Topic: Football chief Dave Richards under fire for ‘smear’ on Hillsborough supporters

[The Tenacious Kennedy]

Call for police to investigate evidence given by ex-Premier League boss Sir Dave Richards about behaviour of Liverpool fans

Serious doubts have been cast over the evidence about the Hillsborough disaster given in a statement by the former Premier League chairman, Sir Dave Richards, which included a notorious allegation against some Liverpool supporters.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/dec/10/hillsborough-football-chief-under-fire-dave-richards-evidence


"Some research for the ITV programme was originally carried out by people who as teenagers survived the crush at Hillsborough and are now applying professional skills in the search for the truth."

Much of the research for this article and the ITV programme was done by a group of us on RAWK, behind the scenes..some survivors, some not, some not even Liverpool supporters

More details to follow, but please think carefully before you comment as these matters are still being actively investigated by the IPCC and Operation Resolve

[TepidT2O]

I'd like to say I'm shocked....

But I no longer am....

[No666]

Good article from Conn.
Documentary on ITV on Monday after News at 10.

[Art of Lies]

More details to follow, but please think carefully before you comment as these matters are still being actively investigated by the IPCC and Operation Resolve

While I understand the need for people to be careful in what they say the contempt of court act only covers actual proceedings, since nobody has been arrested or charged and there are no actual proceedings the contempt act is not applicable as far as I known, the UK does still have strict libel laws that one has to be aware of but it should be perfectly fine to discuss ones feelings about reporting that is in the public domain.

Under Section 2 of the Act, a substantial risk of serious prejudice can only be created by a media report when proceedings are active. Proceedings become active when there is an arrest, oral charge, issue of a warrant, or a summons.

Contempt of Court Act 1981: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/49

(1)The strict liability rule applies only in relation to publications, and for this purpose “publication” includes any speech, writing, programme included in a cable programme service] or other communication in whatever form, which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public.

(2)The strict liability rule applies only to a publication which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced.

(3)The strict liability rule applies to a publication only if the proceedings in question are active within the meaning of this section at the time of the publication.

and:

5 Discussion of public affairs.

A publication made as or as part of a discussion in good faith of public affairs or other matters of general public interest is not to be treated as a contempt of court under the strict liability rule if the risk of impediment or prejudice to particular legal proceedings is merely incidental to the discussion.

[Alan_X]

While I understand the need for people to be careful in what they say the contempt of court act only covers actual proceedings, since nobody has been arrested or charged and there are no actual proceedings the contempt act is not applicable as far as I known, the UK does still have strict libel laws that one has to be aware of but it should be perfectly fine to discuss ones feelings about reporting that is in the public domain.

Contempt of Court Act 1981: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/49

and:

That's all useful information but the need to be careful applies.

If simply being in the right was the issue, there would not have been any need for a twenty-five year fight against the lies spread by individuals and organisations backed by expensive legal teams.

And libel in this country is weighted heavily in favour of those with the wherewithal to issue libel writs to shut people up. It's a sad fact that many including Robert Maxwell and Jimmy Savile used the libel laws to silence criticism. The accusatuons were right but people couldn't afford to take the risk of fighting the case.

A lot of detailed and careful work has been done on this and all that is being asked is that it is not jeopardised through incautious or inflammatory comments.

[The Tenacious Kennedy]

That's all useful information but the need to be careful applies.

If simply being in the right was the issue, there would not have been any need for a twenty-five year fight against the lies spread by individuals and organisations backed by expensive legal teams.

And libel in this country is weighted heavily in favour of those with the wherewithal to issue libel writs to shut people up. It's a sad fact that many including Robert Maxwell and Jimmy Savile used the libel laws to silence criticism. The accusatuons were right but people couldn't afford to take the risk of fighting the case.

A lot of detailed and careful work has been done on this and all that is being asked is that it is not jeopardised through incautious or inflammatory comments.

Spot on Alan

[The Tenacious Kennedy]

This is the statement from the Hillsborough match referee Ray Lewis

You will  note the incongruous line "They were pissed" in the typed version, which I am told, does not appear in the handwritten version (that says "they were a mixed group")

The typed version was the one sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions

[Alan_X]

This is the statement from the Hillsborough match referee Ray Lewis

You will  note the incongruous line "They were pissed" in the typed version, which I am told, does not appear in the handwritten version (that says "they were a mixed group")

The typed version was the one sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions

When it's highlighted it reads like someone with Tourette's Syndrome. .

[TepidT2O]

It doesn't scan does it?  Who would end the sentence that way?

[The Tenacious Kennedy]

It doesn't scan does it?  Who would end the sentence that way?

It stood out like a sore thumb which is why we picked up on it

A bit more to this story in the documentary too

[12C]

It doesn't scan does it?  Who would end the sentence that way?

I think crimes against grammar are the least of their misdemeanours 

[The Tenacious Kennedy]

Video trailer for the ITV documentary

This covers the Dave Richards aspect, but a number of other subjects are covered in the programme

https://www.theguardian.com/football/video/2016/dec/11/hillsborough-disaster-evidence-sir-dave-richards-called-into-doubt-video

[Eeyore]

Video trailer for the ITV documentary

This covers the Dave Richards aspect, but a number of other subjects are covered in the programme

https://www.theguardian.com/football/video/2016/dec/11/hillsborough-disaster-evidence-sir-dave-richards-called-into-doubt-video

Surely some one in his position would be keen to help in any way he could. Seems a strange for him to return the letters unopened.

[Eeyore]

Bump.

[Eeyore]

Bump.

[bigbonedrawky]

This is the guy who wouldn't allow a memorial at Hillsborough when he was in charge at SWFC so it comes as no surprise.
I remember been quite pissed off / angry when he got the Premier League job in the late 90s aswell the f*cking snake.
   

[Zeb]

Just a gentle bump to the top.

ITV. 10.40pm tonight.

[MichaelA]

Under the headline "The Truth" there were three subheadings:

Some fans picked pockets of victims
Some fans urinated on the brave cops
Some fans beat up PCs giving the kiss of life

The story read as follows: "Drunken Liverpool fans viciously attacked rescue workers as they tried to revive victims of the Hillsborough soccer disaster, it was revealed last night.

"Police officers, firemen and ambulance crew were punched, kicked and urinated upon by a hooligan element in the crowd.

"Some thugs rifled the pockets of injured fans as they were stretched out unconscious on the pitch.

"Sheffield MP Irvine Patnick revealed that in one shameful episode a gang of Liverpool fans noticed that the blouse of a girl trampled to death had risen above her breasts.

"As a policeman struggled in vain to revive her, the mob jeered: 'Throw her up here and we will **** her'"

The story went on: "One furious policeman who witnessed Saturday's carnage stormed: 'As we struggled in appalling conditions to save lives, fans standing further up the terrace were openly urinating on us and the bodies of the dead."

A 'high-ranking' police officer was quoted as saying: "The fans were just acting like animals. My men faced a double hell - the disaster and the fury of the fans who attacked us."

That's the original piece that ran alongside 'The Truth' headline in the rag. Let's see how much of it stands up to close scrutiny. Let's see how SYP's finest sleep tonight.

[The Tenacious Kennedy]

The West Midlands Police superintendent who took the referee Ray Lewis' statement (the one that later version said "They were pissed") was jaled for fraud in 1999

https://twitter.com/wrong_kennedy/status/808313026235473920

[mersey_paradiso]

bump

[12C]

That's the original piece that ran alongside 'The Truth' headline in the rag. Let's see how much of it stands up to close scrutiny. Let's see how SYP's finest sleep tonight.

The arrogance towards the truth means that they will sleep soundly, believing still that the establishment will protect them. Tick tock the alarm is set

[RedMarko]

I was away travelling and missed out on the doc last night. I will watch it this evening.

What has surprised me is the number of people who have commented on it in work today. Not LFC supporters, but general populace who have for years ignored it as nothing to do with them. All feedback has been along the lines of "how did they get away with it for so long". My response is "because the vast majority didn't give a shit".

Well done to all involved in the ongoing process of unearthing and making public the level of deceit and coverup that went on.

[whiteboots]

The case against Richards is far greater than that of smearing fans excellent who though it is by TTK.

Why did Sheff Wed fence and pen the terracing without reviewing capacity? Why were planned extra turnstiles not installed? Why were the crush barriers below regulation height? Who allowed the safety certificate to lapse at the club? Whose job was it to ensure that there was a valid safety certificate? (The  Club Secretary) Who at the licensing authority allowed the safety certificate to lapse without serving an enforcement notice? Who at the Council knew that the certificate had lapsed? Who at the league, and FA, was responsible for ensuring that all participating members grounds had valid  safety certificates? Who knew that Sheff Wed didn’t have one? What were the FA’s criteria for staging semi finals at grounds, let alone cup ties?

Why , with the above questions unanswered, has the Chairman of Sheff Wed appointed just after the disaster, Dave Richards, gone on to be chairman of the FA Premier League, member of the Football Association (FA)'s Board, chairman of the FA's international committee, president of the European Professional Football Leagues organisation, chairman of UEFA's Professional Football Committee ?

[Johns_Barn]

I have no idea how so many involved in this case have kept their sanity throughout this, knowing what the were dealing with. One worries about the long term effects of the proximity to such toxic "human beings".

[4pool]

The West Midlands Police superintendent who took the referee Ray Lewis' statement (the one that later version said "They were pissed") was jaled for fraud in 1999

https://twitter.com/wrong_kennedy/status/808313026235473920

Super special thanks for all you've done.

 

[FlashGordon]

Super special thanks for all you've done.

 

Echo these sentiments, a true warrior.

[12C]

The case against Richards is far greater than that of smearing fans excellent who though it is by TTK.

Why did Sheff Wed fence and pen the terracing without reviewing capacity? Why were planned extra turnstiles not installed? Why were the crush barriers below regulation height? Who allowed the safety certificate to lapse at the club? Whose job was it to ensure that there was a valid safety certificate? (The  Club Secretary) Who at the licensing authority allowed the safety certificate to lapse without serving an enforcement notice? Who at the Council knew that the certificate had lapsed? Who at the league, and FA, was responsible for ensuring that all participating members grounds had valid  safety certificates? Who knew that Sheff Wed didn’t have one? What were the FA’s criteria for staging semi finals at grounds, let alone cup ties?

Why , with the above questions unanswered, has the Chairman of Sheff Wed appointed just after the disaster, Dave Richards, gone on to be chairman of the FA Premier League, member of the Football Association (FA)'s Board, chairman of the FA's international committee, president of the European Professional Football Leagues organisation, chairman of UEFA's Professional Football Committee ?

Another question... Graham Mackrell was their (SWFC) secretary IN 89, and went on to work for UEFA as the person responsible for choosing suitable venues for finals. What item in his CV convinced UEFA that he was the right man to check out stadia, the fact that he knew what a dodgy stadium looked like?
The FA gave SWFC that semi to help them out financially, a nice little earner so to speak. They weren't arsed about the lack of safety cert. or the fact that there had been warning signs, they just knew the stadium was a big one capacity wise, and the hospitality was good.

[markedasred]

I just want to say a big thanks to all involved in uncovering such good quality evidence that would have been buried in thousands of reading hours of paper trails. What could have been a thankless task has proved to be totally the opposite. You have my utmost admiration.

[Mighty_Red]

The number of utter c*nts who were directly and indirectly involved never ceases to amaze me. The documentary showed that the inquest only scratched the surface. Bent coppers need to go to jail for justice to truly prevail.

How can the FA talk about corrupt FIFA execs when ours are just as bad (or worse considering this isn't even about money)

[So… Howard Philips]

The number of utter c*nts who were directly and indirectly involved never ceases to amaze me. The documentary showed that the inquest only scratched the surface. Bent coppers need to go to jail for justice to truly prevail.

How can the FA talk about corrupt FIFA execs when ours are just as bad (or worse considering this isn't even about money)

The only mitigation for the FA is that UEFA organised a European Cup Final in a decaying, unsafe stadium as well.