Jury conclusion: The 96 Hillsborough victims were killed – TV 2

In 1989, lost 96 people lost their lives during the FA cupsemifinalen between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest.

Hillsborough tragedy is the worst accident in European football. Police lack of security meant that fans were crushed to death and died inside the stadium. More than 50,000 spectators conceded ports in Sheffield. Too many of them in the same seats.

For 27 years, Liverpool supporters and relatives fought a battle against the government, police, and partly also the country’s political leadership to get to the bottom of what really happened.

today acquitted jury in Hillsborough affair Liverpool fans. Gross negligence of the police was the cause of the tragic incident. It was the conclusion to the jury Tuesday.

The jury was to answer 14 questions about the tragedy that cost 96 lives in 1989.

The conclusion was that the police did their job. The jury’s assessment was that the lack of planning by South Yorkshire Police either caused or contributed to the tragic outcome.

– Gross negligence means that the police should have understood the serious consequences and that they can be blamed for that they are not adapted to that risk size. This is recoverable is very important. Today’s decision will therefore not be any sentence, but a starting shot for damages from those left behind, says TV2′s legal expert Randi Gustad.

it was determined that the 96 victims of the Hillsborough disaster in 1989 died as a result of a criminal act, corresponding manslaughter in Norwegian law terminology, and that Liverpool fans were innocent. It triggered cheers and tears among the relatives in the audience.

– After 21 years of intense investigation, said the jury today yes that tribune accident occurred as a result of gross negligence – ie strong reprehensible behavior from South Yorkshire police, said Gustad.

– police planning, execution, errors and omissions caused the deaths. Emergency services, security at the stadium was also held responsible for its shortcomings, reviews and omissions.

The 12 of 14 issues ended with “yes”. Among other things, the paramedics criticism for not understanding the extent of the tragedy.

Hillsborough judgment

1) Basic fact. 96 people died in the disaster. YES
2) Errors in police planning? YES
3) Error police gates? YES
4) Errors in the behavior of the police in the stands? YES
5) Error police opening of the gates? YES
6) Manslaughter? YES
7) Support ‘search behavior led to the killings? NO
8) Contributed shape of the stadium to the killings? YES
9) Error security at the stadium? YES
10) Planning from Sheffield Wednesday – wrongly? YES
11) Conduct to employees of Sheffield Wednesday – wrongly? NO
12) Should stadium-entrepreneurs have done more? YES
13) Errors in police Repon? YES
14) Errors in ambulance response? YES

– After 27 long years, this real justice for the 96, their families and all Liverpool supporters. The survivors may finally be remembered that they were on that day, the heroes in Hillsborough who tried to help their fellow supporters, says MP Andy Burnham.

Burnham also took the opportunity to kill the effort to retired officers who were involved and their lawyers.

– people must be held accountable for their actions and prosecutions must come, he continued.

Hillsborough affair has been going on for over two years and is thus the longest lagrettssaken in Britain’s history, writes the Guardian.

the jury consisted of seven women and three men.

These questions were considered

the first key question was whether the lack of planning by South Yorkshire police either caused or contributed to the tragic outcome. Furthermore, the jury asked to consider whether the police made mistakes in managing the crowd Leppings Lane, where there was great suffering.

The trial has largely devoted attention to Lieutenant David Duck Field, who led South Yorkshire Police efforts that day. Duck Field was accused of gross neglect of the safety of the 96 people.

The jury was instructed that, in order to find Duck Field guilty beyond any doubt to be able to establish that his actions were not in line with a “careful and competent match official would chose in 1989 to ensure supporters’ safe arrival to and departure from the arena.” Furthermore, the jury was instructed that Duck Fields assessments and actions had to be considered so bad that they constituted a criminal act.

Duck Fields assessment Investigated

After that it had encountered trouble on Leppings Lane page of the arena, ordered Duck Field that output C to be opened to let in people. The jury was in this context asked to consider a question of misconduct by South Yorkshire Police, where Duck Field had command. In order to answer the question was the jury asked to consider whether Duck Field should shut off the tunnel to prevent more people coming to the site where the tragedy occurred.

The jury was also given questions about the emergency services’ handling of the disaster when the occurred, including whether they were too slow to understand the magnitude of what had happened. Three questions dealt with the Hillsborough and whether the arena of design, construction or plan was “dangerous and defective”. In this connection was also Sheffield Wednesday-management brought to justice.

The case also contained a controversial question: Caused or contributed supporters that the dangerous situation occurred? In this connection, the jury asked to assess any late arrival to the arena and whether their conduct towards the police was unusually opposing. This question was central primarily to determine whether police major problems that day stretched beyond what you might expect. Prosecutors stressed that there was no evidence that would suggest that the supporters behaved in a bad way.