• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Hillsborough inquests: David Duckenfield admits gate lie

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gerry_A_Trick

Very Well-Known
Member
The match commander on the day of the Hillsborough disaster has admitted he lied about fans forcing an exit gate open to enter the ground.

Relatives of the 96 fans who died gasped as David Duckenfield told the new inquests: "I apologise unreservedly to the families." He said: "Everybody knew the truth, the fans and police knew the truth that we'd opened the gates."

Mr Duckenfield, 70, said he would regret the lie "to his dying day".

He was in charge of policing at Sheffield Wednesday's stadium on 15 April 1989 when a fatal crush developed in terraced pens allocated to Liverpool fans.
The court heard that on the day Mr Duckenfield told Graham Kelly, of the FA, that some fans had got in themselves through gate C, when the truth was that he had ordered the gate to be opened.

Christina Lambert QC, counsel for the inquests, said some witnesses have spoken of having a "clear recollection" that Mr Duckenfield "made reference to gates having been stormed".
He said he does not recall being as "dramatic" as that. 'Said something hurriedly'

The match commander on the day of the Hillsborough disaster has admitted he lied about fans forcing an exit gate open to enter the ground.

Relatives of the 96 fans who died gasped as David Duckenfield told the new inquests: "I apologise unreservedly to the families."

He said: "Everybody knew the truth, the fans and police knew the truth that we'd opened the gates."

Mr Duckenfield, 70, said he would regret the lie "to his dying day".

He was in charge of policing at Sheffield Wednesday's stadium on 15 April 1989 when a fatal crush developed in terraced pens allocated to Liverpool fans.

The court heard that on the day Mr Duckenfield told Graham Kelly, of the FA, that some fans had got in themselves through gate C, when the truth was that he had ordered the gate to be opened.

Christina Lambert QC, counsel for the inquests, said some witnesses have spoken of having a "clear recollection" that Mr Duckenfield "made reference to gates having been stormed".
He said he does not recall being as "dramatic" as that.

'Said something hurriedly'

Ms Lambert asked: "Did you appreciate that what you said and indeed, what you did not say, could or might bear that meaning to Mr Kelly and others?"
He replied: "Yes ma'am. I didn't give him sufficient information to appreciate the situation as it occurred."

Mr Duckenfield went on to say: "It was a situation I was totally untrained for, totally unprecedented, and I make no excuses. I was the man who did it. But I faced a difficult situation.
"I said something rather hurriedly, without considering the position, without thinking of the consequences and the trauma, the heartache and distress that the inference would have caused to those people who were already in a deep state of shock, who were distressed. I apologise unreservedly to the families."

He told the court that he had "no idea" what motivated him to lie.

Earlier, Mr Duckenfield said it was "one of the biggest regrets of his life" that he did not consider the consequences of opening the gate.

He said he was unaware that turnstiles at the Leppings Lane end fed into an inner concourse and that gate C was opposite a tunnel into the terraces.

Mr Duckenfield said he did not think before opening the gates about blocking the tunnel off with a line of police officers - as had happened in previous years.

The inquests heard he had not been aware that at 14:30, some 5,700 fans were still trying to enter the ground outside the Leppings Lane turnstiles because he did not know the club had a system for monitoring the supporters.

It meant 800 fans would have to go through each turnstile in 30 minutes to get in for kick-off.
Mr Duckenfield said he "accepted" this was "not going to happen".

'Open the gates'

Mr Duckenfield, who had been stationed in the police control box with a bank of TV monitors, said he was "shocked" at the request from Supt Roger Marshall to open the Leppings Lane gates after police became "overwhelmed" by the number of fans.

The witness continued: "I was shocked and taken aback by it and thinking, 'Where are these people going to go if I open the gates?"'

He said another message then came through on the police radio from Mr Marshall saying: "If we don't open the gates someone's going to get killed."

Mr Duckenfield said: "That really was a shocking, terrifying moment to feel you had got to that situation."

_81555488_81555486.jpg


Another officer in the police box, Mr Bernard Murray, then said to him: "Are you going to open the gates?" the jury heard.

Mr Duckenfield said: "I remember saying to him quite clearly, Mr Murray, if people are going to die I have no option but to open the gates. Open the gates."

He said he thought fans would feel "relief and comfort" in being released from the crush of the turnstiles on to the concourse.

Kick-off delay

"I think it is fair to say it is arguably one of the biggest regrets of my life that I did not foresee where the fans would go when they came in through the gates," he continued.

"I was overcome by the enormity of the situation and the decision I had to make and, as a result of that, this is probably very hard to admit, as a result of that I was so overcome probably with emotion of us having got into that situation that my mind for a moment went blank."

Mr Duckenfield was questioned in front of about 200 relatives of those who died as a result of the disaster.

Ms Lambert asked him if he "should have taken steps" to delaying the start of the match.
He responded: "I accept that view now, ma'am".

Asked what he would have done had he known there were so many supporters waiting to enter, he replied: "I would have informed the club. I would have informed the referee that we had a difficulty arising and that on the evidence we had available, we should consider delaying the kick-off."

On the day of the match, police could only judge how full the pens in the terraces were by looking at CCTV and the terraces.

_81432960_cc3ae033-b7e4-4f0a-a484-4ccdaa3414c6.jpg


There were counters on the banks of turnstiles but these did not track how many people were going into each pen.

'Complete blank'

Earlier, Mr Duckenfield also told the jury he could not account for his movements for a period of more than two hours before he took up his position in the police control box on the afternoon of the semi-final.

He told the inquests his mind was "a complete blank" and he could only remember being taken "taken out" in a police car by a colleague and "we drove around".

Ms Lambert put it to Mr Duckenfield that this was a "significant period of time" and would have been a "golden opportunity" to get to know the ground better, on what was to be his first match as commander.

Mr Duckenfield agreed that it was, but said he could not recall whether it was an opportunity he had taken.

Ms Lambert also said it would have been a good opportunity for Mr Duckenfield to survey the turnstiles at the Leppings Lane end.

Again, Mr Duckenfield agreed.

_81562681__76598885_inside_control_box.jpg


He accepted it was "part of his job as a match commander to have a basic knowledge of the layout of the stadium".

Earlier the retired officer said he had urged police to ensure both sets of fans had "a good day out."

He wrote a briefing document for officers before the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, the jury was told.

In the note he said: "I cannot stress too highly the word safety. The ground will be full to capacity".

He recalled telling officers that "...it was supposed to be a wonderful occasion for both the Liverpool and Notts fans. They were to come along and enjoy themselves, and we, the police service, were to ensure that they had a good day out.

"We were to be tolerant, understanding of their enthusiasm, treat them with respect, and put ourselves forward as a professional and caring organisation".

The inquests continue.
 
It certainly is - Duckenfield's name has been poison for any LFC fan for so many years it's difficult to find any forgiveness. Is this the first time he's openly apologised?
 
"I think it is fair to say it is arguably one of the biggest regrets of my life that I did not foresee where the fans would go when they came in through the gates," he continued.

That line makes me wonder what else he regrets.
 
"I think it is fair to say it is arguably one of the biggest regrets of my life that I did not foresee where the fans would go when they came in through the gates," he continued.

That line makes me wonder what else he regrets.

Your quote in bold is interesting, It's an odd comment from Duckenfield - "one of the biggest regrets of my life" - What so being mainly responsible for the death of 96 lives is only 'one of' the biggest regrets of his life...... ?
 
It is GK - I'm angry at this bollocks. I'd imagine a lot of the families are too. Hateful soul and indeed hard to take.
 
This is hard to take, but at least, at last, we're getting the truth. The real truth. Cataclysmic fuck ups compounded by disgusting lies. That he's admitting he has lied is not in any way to his credit. It is far too late for that. But it finally is putting any ambiguity out of the picture. This man, and his minions, mismanaged the situation to the point they created a tragedy. That is no longer in doubt for anyone. That they lied to cover their own arses is also not in doubt. We already knew all this, but no one can doubt it again. And that, hard as it is to hear from this man so late in the day is at least a matter of record.
 
I've got about as much sympathy for the "biggest regret of [Duckenfield's] life" as I do for an ISIS suicide bomber to be frank.

Why has it taken you 26 years, and an unending series of inquests to offer fall on your sword? What does it say to the families of Hillsborough that you were made to take the stand before you offered this half-baked mea culpa? It say's that you are and continue to be a disingenuous amateur, who's actions then and now have an odious stench of inadequacy and unfulfillment.

I have no sympathy for you. I have no respect for this half-arsed 'apology', and I have no interest in ever hearing from you again. I wouldn't begrudge the families thinking extremely little of those hollow words.

JFT96. It'll come one day.
 
His words brought a tear to my eye.. The pain he has suffered over the years and continues too, will be nothing compared to the families that have suffered since that fateful day in 1989 due to his lies, and continue to...
 
I've got about as much sympathy for the "biggest regret of [Duckenfield's] life" as I do for an ISIS suicide bomber to be frank.

Why has it taken you 26 years, and an unending series of inquests to offer fall on your sword? What does it say to the families of Hillsborough that you were made to take the stand before you offered this half-baked mea culpa? It say's that you are and continue to be a disingenuous amateur, who's actions then and now have an odious stench of inadequacy and unfulfillment.

I have no sympathy for you. I have no respect for this half-arsed 'apology', and I have no interest in ever hearing from you again. I wouldn't begrudge the families thinking extremely little of those hollow words.

JFT96. It'll come one day.
Damn right.

People will say "at least he is admitting his mistake & apologising", but "his mistake" cost 96 people their lives, and he has known it was "a mistake", and then compounded it by lying, for the last 25+ years, and yet it has taken until now before he is prepared to admit it & supposedly apologise.

Like the FA "apologising" for allowing the match to go ahead without a safety certificate, more than 20 years after the fact, its hollow, false and just a case of trying to appease the public.
 
Damn right.

People will say "at least he is admitting his mistake & apologising", but "his mistake" cost 96 people their lives, and he has known it was "a mistake" for the last 25+ years, and yet it has taken until now before he is prepared to admit it & supposedly apologise.

Like the FA "apologising" for allowing the match to go ahead without a safety certificate, more than 20 years after the fact, its hollow, false and just a case of trying to appease the public.


They've all done it though. The Sun, Sheffield Wednesday, Duckenfield - they've all known they've been in the wrong all this fucking time but none of them had the basic decency to admit it until they were forced to be in a position where they had to. It fucking stinks.
 
While agreeing with all that's been said above, I can't shake the feeling that zeroing in (understandably, for sure) on what happened on the day lets another, IMHO at least equally guilty, party off the hook. The FA were warned about the dangers to come at this game, because the exact same problems had been evident when we played Forest at the same ground in the same competition before. They were asked to move the game elsewhere, but refused because it would have cost them too much money. For sure Duckenfield made a literally fatal error and (in common with many others, and probably on orders from his superiors initially) has lied about it for a quarter of a century. Is there an argument, though, for saying that the job he was given to do was an impossible one in the first place, and that those whose decisions created such a situation actually bear the greatest responsibility of all?
 
Dickenfield should get done for manslaughter, perverting the course of justice and perjury amongst other things he should then get 15 years in Walton...See how he likes that.

Glad he has apologised but what about the day after or the day or even when the press started lying or even when he was at the last inquest he could have told the truth...I hope he gets the fucking book thrown at him the utter gobshite.
 
The funny thing that as my mum said when these began, "we'll only hear what we already know."
I guess it means now others are hearing it too.
 
While agreeing with all that's been said above, I can't shake the feeling that zeroing in (understandably, for sure) on what happened on the day lets another, IMHO at least equally guilty, party off the hook. The FA were warned about the dangers to come at this game, because the exact same problems had been evident when we played Forest at the same ground in the same competition before. They were asked to move the game elsewhere, but refused because it would have cost them too much money. For sure Duckenfield made a literally fatal error and (in common with many others, and probably on orders from his superiors initially) has lied about it for a quarter of a century. Is there an argument, though, for saying that the job he was given to do was an impossible one in the first place, and that those whose decisions created such a situation actually bear the greatest responsibility of all?

The FA have never had to account for anything. Spurs fans were nearly killed a couple of years before, and I climbed out of the centre left pen in '88 because of the crush. Sheffield Wednesday are cunts too.
 
Guys, we should be adhering to the Attorney Generals comments on making prejudicial comments about is while the inquest is ongoing. Hard I know but having come this far and taken this long, we don't want any technicalities called into play.
 
I must admit I'm keeping up with the excellent commentary daily on Twitter from David Conn of the Guardian. But need to ask, has Bettison been called yet? If not is he due to be called?
 
The FA have never had to account for anything. Spurs fans were nearly killed a couple of years before, and I climbed out of the centre left pen in '88 because of the crush. Sheffield Wednesday are cunts too.

Is there a sense then that perhaps it wasn't all that foreseeable?

I mean, you went back the very next year, right? Did people just not believe something like that could happen?
 
Is there a sense then that perhaps it wasn't all that foreseeable?

I mean, you went back the very next year, right? Did people just not believe something like that could happen?
Football fans were treated like cattle back then. We were dehumanised.

People moan today about clubs and the game taking our money. Back then they gave us very little and expected us not only to be grateful but also silent. I'd like to comment on specific incidents that I was involved in at that ground, but I won't as I just don't want to prejudice this inquiry.
 
Is there a sense then that perhaps it wasn't all that foreseeable?



I mean, you went back the very next year, right? Did people just not believe something like that could happen?


As opposed to what? Not going because you all, as paying spectators, took the decision that it was unsafe. Yeah, it should have been up top us to make that decision, nothing to do with the people that had the job of making it safe for the public.

Why would anyone believe it could happen?
 
Guys, we should be adhering to the Attorney Generals comments on making prejudicial comments about is while the inquest is ongoing. Hard I know but having come this far and taken this long, we don't want any technicalities called into play.

I've given my witness statement to the inquiry. They can use that, in which I said the very same things.
 
Football fans were treated like cattle back then. We were dehumanised.

People moan today about clubs and the game taking our money. Back then they gave us very little and expected us not only to be grateful but also silent. I'd like to comment on specific incidents that I was involved in at that ground, but I won't as I just don't want to prejudice this inquiry.

It's impossible for people who didn't go to games back then the understand what it was like and how we were treated. Impossible. I don't think anyone going to game now would even begin to believe it.
 
As opposed to what? Not going because you all, as paying spectators, took the decision that it was unsafe. Yeah, it should have been up top us to make that decision, nothing to do with the people that had the job of making it safe for the public.

Why would anyone believe it could happen?

Because it nearly happened a few years earlier and you yourself experienced genuine danger.

You'd think things like that might be, you know, relevant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom