Annie Bynnol   612 #1 Posted May 26, 2021 All aquitted on the direction of Judge Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
butlers   259 #2 Posted May 26, 2021 What a sorry ,sorry tale.  The upshot being the only conviction was SWFC club Sec on 1 count of breaking health and safety rules. £6,500 fine.  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Mr Allen   0 #3 Posted May 26, 2021 25 minutes ago, butlers said: What a sorry ,sorry tale.  The upshot being the only conviction was SWFC club Sec on 1 count of breaking health and safety rules. £6,500 fine.  £6,500 fine for all those lives lost 32 years ago? Que?!   Nowhere near enough IMO, should've been £6.5 Million (at least)  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
HeHasRisen   3,377 #4 Posted May 26, 2021 Anyone else want to pluck a number out of thin air? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Padders   2,850 #5 Posted May 26, 2021 21 minutes ago, Mr Allen said: £6,500 fine for all those lives lost 32 years ago? Que?!   Nowhere near enough IMO, should've been £6.5 Million (at least)  Meh, and what would that have solved. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
geared   303 #6 Posted May 26, 2021 So they got off on a technicality? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Padders   2,850 #7 Posted May 26, 2021 4 minutes ago, geared said: So they got off on a technicality? The judge ruled their was no case to be answered, also stated a complete waste of public money which could have been spent elsewhere.  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
diksey   17 #8 Posted May 26, 2021 Doe's that mean there will be a riot in Liverpool tonight? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Runningman   143 #9 Posted May 26, 2021 A decision of convenience ! The judge knows a guy whose friend knows a guy who was a high ranked Police Officer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
dave_the_m   61 #10 Posted May 26, 2021 They were accused of misleading a public inquiry (to make SYP look better) which, it turns out, isn't the criminal offence of perverting the course of justice they were charged with, since the inquiry wasn't a court. So really the case should never have bought, and the judge was right to throw it out.  So the particular behaviour being prosecuted was arguably reprehensible, but not criminal.  Note that this case is unrelated to whether anyone should be been prosecuted for actions / inactions on the day which caused the deaths. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
HeHasRisen   3,377 #11 Posted May 26, 2021 35 minutes ago, Runningman said: A decision of convenience ! The judge knows a guy whose friend knows a guy who was a high ranked Police Officer. Well no, the charges were erronious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
alchemist   35 #12 Posted May 26, 2021 2 hours ago, Runningman said: A decision of convenience ! The judge knows a guy whose friend knows a guy who was a high ranked Police Officer. You DO of course have proof of this accusation?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...