Hillsborough Disaster
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Montreal Wanderer
- Immortal
- Posts: 12942
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
So I would have thought, but why do I read on the BBC site today that "Police have launched a criminal investigation into Savile, who died last year aged 84."Prufrock wrote:You can't try a dead person. An inquest could effectively say they unlawfully killed someone, but again with the criteria.Lord Kangana wrote:Which goes back to my original point. I can't see SYP emerging unscathed, collectively, from this new turn of events. I still, however, believe that some individuals may have more put upon them. What are the rukles on trying in absentia these days? Can the dead still be found guilty of a crime?
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
because it is shorthand for "all the people who may potentially have been accessories"Montreal Wanderer wrote:So I would have thought, but why do I read on the BBC site today that "Police have launched a criminal investigation into Savile, who died last year aged 84."Prufrock wrote:You can't try a dead person. An inquest could effectively say they unlawfully killed someone, but again with the criteria.Lord Kangana wrote:Which goes back to my original point. I can't see SYP emerging unscathed, collectively, from this new turn of events. I still, however, believe that some individuals may have more put upon them. What are the rukles on trying in absentia these days? Can the dead still be found guilty of a crime?
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-me ... e-20772416" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And so the grim charade rolls on to its inevitable disappointing conclusion for the Hillsborough families...
And so the grim charade rolls on to its inevitable disappointing conclusion for the Hillsborough families...
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
Thanks bbc breakfast for giving me advance warning on a song to avoid
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
Over indulgent, self obsessed, talent free, mawkish bollox ... despite this, the X-Factor single will not top the Charts this year.
I've managed not to listen to the LFC one so far, hopefully it will stay that way.
I've managed not to listen to the LFC one so far, hopefully it will stay that way.
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
- Harry Genshaw
- Legend
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
- Location: Half dead in Panama
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
No wonder he doesn't post on here any more! He'll have been drummed out of the legal profession with predictions like thatmummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:05 am
However, the simple fact is that for a verdict of unlawful killing to be returned, a person or organisation has to be thought guilty of manslaughter. My prediction is that the inquest will not find that.
I also predict that the DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation. It's the law that he can only do this if he feels conviction is likely.
So my list of predictions for the predictions thread.
1. The new inquest will not find a new verdict.
2. The DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation.
3. The DPP will charge the SYP with an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
4. SYP will be convicted of an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
To be fair to crayons, atmosphere has changed dramatically since 2012, we are now in the someone must hang for anything era.Harry Genshaw wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:36 pmNo wonder he doesn't post on here any more! He'll have been drummed out of the legal profession with predictions like thatmummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:05 am
However, the simple fact is that for a verdict of unlawful killing to be returned, a person or organisation has to be thought guilty of manslaughter. My prediction is that the inquest will not find that.
I also predict that the DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation. It's the law that he can only do this if he feels conviction is likely.
So my list of predictions for the predictions thread.
1. The new inquest will not find a new verdict.
2. The DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation.
3. The DPP will charge the SYP with an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
4. SYP will be convicted of an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
- Montreal Wanderer
- Immortal
- Posts: 12942
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
Well, he's not a criminal lawyer, but I suspect he doesn't post because his interests lie more in art than BWFC. Not to mention, in Capri he recently married a noted entertainer and honeymooned it Italy (with her and a pug). Nonetheless, in Facebook he did express his astonishment at the charges against David Duckenfield so his legal opinion would appear not to have altered.Harry Genshaw wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:36 pmNo wonder he doesn't post on here any more! He'll have been drummed out of the legal profession with predictions like thatmummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:05 am
However, the simple fact is that for a verdict of unlawful killing to be returned, a person or organisation has to be thought guilty of manslaughter. My prediction is that the inquest will not find that.
I also predict that the DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation. It's the law that he can only do this if he feels conviction is likely.
So my list of predictions for the predictions thread.
1. The new inquest will not find a new verdict.
2. The DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation.
3. The DPP will charge the SYP with an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
4. SYP will be convicted of an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
'Cuk me! I now have visions of silver spoons and Pippa Matthews nee Midleton.Montreal Wanderer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:55 pmWell, he's not a criminal lawyer, but I suspect he doesn't post because his interests lie more in art than BWFC. Not to mention, in Capri he recently married a noted entertainer and honeymooned it Italy (with her and a pug). Nonetheless, in Facebook he did express his astonishment at the charges against David Duckenfield so his legal opinion would appear not to have altered.Harry Genshaw wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:36 pmNo wonder he doesn't post on here any more! He'll have been drummed out of the legal profession with predictions like thatmummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:05 am
However, the simple fact is that for a verdict of unlawful killing to be returned, a person or organisation has to be thought guilty of manslaughter. My prediction is that the inquest will not find that.
I also predict that the DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation. It's the law that he can only do this if he feels conviction is likely.
So my list of predictions for the predictions thread.
1. The new inquest will not find a new verdict.
2. The DPP will not bring manslaughter charges against any person or organisation.
3. The DPP will charge the SYP with an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
4. SYP will be convicted of an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2233
- Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:03 am
- Location: Portland, Maine USA
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
I thought mummy was banned? Hello again. I'll pop by in a couple of years again. Screw allegiances. The police deserve to pay for what they did.
Re: Liverpool laughing stocks?
What do you mean?Annoyed Grunt wrote: ↑Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:02 pm""The new evidence that we're presented with today makes clear in my view that these families have suffered a double injustice: the injustice of the appalling events, the failure of the state to protect transfers Caen their loved ones, and the indefensible wait to get the truth, and then the injustice of the denigration of the deceased - that they were somehow at fault for their own deaths. So on behalf of the government, and indeed our country, I am profoundly sorry that this double injustice has been left uncorrected for so long."
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
And that's exactly what appears to have happenedmummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:38 am
And so the grim charade rolls on to its inevitable disappointing conclusion for the Hillsborough families...
May the bridges I burn light your way
- Harry Genshaw
- Legend
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
- Location: Half dead in Panama
Re: Hillsborough Disaster
Well 1 out of 5 ain't that impressive! In all seriousness, I hope that the families draw a line under it all now. It was remarkable what they achieved and the dignity in which they did it but the deaths were down to a catalog of failures and not to one individual.Bruce Rioja wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:47 pmAnd that's exactly what appears to have happenedmummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:38 am
And so the grim charade rolls on to its inevitable disappointing conclusion for the Hillsborough families...
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests