Hillsborough files released: LIVE coverage

reply to post by jeantherapy


I think you should view some footage and tell us how these people could NOT push once they got in.

Originally posted by jeantherapy
What I am hearing is that there were too many people there, whose fault is that? At any serious sporting venue you sell as many tickets as you have seats for. The police may have covered up their lousy response to a lousy situation but saying that it was the fault of the police is a cop out, they didn't force all these people to show up to a soccer match.

Sorry, but no. Do some research on this. Then read the report, which is one of the most comprehensive and damnning indictment I've ever read. Sickening as well. Thousands of fans trying to enter one end of a stadium that only had seven turnstiles operating. Seven. The police fell down massively on this one - and then they tried to blame it all on the fans, instead of their own masterclass on how not to control a crowd.

What if there had been no police presence whatsoever? Just venue ushers. Would the outcome have been different? (since the police are clearly at fault the answer should be yes)

Folks....

Don't feed the troll.

Originally posted by neformore
Folks....

Don't feed the troll.

If I were a moderator I might delete that off topic post. Care to give me your input as regards how things might have turned out if there had been ZERO police presence there that day?

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
reply to post by jeantherapy

 

In England alone there are 4 division's with 20 to 24 teams each. who play every weekend for 9 months of the year, millions of people go to watch each week and you can only find 1 or 2 examples of idiots causing trouble.
You sir must try harder.

edit on 12-9-2012 by marvinthemartian because: oops dyslexic

You're joking, right? There's plenty of examples of how well behaved "footballer fans" are...

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by jeantherapy


Geeza why dont you just go and hide under your bridge and leave the adults to their discussion.

Originally posted by jeantherapy
If I were a moderator I might delete that off topic post. Care to give me your input as regards how things might have turned out if there had been ZERO police presence there that day?

Well, then there might have been people who knew what the hell they were doing and who wouldn't have lied through their teeth about it, smeared the dead and then tried to hide their own incompetance. But then as there's always going to be a police presence at any UK stadium, just for traffic management if nothing else, your question is meaningless.

reply to post by AngryAlien

Look at the numbers.
Its less than 0.5 % of matches that suffer from trouble.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


I guess I was asking you to use your imagination. The police are clearly at fault, okay I accept that. Which would mean that if there were no police presence there (why is that so hard for you to imagine?) nobody would have lost their life, right? Because it was the police who were at fault. So you can see where I am going with this, right? No police = no deaths.

Originally posted by jeantherapy
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

I guess I was asking you to use your imagination. The police are clearly at fault, okay I accept that. Which would mean that if there were no police presence there (why is that so hard for you to imagine?) nobody would have lost their life, right? Because it was the police who were at fault. So you can see where I am going with this, right? No police = no deaths.

You fail to understand the entire thing here. No police = no match. There's always been a policeman somewhere around any major stadium that I've been to, if only to keep an eye on the local pickpockets and make sure that the traffic runs smoothly.

Never heard of it and I'm reasonably well-informed, shows how much the media of each country focuses on it's own people and less on foreign countries, especially true of America. The only Hillsborough I know is in Florida, so I initially thought the thread might be about that.

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by neformore
Folks....

Don't feed the troll.

If I were a moderator I might delete that off topic post. Care to give me your input as regards how things might have turned out if there had been ZERO police presence there that day?

The police were paid to maintain the safety of the public at a football match. It is a job many other police forces had carried out with great success, except on very rare occasions, at 100s of football grounds every week throughout Britain. They have done ever since.

The senior police officers failed that day and then tried to cover up their incompetence.

So your question is as irrelevant as asking what if there were no law enforcement agencies anywhere. Which is plain stupid. On this occasion the police failed to carry out the duties to a standard required.

Originally posted by mirageman

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by neformore
Folks....

Don't feed the troll.

If I were a moderator I might delete that off topic post. Care to give me your input as regards how things might have turned out if there had been ZERO police presence there that day?

The police were paid to maintain the safety of the public at a football match. It is a job many other police forces had carried out with great success, except on very rare occasions, at 100s of football grounds every week throughout Britain. They have done ever since.

The senior police officers failed that day and then tried to cover up their incompetence.

So your question is as irrelevant as asking what if there were no law enforcement agencies anywhere. Which is plain stupid. On this occasion the police failed to carry out the duties to a standard required.

My question is not irrelevant, this entire matter hinges upon the fact that police were present! I am asking you to consider the possible outcome if there were no police there. Why is everyone unwilling to consider the outcome if there had been no police? Afraid of what the answer might be?

reply to post by AngryCymraeg

I agree 100% with what you say. The police LIED and FALSIFIED EVIDENCE. Rewrote statements and blamed the dead fans. Now that is a very serious charge in itself. Every officer who did that, was going against every rule and regulation in the book. If it was in some other case, then they would be trying to charge who ever had done it with murder. Their incompetense led to the deaths of 96 people, so they really should be charged. Every one who was involved in this cover up, should face trial.

Originally posted by jeantherapy
My question is not irrelevant, this entire matter hinges upon the fact that police were present! I am asking you to consider the possible outcome if there were no police there. Why is everyone unwilling to consider the outcome if there had been no police? Afraid of what the answer might be?

Your question is meaningless - no police = no match, as there would have been no permit for it to go ahead! The UK police handle basic security and traffic management at big matches. Lack of a police presence would mean that the match would be cancelled. This is quite simple.

reply to post by jeantherapy


Police do have a reputation for stopping bystanders from lending a hand because even in chaos they like to make it look like they're in control. Maybe that had an effect on who died? This has happened too many times in recent years that personally, if a friend of mine got into trouble I might prefer to stop a passersby to lend me a hand rather than call the authorities.

Here's just two examples of that very thing.

Emergency services blasted for failing to save woman who fell down mine shaft

Father hits out at safety rules that made fireman leave his son to drown in 3ft of water

reply to post by illuminnaughty

Absolutely. I was horrified when I heard Cameron's statement this afternoon (I hate the smug git but he and Millibean got it exactly right today) and then I went and read the report. I felt physically sick afterwards. We trust the police to protect us - not lie and smear and cover their tracks.

What I am saying is this: If the police were not there then nobody would have died. Does somebody want to disagree with that? Please also remember that I am from the US, where our Supreme Court has ruled that the police are not legally obligated to assist you in any way.

Originally posted by jeantherapy
What I am saying is this: If the police were not there then nobody would have died. Does somebody want to disagree with that? Please also remember that I am from the US, where our Supreme Court has ruled that the police are not legally obligated to assist you in any way.

edit on 12-9-2012 by jeantherapy because: (no reason given)

If the police had not been there then no-one would have died, yes you are correct. Because there wouldn't have been a match. Simples!