|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Apr 30, 2016 18:20:06 GMT 1
It seems as if this thread is turning into perfect Guardinista fodder. Probably cause of David Conn's work over the last umpteen years and his investigations. The scandal of all this is that the families of the dead had to beg and scrape and fight and battle for 26 years... why should they have had to do that ? They were the victims of all this ..victims shouldn't have to battle for half their lives because we live in a corrupt country .. if this had happened in Botswana or Zimbabwe or Soviet Russia we would have all been up in arms .. but the wholesale lies and cover up means that if you read back through this thread the families are getting CRITICISED by fellow football fans for daring to question our corrupt society .. it's a total disgrace and one or two on here need to hang their heads in absolute shame
|
|
|
Post by Lard Buttie on Apr 30, 2016 18:22:50 GMT 1
Agree 100% Ted - I liked to think that I'd read up on affair bit of this story but have been embarrassed & shocked to some of the details that have come out about how the victim's families have been treated for the WHOLE 27 years
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 18:26:35 GMT 1
Speculative conspiracy theory bollox unless you put up some supporting facts! Is it not clear that the man in charge, a middle ranking Police officer, lied within minutes of making an inept decision and he was then probably backed up by the man in charge overall, a high ranking Police officer who had recently promoted him, by supporting him with an instutionalised cover-up to protect their backs and blame the powerless football fan (pissed-up ticketless hooligans for breaking in). The politicians were told who to blame, or are you saying they, and we, should have been disbelieving of Police statements on such a catastrophe back then? I think galpharms probably right to an extent.... Lots of people to blame here... And I'd be very surprised if it didn't go right to the very top . As in Maggie T ... There is evidence of freemasonry which rarely gets mentioned but is a cancer at the heart of british society .. What is clear is the decision by SWP to move on the capable commander Jim Mole (to Barnsley !!) was a dropped bollock... As was appointing the dictatorial but clueless Freemason Duckinfield... The FA made the calamitous decision to keep giving Hillsborough the semi despite evidence it was an accident waiting to happen.. Sheffield Wednesday are culpable because they had a death trap of a stadium. And bypassed their statutory responsibilities...The lack of prep done by Duckinfield was an absolute disgrace and the decision to allow 1000s into the central pen meant 100 people died... Simple as... The lies began straight away and the press, the government et al were all complicit... The emergency services rightly got a hammering because their response was pitiful and shambolic... Having reflected on it I think DD should go to prison.. And whoever ordered the doctoring of the witness statements .. That's just abhorrent behaviour worthy of prosecution He isn't; & nor are you regarding a top down (MaggieT) conspiracy theory or Freemasonry. Put up the evidence or stick to realistic interpretations of known facts, which the rest of what you say is.
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Apr 30, 2016 20:32:29 GMT 1
missing the point.. the police were highly culpbable and that was self evident a long, long time ago. The enquries have concentrated on that culpability... this inquest has done likewise. FULL apologies will never come from persons further up the food chain. Said before and I repeat the same 'mistakes and mismanagement' took place a number of times at football matches before and around the time of this one, they were not fatal and were ignored. If you still think a middle ranking police officer and a few of his mates can organise with the speed it took a full cover up for as long as they did, then please carry on believing. The inquest was allowed now and the findings as they are have been allowed now because the political overseers of the cover up and subsequent minions who became top dogs have covered their tracks fully. You and I know they would sell their grandmothers arse for a vote and sell us all out to move up the pecking order. When they reveal the politicians and high ranking officials who were the instigators and movers and continuers of this cover up, then justice will be done. Speculative conspiracy theory bollox unless you put up some supporting facts! Is it not clear that the man in charge, a middle ranking Police officer, lied within minutes of making an inept decision and he was then probably backed up by the man in charge overall, a high ranking Police officer who had recently promoted him, by supporting him with an instutionalised cover-up to protect their backs and blame the powerless football fan (pissed-up ticketless hooligans for breaking in). The politicians were told who to blame, or are you saying they, and we, should have been disbelieving of Police statements on such a catastrophe back then? cant quite figure out what point you are trying to make, cant quite work out why you bring the police or the fans into my points above..the fans were blamed totally first, then the police have been given the total blame for the incident.. neither is true.. the media feed and subsequent taking up of the first stories of the event was organised too quickly and efficiently and the subsequent inquest and then the time involved in holding the cover up simply confirms that higher powers were very much at work. You keep affirming that the police officer in charge lied fairly sharply after the even unfolded, thats been a given for a long, long time. Someone took the lie and ran with it, almost for 20 odd years?? Governments have been in power since and have continued to stall and continued to defer inquiries etc.. Is that all police led? We all know and have known for a long time that a number of police officers should be held to account fully for the day and the aftermath but leaving them to take all the blame and being satisfied with that is clearly going to let some big players be left unblemished.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 20:44:17 GMT 1
Speculative conspiracy theory bollox unless you put up some supporting facts! Is it not clear that the man in charge, a middle ranking Police officer, lied within minutes of making an inept decision and he was then probably backed up by the man in charge overall, a high ranking Police officer who had recently promoted him, by supporting him with an instutionalised cover-up to protect their backs and blame the powerless football fan (pissed-up ticketless hooligans for breaking in). The politicians were told who to blame, or are you saying they, and we, should have been disbelieving of Police statements on such a catastrophe back then? cant quite figure out what point you are trying to make, cant quite work out why you bring the police or the fans into my points above..the fans were blamed totally first, then the police have been given the total blame for the incident.. neither is true.. the media feed and subsequent taking up of the first stories of the event was organised too quickly and efficiently and the subsequent inquest and then the time involved in holding the cover up simply confirms that higher powers were very much at work. You keep affirming that the police officer in charge lied fairly sharply after the even unfolded, thats been a given for a long, long time. Someone took the lie and ran with it, almost for 20 odd years?? Governments have been in power since and have continued to stall and continued to defer inquiries etc.. Is that all police led? We all know and have known for a long time that a number of police officers should be held to account fully for the day and the aftermath but leaving them to take all the blame and being satisfied with that is clearly going to let some big players be left unblemished. Oh dear, you can't figure out what I mean & seam to forget what you have typed before. You are not worth my time in responding anymore! Another disingenuous poster who I should block.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Apr 30, 2016 20:45:26 GMT 1
Speculative conspiracy theory bollox unless you put up some supporting facts! Is it not clear that the man in charge, a middle ranking Police officer, lied within minutes of making an inept decision and he was then probably backed up by the man in charge overall, a high ranking Police officer who had recently promoted him, by supporting him with an instutionalised cover-up to protect their backs and blame the powerless football fan (pissed-up ticketless hooligans for breaking in). The politicians were told who to blame, or are you saying they, and we, should have been disbelieving of Police statements on such a catastrophe back then? cant quite figure out what point you are trying to make, cant quite work out why you bring the police or the fans into my points above..the fans were blamed totally first, then the police have been given the total blame for the incident.. neither is true.. the media feed and subsequent taking up of the first stories of the event was organised too quickly and efficiently and the subsequent inquest and then the time involved in holding the cover up simply confirms that higher powers were very much at work. You keep affirming that the police officer in charge lied fairly sharply after the even unfolded, thats been a given for a long, long time. Someone took the lie and ran with it, almost for 20 odd years?? Governments have been in power since and have continued to stall and continued to defer inquiries etc.. Is that all police led? We all know and have known for a long time that a number of police officers should be held to account fully for the day and the aftermath but leaving them to take all the blame and being satisfied with that is clearly going to let some big players be left unblemished. The police ARE NOT being given total blame ( please read the findings ) but what is established is that Liverpool supporters were in NO WAY to blame ... Unless you know better than the longest legal hearing in history ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 20:50:06 GMT 1
Probably cause of David Conn's work over the last umpteen years and his investigations. The scandal of all this is that the families of the dead had to beg and scrape and fight and battle for 26 years... why should they have had to do that ? They were the victims of all this ..victims shouldn't have to battle for half their lives because we live in a corrupt country .. if this had happened in Botswana or Zimbabwe or Soviet Russia we would have all been up in arms .. but the wholesale lies and cover up means that if you read back through this thread the families are getting CRITICISED by fellow football fans for daring to question our corrupt society .. it's a total disgrace and one or two on here need to hang their heads in absolute shame Great post Ted, you are on the money with this. I don't do shock but I am genuinely shocked that people are ignoring the facts and evidence that have been placed so clearly in front of them. I guess some people just need to counter everything, no matter what. It seems to be their default setting. Their problem, not ours.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Apr 30, 2016 20:53:32 GMT 1
The scandal of all this is that the families of the dead had to beg and scrape and fight and battle for 26 years... why should they have had to do that ? They were the victims of all this ..victims shouldn't have to battle for half their lives because we live in a corrupt country .. if this had happened in Botswana or Zimbabwe or Soviet Russia we would have all been up in arms .. but the wholesale lies and cover up means that if you read back through this thread the families are getting CRITICISED by fellow football fans for daring to question our corrupt society .. it's a total disgrace and one or two on here need to hang their heads in absolute shame Great post Ted, you are on the money with this. I don't do shock but I am genuinely shocked that people are ignoring the facts and evidence that have been placed so clearly in front of them. I guess some people just need to counter everything, no matter what. It seems to be their default setting. Their problem, not ours. It's like they bought the Sun in 1989 and are unable to recalibrate their brains .... EVERYONE HAS ADMITTED TO LYING
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 20:57:58 GMT 1
Unfortunately Steve, as plebs it's difficult to gain the proof you suggest is missing. The facts are quite simple in that the man in charge lied (about opening the exit gate), had his story corrected later in the evening by his superiors & then v quickly it was back to being refuted again. After that point the inquest lays out all the details of the lengths SYP went to, in order to get the untruth to hold firm.
As said before on this thread, all this needed many many yrs ago, was one bloke to stand up & be counted and beat officers to blow the whistle in conjunction with that. Instead some strong arm tactics must have been in place to hold their line for so long. Getting political for a minute let's not forget the position that Thatchers Press Secretary holds on this (even today it seems) & the shit stirring from Irvine Patnick. Alongside a few other things I'd hazard a guess there are some horrendous skeletons in Thatchers cupboards & Hillsborough will be right up there. That's assuming things like this will get released under whatever rule currently exists (30 - 50 yr rule etc. - for the sake of argument there will be some interesting stuff from Blair as well when the time comes...)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 21:31:18 GMT 1
Unfortunately Steve, as plebs it's difficult to gain the proof you suggest is missing. The facts are quite simple in that the man in charge lied (about opening the exit gate), had his story corrected later in the evening by his superiors & then v quickly it was back to being refuted again. After that point the inquest lays out all the details of the lengths SYP went to, in order to get the untruth to hold firm. As said before on this thread, all this needed many many yrs ago, was one bloke to stand up & be counted and beat officers to blow the whistle in conjunction with that. Instead some strong arm tactics must have been in place to hold their line for so long. Getting political for a minute let's not forget the position that Thatchers Press Secretary holds on this (even today it seems) & the shit stirring from Irvine Patnick. Alongside a few other things I'd hazard a guess there are some horrendous skeletons in Thatchers cupboards & Hillsborough will be right up there. That's assuming things like this will get released under whatever rule currently exists (30 - 50 yr rule etc. - for the sake of argument there will be some interesting stuff from Blair as well when the time comes...) It may be unfortunate that us plebs find it difficult to gain proof, but that does not justify turning ones back on the published evidence and speculating on responsibilities about which we may not have evidence. People in authority accept the advice given by those to whom report compilation is delegated. They also assume the established systems, e.g. coroner's courts draw sound conclusions. Overturning these, normally, reasonable assumptions takes time, 26 years is too long, and that does not make those that fail to see through it responsible for the original wrongdoing! It does though allow credit to those in authority that do see through it and instigate appropriate reviews.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 22:10:51 GMT 1
Steve, I can only assume you are some way above my pay grade if your post is defending the higher ups...
Those higher ups are in those positions (in public service) because somehow us, the people, have created the mechanics to put them there. What that normally means is that we should expect them to behave honestly, honourably and ensure the truth is the outcome in criminal cases & particularly horrendous tragedies like Hillsborough.
The same principles apply to whichever politics you choose and history has taught us that no party is beyond blame...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 22:42:51 GMT 1
Steve, I can only assume you are some way above my pay grade if your post is defending the higher ups... Those higher ups are in those positions (in public service) because somehow us, the people, have created the mechanics to put them there. What that normally means is that we should expect them to behave honestly, honourably and ensure the truth is the outcome in criminal cases & particularly horrendous tragedies like Hillsborough. The same principles apply to whichever politics you choose and history has taught us that no party is beyond blame... It is quite simple in my opinion, the first person in line with responsibility for any decision is the one to be held accountable. The Police officer in charge is responsible for his decision & lies. The instutionalised police cover-up is the responsibility of the Police officer in charge of the institution. The Coroner is responsible for his court and poor timing criteria he set. The Sun newspaper is responsible for it's headline story. The ambulance service are responsible for their poor response. Sheffield Wednesday/HSE for no valid safety certificate. The FA/HSE I would imagine for allowing fans to be penned in. Where is the evidence that politicians are responsible for the above? Where politicians are responsible is for facilitating an overturning of prior poor decisions when evidence is persuasive, as they have. If we focus on those that didn't & we will be tuning in.
|
|
|
Post by thrice on May 1, 2016 10:03:41 GMT 1
What would justice look like? I cannot see a satisfactory ending to this. Do you think it's more satisfactory now than when you wrote this ? No not really. It looks like the start of much more acrimony to me.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on May 1, 2016 10:06:58 GMT 1
Do you think it's more satisfactory now than when you wrote this ? No not really. It looks like the start of much more acrimony to me. Do you think it's valid acrimony or misplaced acrimony ?
|
|
|
Post by thrice on May 1, 2016 10:11:44 GMT 1
No not really. It looks like the start of much more acrimony to me. Do you think it's valid acrimony or misplaced acrimony ? I think that there will be plenty of both. It will be interesting to see who now starts to get fingered (if anyone) following the unlawful killing verdict.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on May 1, 2016 10:23:50 GMT 1
Do you think it's valid acrimony or misplaced acrimony ? I think that there will be plenty of both. It will be interesting to see who now starts to get fingered (if anyone) following the unlawful killing verdict. Thrice I respect you as a poster on here although our views sometimes differ .. but I am at a loss as to why you feel that any acrimony of people who suffered the needless death of friends and family, and who were then lied to ... and accused of causing said needless deaths.. would be misplaced ? Do you not feel if it had been your son or daughter or brother or best mate that you might not have carried a little acrimony round for all this time ? Having been told for 27 years that their deaths were accidental when you knew ( and were proved to be correct ) that they weren't ?
|
|
|
Post by thrice on May 1, 2016 10:46:42 GMT 1
I think that there will be plenty of both. It will be interesting to see who now starts to get fingered (if anyone) following the unlawful killing verdict. Thrice I respect you as a poster on here although our views sometimes differ .. but I am at a loss as to why you feel that any acrimony of people who suffered the needless death of friends and family, and who were then lied to ... and accused of causing said needless deaths.. would be misplaced ? Do you not feel if it had been your son or daughter or brother or best mate that you might not have carried a little acrimony round for all this time ? Having been told for 27 years that their deaths were accidental when you knew ( and were proved to be correct ) that they weren't ? Your being naive to believe that there will not be acrimony & this is a happy ending.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on May 1, 2016 10:53:54 GMT 1
Thrice I respect you as a poster on here although our views sometimes differ .. but I am at a loss as to why you feel that any acrimony of people who suffered the needless death of friends and family, and who were then lied to ... and accused of causing said needless deaths.. would be misplaced ? Do you not feel if it had been your son or daughter or brother or best mate that you might not have carried a little acrimony round for all this time ? Having been told for 27 years that their deaths were accidental when you knew ( and were proved to be correct ) that they weren't ? Your being naive to believe that there will not be acrimony & this is a happy ending. You've not addressed my question .. and how can there ever be a happy ending when 96 people are unlawfully killed ? I'm struggling to understand what your point is ? Do you feel the families should have "just left it " ?
|
|
|
Post by Lard Buttie on May 1, 2016 12:13:23 GMT 1
The Justice for 96 campaign has shone a torch into the murky world of SYP & it's policies during the 80's - the man in the street should be thankful for the persistence of these LFC fans/families for this.
The Police are meant to serve & protect us, not themselves.
I wonder how ALL the other Police Forces in the UK would be exempt from ANY criticism if the torch had shone their way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 12:56:03 GMT 1
"Unlawful killing" was the verdict given on the 52 who were killed by terrorists in London in the 2005 bombings. I'm not sure that verdict should have been applied to Hillsborough, it implies malice aforethought, or planned intention to kill.
The verdict is clearly what the campaigners wanted, whether it's correct I don't know. All I know is that a can of worms has been opened now and this will go on for years, with law suit after law suit for compensation. Nearly 400 are already involved in a class action against the police for damages.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 13:38:10 GMT 1
"Unlawful killing" was the verdict given on the 52 who were killed by terrorists in London in the 2005 bombings. I'm not sure that verdict should have been applied to Hillsborough, it implies malice aforethought, or planned intention to kill. The verdict is clearly what the campaigners wanted, whether it's correct I don't know. All I know is that a can of worms has been opened now and this will go on for years, with law suit after law suit for compensation. Nearly 400 are already involved in a class action against the police for damages. You just show your stupidity in your posts, try giving it a rest for the sake of the rest of humanity! 'Unlawful killing' includes murder, manslaughter & infanticide; it does not infer blame on any person or motive.
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on May 1, 2016 13:57:38 GMT 1
Steve, I can only assume you are some way above my pay grade if your post is defending the higher ups... Those higher ups are in those positions (in public service) because somehow us, the people, have created the mechanics to put them there. What that normally means is that we should expect them to behave honestly, honourably and ensure the truth is the outcome in criminal cases & particularly horrendous tragedies like Hillsborough. The same principles apply to whichever politics you choose and history has taught us that no party is beyond blame... It is quite simple in my opinion, the first person in line with responsibility for any decision is the one to be held accountable. The Police officer in charge is responsible for his decision & lies. The instutionalised police cover-up is the responsibility of the Police officer in charge of the institution. The Coroner is responsible for his court and poor timing criteria he set. The Sun newspaper is responsible for it's headline story. The ambulance service are responsible for their poor response. Sheffield Wednesday/HSE for no valid safety certificate. The FA/HSE I would imagine for allowing fans to be penned in. Where is the evidence that politicians are responsible for the above? Where politicians are responsible is for facilitating an overturning of prior poor decisions when evidence is persuasive, as they have. If we focus on those that didn't & we will be tuning in. The first, second, third and fourth, person in 'line' making a decision are usually very much subordinate of the actual policy maker or indeed the actual decision maker. It therefore follows that the head of Southern Health being asked to resign is clearly incorrect as the hundreds, possibly a few thousand, below her should resign first??? they made the decisions well below her pay grade and are fully responsible for those decisions/actions/inactions? The evidence of politicians being involved from the start on the cover up for hillsborough may be hard to find now, but common sense says it must have been there. I state again that serious errors were made long before the game and certainly on the day. Those errors should never have been covered up and lied about and then the system(not just the syp) was allowed to keep it going for so long that it just cannot have been a single entity involved. The political bases are covered and then we are allowed the proper inquest and the guilty are found, they havent been hidden for years now...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 14:07:23 GMT 1
It is quite simple in my opinion, the first person in line with responsibility for any decision is the one to be held accountable. The Police officer in charge is responsible for his decision & lies. The instutionalised police cover-up is the responsibility of the Police officer in charge of the institution. The Coroner is responsible for his court and poor timing criteria he set. The Sun newspaper is responsible for it's headline story. The ambulance service are responsible for their poor response. Sheffield Wednesday/HSE for no valid safety certificate. The FA/HSE I would imagine for allowing fans to be penned in. Where is the evidence that politicians are responsible for the above? Where politicians are responsible is for facilitating an overturning of prior poor decisions when evidence is persuasive, as they have. If we focus on those that didn't & we will be tuning in. The first, second, third and fourth, person in 'line' making a decision are usually very much subordinate of the actual policy maker or indeed the actual decision maker. It therefore follows that the head of Southern Health being asked to resign is clearly incorrect as the hundreds, possibly a few thousand, below her should resign first??? they made the decisions well below her pay grade and are fully responsible for those decisions/actions/inactions? The evidence of politicians being involved from the start on the cover up for hillsborough may be hard to find now, but common sense says it must have been there. I state again that serious errors were made long before the game and certainly on the day. Those errors should never have been covered up and lied about and then the system(not just the syp) was allowed to keep it going for so long that it just cannot have been a single entity involved. The political bases are covered and then we are allowed the proper inquest and the guilty are found, they havent been hidden for years now... Speculative conspiracy theory until you, or anyone, presents evidence. Obviously those that make the decisions that determine the institutions approach are responsible, I gave an example!
|
|
|
Post by thrice on May 1, 2016 16:33:46 GMT 1
Your being naive to believe that there will not be acrimony & this is a happy ending. You've not addressed my question .. and how can there ever be a happy ending when 96 people are unlawfully killed ? I'm struggling to understand what your point is ? Do you feel the families should have "just left it " ? I'll give you a couple of now possible scenarios that could come to pass to highlight the point I was making. Dukinfield gets called before the courts & nothing sticks or worse still he does not get the call = acrimony. Some other peripheral figure (individual police officers or emergency responders) get the call & get fingered for their part = acrimony. And there are no end of other such scenarios that could come.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 16:54:46 GMT 1
You've not addressed my question .. and how can there ever be a happy ending when 96 people are unlawfully killed ? I'm struggling to understand what your point is ? Do you feel the families should have "just left it " ? I'll give you a couple of now possible scenarios that could come to pass to highlight the point I was making. Dukinfield gets called before the courts & nothing sticks or worse still he does not get the call = acrimony. Some other peripheral figure (individual police officers or emergency responders) get the call & get fingered for their part = acrimony. And there are no end of other such scenarios that could come. Responsibility is difficult to stick on individuals in institutions, but Duckinfield is not in a good position having not prepared well, made a crap decision, then lied about it - confirmation of he understanding of his error. Institutional responsibility for the cover-up will lead to compensation and I would be very surprised if prosecution of individuals doesn't stick on that one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 0:46:45 GMT 1
You've not addressed my question .. and how can there ever be a happy ending when 96 people are unlawfully killed ? I'm struggling to understand what your point is ? Do you feel the families should have "just left it " ? I'll give you a couple of now possible scenarios that could come to pass to highlight the point I was making. Dukinfield gets called before the courts & nothing sticks or worse still he does not get the call = acrimony. Some other peripheral figure (individual police officers or emergency responders) get the call & get fingered for their part = acrimony. And there are no end of other such scenarios that could come. Forgive me for jumping into your debate but why would criminal prosecutions be acrimonious? Well why more so than any other criminal prosecution. I think it's imperative that we do now see prosecutions starting with Duckinfield. The only good thing that can come out of this situation now is ruthless honesty, complete transparency and rigorous adherence to the rules of law. I do understand the argument that somehow 'enough is enough' but this is about more than the just the poor kids who were killed that day. It's about how the families have been treated and the very fabric our legal system & society. We must show that we have moved on from the treachery of the past. That things are better now, not without fault, but better.
|
|
|
Post by artysid on May 2, 2016 1:09:51 GMT 1
You've not addressed my question .. and how can there ever be a happy ending when 96 people are unlawfully killed ? I'm struggling to understand what your point is ? Do you feel the families should have "just left it " ? I'll give you a couple of now possible scenarios that could come to pass to highlight the point I was making. Dukinfield gets called before the courts & nothing sticks or worse still he does not get the call = acrim Some other peripheral figure (individual police officers or emergency responders) get the call & get fingered for their part = acrimony. And there are no end of other such scenarios that could come. So should the families just have left it?
|
|
|
Post by Manx Terrier on May 2, 2016 7:08:25 GMT 1
This case calls for acrimony in spades. Anything else would be disrespectful to the dead.
|
|
|
Post by thrice on May 2, 2016 8:53:20 GMT 1
I'll give you a couple of now possible scenarios that could come to pass to highlight the point I was making. Dukinfield gets called before the courts & nothing sticks or worse still he does not get the call = acrim Some other peripheral figure (individual police officers or emergency responders) get the call & get fingered for their part = acrimony. And there are no end of other such scenarios that could come. So should the families just have left it? They did what they felt they had to do & should continue to do just that.
|
|
|
Post by Lard Buttie on May 2, 2016 9:08:03 GMT 1
|
|