This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/25/hillsborough-disaster-coroner-inquest-david-duckenfield
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Hillsborough jury told to consider whether victims were unlawfully killed | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The jury sitting at the inquests into how 96 people died at Hillsborough in 1989 will be asked to consider the South Yorkshire police management of the FA Cup semi-final and whether the victims were unlawfully killed. | The jury sitting at the inquests into how 96 people died at Hillsborough in 1989 will be asked to consider the South Yorkshire police management of the FA Cup semi-final and whether the victims were unlawfully killed. |
| The coroner, Sir John Goldring, told the jury of seven women and three men that in order to answer yes to the question about whether those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed, “you would have to be sure that David Duckenfield, the match commander, was responsible for the manslaughter by gross negligence of these 96 people. When answering this question, we are looking at Mr Duckenfield’s conduct and his responsibility.” | |
| Four separate questions will be asked about the South Yorkshire police’s handling of the match, including whether a different match commander should have been selected instead of Duckenfield, the chief superintendent, given his level of experience in policing at Hillsborough. | |
| Consideration of his and the general police management of the match, at which they were responsible for the safety of 54,000 people attending, will include their planning and preparation, their stewardship of the crowd outside the Leppings Lane turnstiles where a dangerous situation developed, and whether, when a large exit gate was opened to let in 2,000 supporters, the tunnel leading to the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace should have been closed. | |
| The jury will also answer questions about whether the South Yorkshire police and South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Services failed to adequately recognise the lethal crush developing in those pens, and to organise a medical response quickly and effectively. | The jury will also answer questions about whether the South Yorkshire police and South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Services failed to adequately recognise the lethal crush developing in those pens, and to organise a medical response quickly and effectively. |
| The jury is also to be asked to determine whether the behaviour of Liverpool supporters at the approach to the Leppings Lane turnstiles may have contributed to the disaster. The question, number seven, will ask whether supporters there “behaved in a way which was unusually forceful or resistant to police control”. | The jury is also to be asked to determine whether the behaviour of Liverpool supporters at the approach to the Leppings Lane turnstiles may have contributed to the disaster. The question, number seven, will ask whether supporters there “behaved in a way which was unusually forceful or resistant to police control”. |
| Considerations for answering that question include whether there were significant numbers of supporters without tickets at the approach to the turnstiles, and whether there was anything in their behaviour or “arrival pattern” which “could not reasonably be foreseen by experienced police officers”. | |
| Goldring was addressing the jury at the start of his summing up of 267 days of evidence heard since 1 April 2014, in the longest case ever heard by a jury in British legal history. Ninety-six people who were at Hillsborough supporting Liverpool at the 1989 FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest died following the lethal crush in the pens of the Leppings Lane terrace. | |
| Around 250 people whose relatives died in the disaster were in the courtroom, listening quietly as Goldring began his summing up and read out the 14 questions to be answered. The questions, he explained, also included consideration of whether there were defects in the safety of the stadium, or failures by Sheffield Wednesday football club, whose ground Hillsborough is, the club’s engineers Eastwoods, and the licensing of the stadium, which contributed or may have contributed to the dangerous situation that developed outside and on the terrace. | |
| Goldring has said he will take three weeks to complete his summing up of all evidence and law relating to the deaths. The jury is expected to start considering its verdicts on 22 February. | Goldring has said he will take three weeks to complete his summing up of all evidence and law relating to the deaths. The jury is expected to start considering its verdicts on 22 February. |
| Introducing his summing up, Goldring explained that an inquest is a legal proceeding that answers four questions: who, when, where and how a person died. | |
| “In this case, as in many inquests, the question of how the person came by his or her death is the most important, difficult and controversial,” he said. | “In this case, as in many inquests, the question of how the person came by his or her death is the most important, difficult and controversial,” he said. |
| “How includes the circumstances surrounding the death; that includes the events which led to the death, the facts which may have contributed to the death. In this case, that is the more controversial area, is it not?” |