'The verdict defies logic. Ch Supt Duckenfield reacted to the build-up of supporters outside the ground by ordering the gates to be opened before the game between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest. It was a catastrophic and deadly error. Duckenfield then lied and told FA executives that fans had broken in to the stadium. That cowardly deceit set the tone for everything that followed. It was the founding myth of Hillsborough. Even while the dead and dying were lying on the pitch, barely attended to by the emergency services, Duckenfield was throwing the blame and trying to avoid the responsibility for a decision that caused the carnage.
He admitted everything at the 2015 inquests into the disaster, saying that his “professional failings … led to the deaths of 96 innocent men, women and children”. Duckenfield added that he had “no idea” what motivated him to blame other people for his mistakes. The jury at the inquests returned a verdict of unlawful killing, reversing the 1990 ruling of accidental deaths. Despite this, the retired officer was able to walk away last week in the face of overwhelming evidence and his own admissions.
It took some tortuous legal logic to create a courtroom environment where this could be allowed to happen. Sir Peter Openshaw, the judge, told the jury that the inquest’s findings – which were not discussed in court – were “quite irrelevant”. The most exhaustive and longest inquest in British history was dismissed as not being pertinent. The families watching in a conference room in Liverpool were aghast. It was even more dispiriting to hear the defence barrister, Benjamin Myers QC, recycle all the rancid myths that grew out of Duckenfield’s dissembling: that fans turned up late, alcohol was a factor and supporters ignored police instructions. All this had been comprehensively dismissed at the inquests. They were even more appalled when Judge Openshaw called the defendant a “poor chap” after Duckenfield was forced to go to hospital with a suspected chest infection.
Yet this was not a doddery septuagenarian being persecuted inappropriately for actions long buried in the past. Duckenfield was a public servant who failed in his basic duties to the people he was charged with protecting. Debate about Hillsborough should not be about football or the city of Liverpool; this is a matter of civic safety that has implications for everyone in British society. We need to be able to trust the emergency services and the systems that are set up to protect the populace. Those systems failed on 15 April, 1989, and no one will ever take responsibility for that failure.
Why should anyone care about Hillsborough? Because any time you or your loved ones attend a public event it should be with the knowledge that the people responsible for maintaining order and safety will be competent. If things go wrong it is important that investigations explain why and ensure the situation never occurs again. For this to happen, there needs to be accountability.'
(Guardian)
