* couldn't see this topic anywhere else.

[Link]

"The match commander on the day of the Hillsborough disaster David Duckenfield will face trial for the manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 football supporters, a judge has ruled.

The decision to prosecute the former chief superintendent was made by Sir Peter Openshaw at Preston Crown Court who lifted a stay on his prosecution.

An order preventing Mr Duckenfield being tried was imposed 18 years ago.
Four other men will also face trial on charges related to Hillsborough.
Former Sheffield Wednesday club secretary Graham Mackrell is charged with health and safety, and safety at sports grounds offences.

The trial of Mr Duckenfield and Mr Mackrell is currently listed to start on 10 September.

Former solicitor Peter Metcalf and former police officers Donald Denton and Alan Foster are scheduled to go on trial in January 2019 charged with perverting the course of justice.

A hearing to determine whether former Chief Constable Sir Norman Bettison will be tried has been adjourned until August." (BBC website)

Lets hope the CPS have done an excellent job. Bringing it to trial has been a mammoth task, and they must think successful prosecutions are likely.
Interestingly significant, are the charges for perverting the course of justice. The CPS seem to be holding a few people responsible at various points, and not just Duckenfield

Fingers crossed

Edited by Forest Hillbilly (29 Jun 2018 4.59pm)

"The facts have changed", Rishi Sunak

Duckenfields defence was that he couldn't remember what he did in the hours before KO. Crucially, he should have been familiarising himself with the stadium layout and the procedures in place.

Someone with a history of periods of alcohol abuse, you couldn't speculate what Duckenfield was doing for fear of jeopardising any trial.

I hope justice is done, and that no scousers disruption to the case prevents the facts being outed.

"The facts have changed", Rishi Sunak

Anyone know what the burden of proff was at the inquest?

I tried googling it but couldn't find anything.

Particularly as I should have said standard of proof.

He's had years to work out a defence and I can see it being more difficult to get a conviction that most people expect.

The former owner of Sheffield Wednesday is also on trail. It's going to be very difficult for him to put up a defence as he knew the ground did not have a safety certificate

He had 2 choices let the marauding lunatics in pressing up against the gates outside to prevent injuries and possible deaths and relieve the pressure or watch them get injured, which he did to the best of his judgment, it was the wrong decision we all know that now, but it was not murder or his intention to see people killed, it was to do exactly the opposite, So easy to be an armchair expert!!!

Agree with Badger11... This will be more difficult to prove than people think. It's already been proven that Duckenfield was hugely inexperienced at policing football matches... Indeed he kept referring to Nottingham Forest in his pre match briefing as 'Nottingham City'... He knew nothing about football, and indeed knew little else about being in charge of a big football match.

I can see his defence being that he was 'forced' to take charge of this football match. That he told his superiors he was inexperienced bit that they insisted he do it. The man is facing prison.. In my experience of the Police senior officers will literally do anything to save themselves and will drag anyone down with them no matter who it is.

The disgraceful lies and cover ups afterwards need addressing, however he is not in the dock for that so I would imagine it can't be used as it's inadmissible.

Those supporters do deserve justice but I can see Duckenfield wriggling out of this one.

Don't waste your time with jealousy. Sometimes your ahead, sometimes your behind, the race is long. But in the end it's only with yourself!!