Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hillsborough Independent Panel findings and release of documents.

nope, only been twice, once in my teens as a tourist and once as an adult giving a training course up there. both times i was abused and insulted in the street by passing locals more than one, threatened with violence, and subjected to a beatles nostalgia campaign that made me want to throw up my own ears. even romford hasn't been so utterly utterly unpleasant. our liverpool tenants were always burning each others house down too. what the fuck is up with that?

but that's prejudice based on a limited experience and i accept that. just because i have this prejudice doesn't mean that i believed the horseshit that was spun about hilsborough.

You wouldn't survive a minute in Middlesbrough then.
 
sorry. they weren't nice to me and i bear a grudge. i have no doubt that outside of my head liverpool people are just as good as everyone else and i'm sorry to anyone who was offended.

What's surprising though is that I doubt you'd accept someone else saying the same on racial grounds based on little to no experience.

"I don't like blacks because one nicked my wallet once" or somesuch. I'd expect you'd have an argument at the ready there.
 
Andy Burnham must be feeling justified today in fucking off the thirty year rule and setting up the independent panel.
He did well and without him this might never have come out, better than Jack Straw who also did another whitewash inquest, lets not forget that.


On the 6 October 1997, Lord Justice Stuart-Smith was at the Maritime Museum in Liverpool's Docklands area. He was there to listen to any new evidence from families. Any optimism families might have had was swiftly diminished when the judge set the tone for the proceedings by stating to one bereaved father:

"Have you got a few of your people or are they like the liverpool fans, turn up at the last minute."

http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough/history/stuartsmith.shtm

This is what the families have had to put up with before now. I'm glad the truth is being told and hopefully it will lead to prosecutions. Duckenfield retired on a full pension and some of the police got payouts for trauma - the insurance company accepted there had been a loss of command.
 
I understood that it was senior officers that changed the notes. Well, that was the impression I got anyway.
You would do well to read through the appropriate passage, then - Chapter 15 (p315-339).

The subject is dealt with in some detail. Officers were instructed on the Sunday not to use their pocket books or CJA forms (as trained). Instead an ad hoc arrangement of recording their 'recollections' for submission to the Taylor Inquiry as "a formal proof of evidence", and in support of the Chief Constable's own evidence, was developed by senior management at SYT in conjunction with the Force's solicitors, Hammond Suddards. Chief Superintendent Terry Wain was tasked with arranging the process, and in a briefing on 26 April he explained to those who would be providing 'recollections' what was required, following a template suggested by the lawyers.

'Recollections' were made on plain paper, not on standard documents like CJA forms. At the same time, the WMP was investigating the SYP's role in the disaster. SYP had anticipated that WMP would interview its officer-witnesses, but WMP indicated it would take written evidence instead. There was concern in the SYP that these written 'recollections' - intended only for Taylor in support of the SYP senior management evidence - might then be used at inquests or disciplinaries. The Force solicitors duly reviewed the 'recollections' before they were sent to WMP.

In the words of Chief Superintendent Donald Denton of the SYP Incident Room, who alongside Peter Metcalf of Hammond Sudards, oversaw the review of 'recollections': "Nothing currently in our possession will be released to W/Mids until it has been vetted by our legal representatives."

The process of taking 'recollections' was expanded to include those of officers from forces other than SYP on duty at Hillsborough; the review and vetting continued into June. The vetting was justified within SYP (e.g. by Assistant Chief Constable Stuart Anderson) on the grounds that statements might be entered into the record during the Inquiry, without being challenged in cross-examination - accordingly a rationale was developed for "editing them for use as a factual statement". Both WMP and the Treasury Department were aware of this vetting process. SYP categorised elements in the 'recollections' to be 'edited' thus (numbers of recollections affected):

▪ Grammatical clarification, redundant language and jargon (194)
▪ Informal or coarse language (22)
▪ Criticisms of the police response or inadequate leadership (116)
▪ Poor communications or inadequate radio contact (48)
▪ Deletion of references to ‘chaos’, ‘fear’, ‘panic’ or ‘confusion’ (23)
▪ Abusive criticism of supporters (33)

ACC Anderson required that officers 'agreed' to the changes. It seems that officers were told that "alterations were made to exclude personal opinion", but that they were not shown their original 'recollections' for comparison when asked to sign off the vetted versions.
 
nope, only been twice, once in my teens as a tourist and once as an adult giving a training course up there. both times i was abused and insulted in the street by passing locals more than one, threatened with violence, and subjected to a beatles nostalgia campaign that made me want to throw up my own ears. even romford hasn't been so utterly utterly unpleasant. our liverpool tenants were always burning each others house down too. what the fuck is up with that?

they can spot complete whoppers a mile away up there, dont take it personally
 
You would do well to read through the appropriate passage, then - Chapter 15 (p315-339).
Thanks for that clarification, it was the impression I got from listening to the news on the radio.

I know one thing for sure. Kelvin McKenzie's apology was incredibly hollow, decades too late and bearing in mind his previous arrogant pronouncements, I hope his career is finished. It would be a happy thing to see him on JSA
 
Still a lot of unanswered questions but at last the truth is coming out.

That cunt McKenzie.

Interesting that even the Daily Mail dropped him as a columnist a month ago..bet he goes crawling back to Uncle Rupie...hope he becomes a toxic brand.
 
Peter Metcalf was a Senior Partner at SYP's lawyers Hammond Suddards. That law firm was merged with Edge Ellison in 2000 and then with Squire, Sanders & Dempsey in 2011. Squire Sanders is now a significant global law firm, with 1,300 lawyers across 37 offices in 18 countries.

http://www.squiresanders.com/
 
Back
Top Bottom