which could personally destroy the participants unless they take part in a cover-up. It plays on the participants sense of survival in a situation which has happened beyond their control. To ask them to commit to a conspiracy, they need to be made to do a criminal action then cover up the deed to get off the hook ... far more chancy in reality.

All I see is a lot of (now) forgotten politicians and ranking coppers dragging their heels, shrugging their shoulders and denying anything, in the vague hope that it'll all be swept away by the demise of those who want to get to the truth! Even if fingers, finally, get pointed those who should be made accountable because of their errors and participation in a cover-up of feck-up ... they'll be beyond any public censure, either by deep retirement from "active" life or their own natural death.

 

[WhistlingJack]

All hypothetical, but what happened was a terrible, terrible accident and as much as this is taboo to consider, blame can be found on ALL sides.

I really have to disagree with you here.

• Hillsborough was known to be a dangerous ground.
  
  The F.A. knew Hillsborough didn't have a valid safety certificate.
  
  While it was known that LFC would be bringing the greater number of supporters, the F.A. still allocated them the end of the ground which had the fewer turnstiles.
  
  Both the police and the F.A. knew that a significant proportion of the LFC support was delayed by roadworks, yet refused to delay the kick-off.
  
  When the police decided to open the gate, they neglected to block-off the central pen where the crush would subsequently occur.
  
  When the police knew that medical assistance was urgently needed, they neglected to allow a sufficient number of ambulances onto the pitch.

All this considered, it's clear that the LFC supporters who were killed or injured bear no responsibility for the incident and that the police and F.A. have blood on their hands.

 

[McAvennie]

All this considered, it's clear that the LFC supporters who were killed or injured bear no responsibility for the incident and that the police and F.A. have blood on their hands.

The issue is not those LFC supporters who were killed or injured though. The vast majority, if not all of the deaths came from those who were already in the ground long before kick-off and had taken up their places at the front of the terrace. Their deaths were caused by being crushed against those barriers and the barriers placed at intervals up the terrace.

In order for them to have been crushed though after 3pm there has to have been something change that was not causing them to be crushed before 3pm - which is of course the additional mass of fans who had been let in by the opening of Gate C and had not been evenly distributed to all enclosures on the Leppings Lane end.

It is this point which I find incredibly hard to see overlooked when all the finger-pointing and blame is being thrown around - yes, there was a mistake made by not having police or stewards evenly distribute late arriving fans into all enclosures but there must surely be some measure of blame on the fans at the back who must have seen that the entrance was bottlenecking and a crush was occurring.

As I have stated earlier, I have found myself in those situations before and been amazed that despite there being a clearly dangerous crush occurring people are still so pig-headed and stubborn about getting to where they are going that they will push and shove and try to force those in front forward so they can get where they are going. You see it all the time on the Metro when some idiot tries to push everyone else further into the carriage so they can squeeze in at the back. I just find it incredible to think that anyone could dismiss the possibility that there would have been Liverpool fans desperate to get in the ground who instead of moving back and creating space for those in difficulty in front to move back exacerbated things by continuing to try and get in the ground.

It is the same factor with the alcohol issue. A real sense of justice and 'we told you so' emerged over the issue of the toxicology reports showing that alcohol levels were not found to be high in the post-mortem reports. It was stated as proof that blaming drunken fans was a real slur against the Liverpool fans, but it seems to me quite obvious that the fans who died would not have been found to have excessive levels of alcohol in their blood because they were already in the ground early and were positioned early at the front ready to watch the game.

Those who would have been more likely to have excessive alcohol levels in their blood would have been fans who had spent the time pre-game drinking in bars around the ground and then headed to the match at the last minute. Again this is something that happens every week at the football - especially at away games that are seen as a big day out, as the FA Cup semi-final would have been. We have all been to games and stayed for one more in the pub and then had to rush to get to the ground. Of course, after the event the medical staff would not have been taking the blood samples of the fans at the back who had been late-comers and potentially pushing to get into the ground.

It seems perfectly logical to me to surmise that there is at the very least a possibility that fans who had been drinking and waited a little too long to get to the ground for kick-off combined with non-drinking fans who had been held up by traffic arrived outside the Liverpool end in large numbers.

That those fans were eager to get into the ground as quick as possible, aware that the match was an important and highly anticipated game and that it had already kicked off.

That those fans would have acted as large crowds do and become agitated and frustrated at being held up outside and started to push to get in and also get annoyed with police who in their eyes were holding them up from getting into the ground. In that situation, and faced with a potential crush outside the ground, you can see why mistakes were made and by trying to prevent a crush outside the police's actions led to one inside.

It is such a sensitive issue and to say anything other than it was entirely the police or the FA or the Hillsborough stewards who were to blame gets you looked at like you have just pissed all over the Hillsborough Memorial.

Yes, there was a failure to herd the fans into the emptier enclosures, but is such a huge common sense failure from late-arriving fans seeing the huge mass of bodies already trying to get into the central enclosure and still trying to join the push to get in that section really exempt from any portion of the blame?

 

[Yithian]

*Dives for cover*

 

[Cavynaut]

*Dives for cover*

Agreed.

This is a thread worth watching.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_Disaster#Findings

...

Findings

On 12 September 2012, the Hillsborough Independent Panel[80] concluded that no Liverpool fans were responsible in any way for the disaster,[81] and that its main cause was a "lack of police control" and crowd safety was "compromised at every level" and overcrowding issues had been recorded two years earlier. The panel concluded that "up to 41" of the 96 who perished might have survived had the emergency services' reactions and co-ordination been improved.[82] The number is based on post mortem examinations which found some victims may have had heart, lung or blood circulation function for some time after being removed from the crush. The report stated that placing fans who were "merely unconscious" on their backs would have resulted in their deaths.[83]

The findings concluded that 164 witness statements had been altered and 116 statements unfavourable to South Yorkshire Police had been removed. South Yorkshire Police had performed blood alcohol tests on the victims, some of them children, and ran computer checks on the national police database in an attempt to "impugn their reputation".[84] The report concluded that the then Conservative MP for Sheffield Hallam, Irvine Patnick, passed inaccurate and untrue information from the police to the press.[85][86]

...

Ultimately, only the police were in a real position to oversee and control the flow of the crowd on that day. When you are in the middle of a closely packed crowd, as an individual, as McAvennie points out, it's almost impossible to do anything, but go with the flow. It's not like forcing your way onto a metro train, because you don't have the choice. At the back of the crowd, you've no real idea what's happening at the front. Only the police and stewards, are in a position to direct and control the flow. This they spectacularly failed to do, despite previous warnings about serious problems with crowd safety at the ground.

The police ran alcohol checks on the victims as part of an attempt to besmirch the reputation of the victims and shift the blame on to them. Almost twice as many people died as were killed in the immediate crush, mostly because of the shambolic response. The police, politicians and sections of the media lied, distorted, hid, or altered the evidence, to cover up the true causes of the disaster.

 

[Cochise]

The thing about disasters like this, is that they have to happen before we learn the lessons from them. If the police had closed the gate to the central pens when they opened the exit gate, then no one would have died that day. And so no lessons would have been learned.

So at some subsequent game there would have been an identical disaster, caused by very similar circumstances.

I suppose Hillsborough was the Titanic of the football world.

Disasters and near-disasters had happened before, and the police had developed methods to deal with it. Problems had occurred before at the very entrance to the ground involved in this disaster, and procedures were known (such as diverting people to the side pens). I should also point out my club, Arsenal, refused to install the cages because they believed them to be dangerous, and lost the right to hold FA cup semi-finals as a result.

On this occasion there was an inexperienced officer in charge who apparently first panicked and then went into denial, over a situation that should never have happened in the first place because the FA should never have held such an important fixture at a ground without a safety certificate. If a train driver had done something similar and caused deaths he/she would be tried for manslaughter. In any case there should certainly have been dismissals and resignations among the PTB's that allowed the situation to arise.

Had that all simply been admitted at the time, while there would still have been a desperate tragedy, then I think people would have got over it well before now. As it is, the damage to trust will go on and on, including that of the 'no smoke without fire' folk outside Liverpool who still somehow think the fans or Liverpool culture in general were somehow to blame.

 

[ChrisBoardman]

Had that all simply been admitted at the time, while there would still have been a desperate tragedy, then I think people would have got over it well before now. As it is, the damage to trust will go on and on, including that of the 'no smoke without fire' folk outside Liverpool who still somehow think the fans or Liverpool culture in general were somehow to blame.

I certainly agree with this bit.

Largely because you can not put the blame on one person, or one incident. Ducansfield who was in charge had never been in charge of a big game before. There were mistakes before that day as they didn't cordon the street like the previous year. Which officers were keeping an eye on the crowd level in the central pens? they should have closed the gate without orders when it got too full.

 

[Cochise]

I should add that being tried for manslaughter when you cause an accident is not quite the same as manslaughter as an alternative to murder, which hinges primarily on premeditation.

Where people have been tried for manslaughter as a result of accidents, the burden of proof is usually that they _knowingly_ disobeyed rules that led to the accident, rather than accidentally.

To give a not-entirely-fictional example, passing a stop signal because you were distracted by a fault on the train would be 'not guilty', doing the same because you wanted to get home for your tea would be 'guilty'.

It's not regarded as murder because, while in the 'guilty' case the perp has deliberately broken a rule, it is assumed that he /she expected to get away with it without causing any accident. For it to be murder it would have to be proven that you deliberately set out to cause an accident so serious that it must have been obvious that people would have been at risk of death.

Given the above, I doubt anyone involved on the day at Hillsborough should have been found guilty of manslaughter, unless there were specific written rules - not mere precedent - about gate management or what to do if the pen was overcrowded that were ignored.

However, finding someone guilty of manslaughter in such a case is not the only point of the trial, it is also a mechanism for determining the true facts and responsibilities - much better suited to do so, in my opinion, than an enquiry by politicians.

Clearly there was no proper major incident plan in place at all. If anyone was guilty it would actually be the FA in knowingly assigning the tie to an uncertified stadium. On the other hand many responsible people involved clearly were inadequate for their positions and responsibility and should have been removed accordingly.

 

[ChrisBoardman]

It would be unfair to charge an individual with manslaughter but maybe a corporate manslaughter charge would be more appropriate as the police failed in many areas.

I don't know if such a charge existed back then.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

More murky stuff:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...y-have-been-edited-inquest-hears-8864697.html

Expert suggests police videos of Hillsborough disaster may have been edited, inquest hears

It also emerged that 74 more police statements are suspected of being altered than was originally believed

The Independent. John Hall. 07 October 2013


An expert witness has allegedly suggested that police videos of the Hillsborough disaster may have been edited after the event, a pre-inquest hearing heard today.

A barrister representing several families who lost loved ones in the tragedy told the hearing that the expert had studied footage taken on a hand-held camera at the football stadium during the event, and concluded that the pictures he saw may well have been edited at a later date.

It also emerged that 74 more police statements are suspected of being altered than was originally stated – a figure that suggests a far wider cover-up of the Hillsborough disaster than had been previously thought.

238 police officers are accused of tampering with official statements following the disaster, but out of the 220 that are still alive, only 57 have been interviewed by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Speaking to Sky News, Steven Kelly - who lost his brother Michael in the disaster - said: “It's so shocking. Every new inquest into Hillsborough there is new evidence which suggests a cover-up.”

He added: “It’s interesting today to hear of the amount of police notebooks which were tampered with and allegations that cameras have been tampered with. It’s frightening, really… I'm pleased the legal team have found this new evidence and I'm sure they'll get the right experts to find out if they have been tampered with”.

Mr Kelly went on to say: “Looking at Lord Justice Goldring's performance today, he’s truly got a grip on it and is determined to run the inquest his way. I have total confidence in him and our legal team to get to the bottom of it.

The IPCC hopes to complete all police interviews by February 2014 before the new inquest begins in March. The inquest will be held in Warrington in front of a jury and is expected to last six to nine months.

 

[Cochise]

I'm probably losing my sense of proportion, but it seems that this case is symptomatic of two great schisms in our society, between North and South and between the ruled and the rulers.

I may be naive, but when I was growing up and actively involved in politics,while we may have been aware that corruption could occur and was occurring, systematic - oh , I don't know the right word - irresponsible, immoral? I'm thinking of altering evidence and threatening colleagues to toe the line - was unthinkable? Has it really always gone on like this or was it a phenomenon that has grown out of the Union/Establishment battles of the 70's and 80's?

It certainly makes me look at the actions of the police in the 80's miner's dispute in a much more sinister light - not that I was in favour of their behaviour at the time, mind you, although I still think Scargill is and was a fool to carry on with the strike when he didn't have full support. A good general realises when the enemy has outmanoeuvred him and retires to marshall resources and fight another day.

 

[OneWingedBird]

I often wonder similar things Cochise, the first time I came across some serious corruption first hand was when I was a civil servant getting on for 17 years back... the more I see though and the more often I see it... I am at a loss as the whether things have got a lot worse during my lifetime or the apple was always was this rotten most of the way through and I just didn't have the life experience to see it before.

 

[Cochise]

In a strange way the Sun's terrible reporting has been one of the strengths behind the campaign - their slurs were so nasty that no-one in Liverpool was going to rest until they were forced to eat their words.

Even now of course we still do not know 'The Truth'. Not all of it. And we probably never will - I notice from the above link that there would still appear to be no appetite to investigate the masonic link.

 

[ChrisBoardman]

Has anybody ever seen the 1996 Hillsborough film?

 

[Monstrosa]

Hillsborough inquests: Terry Wain's disaster report queried
A police report about the Hillsborough disaster "exaggerated" how late it was when fans arrived at the ground, said a senior officer involved in writing it.

Former Ch Supt Terry Wain led the South Yorkshire Police (SYP) team writing the report which was being prepared for a public inquiry into the 1989 tragedy.

The inquests jury heard the report also stressed how alcohol affected fans.

But it did not include many references to senior officers losing control or criticism of police leadership.

BBC site

 

[lopaka]

I think I may have mentioned this, but the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary on Hillsborough was both incredibly well done and exceedingly difficult to watch. It was really quite devastating. I understand it cannot be broadcast in the UK until the coroner's inquest is completed, but highly recommended once it becomes available across the pond.

 

[ChrisBoardman]

I think I may have mentioned this, but the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary on Hillsborough was both incredibly well done and exceedingly difficult to watch. It was really quite devastating. I understand it cannot be broadcast in the UK until the coroner's inquest is completed, but highly recommended once it becomes available across the pond.

Is it on youtube anywhere?

 

[lopaka]

Between what I imagine are ESPN's proprietary interests and the legal issues, I'd be a surprised if there was a free, all-regions version available on YouTube. OTOH, it is the internet, so if one looks hard or well enough, it may very well be out there for viewing 'somewhere'. Sorry I can't offer anything helpful. I saw it here in the states when it debuted on TV last April. I'd certainly hope that once it can be aired in the UK that it will.

 

[ramonmercado]