header-logo header-logo

27 April 2016
Issue: 7696 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Hillsborough: unlawful killing

Longest inquest in British legal history concludes 27 years after tragedy

The 96 Liverpool football fans crushed to death during the April 1989 Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the jury at the two-year inquest has concluded.

The jury were tasked with 14 questions about the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, which ended in tragedy. They found that the fans were unlawfully killed; David Duckenfield, the former chief superintendent in charge of policing the match, was guilty of gross negligence; there were “major omissions” in the operational order of the game; there were errors by the ambulance service; and Liverpool fans were not to blame.

The jury reached a majority verdict about unlawful killing and were unanimous on the police pre-game planning, stadium safety and the emergency services’ response. They criticised the “slow and uncoordinated” police response and ruled that officers should have closed a tunnel leading to the overcrowded area before ordering an exit gate to be opened.

Criminal investigations into allegations of a police cover-up to shift blame on to the fans are ongoing. The initial inquests ruled that the deaths were accidental, but these were quashed following the 2012 Hillsborough Independent Panel report after families battled for decades to have the truth exposed.

The Crown Prosecution Service is considering whether to bring further criminal charges.

In a joint statement, Elkan Abrahamson, partner at QS Jackson Canter, and Marcia Willis-Stewart, partner at Birnberg Peirce & Partners, representing the Hillsborough Justice Campaign and the Hillsborough Family Support Group, said the jury’s conclusions “completely vindicate the family’s long fight for justice”.

“It is therefore all the more shameful that, rather than focusing on the search for truth and despite having made public apologies, the approach to the inquests taken by South Yorkshire police and the Yorkshire ambulance service was to fight tooth and nail to avoid adverse findings by the jury; this turned the Inquests into an adversarial battle that probably doubled the length of time it might otherwise have done,” they said.

“There is, however, still a long road to travel; the recent investigations have already taken 3 years and we therefore now urge the authorities to conduct rigorous and speedy investigations which will lead to criminal and disciplinary proceedings and to the attribution of final and full accountability.”

They said the families had shown “a constant and enduring tenacity and dedication to exposing the truth which has, despite all attempts to derail the process, stood firm over the decades”.

 

Issue: 7696 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll