By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
And it being established fans were not to blame, it’s quite staggering that a lawyer can appear on BBC Radio today and go unchallenged when claiming there was a riot by Liverpool fans and it was that which caused the 96 deaths. Shame on Adrian Chiles for not doing his job.
The same co ont has just been on the radio decrying the enormous expense after 32 years in bringing this case, ignoring completely the reasons why that might be the case. Fking cheek.
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 16:39 - May 26 by Steve_M
FFS.
The same co ont has just been on the radio decrying the enormous expense after 32 years in bringing this case, ignoring completely the reasons why that might be the case. Fking cheek.
With this and Cummings and Johnson it almost feels like the powers that be are deliberately taking the piss and seeing how far people can be pushed until they snap.
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 20:53 - May 26 by Illinoisblue
With this and Cummings and Johnson it almost feels like the powers that be are deliberately taking the piss and seeing how far people can be pushed until they snap.
I'll be interested to read some legal commentary on the judge's decision here, it might be that the CPS were wrong to try the case in law, although morally it's a different matter, or it might be the judge made a somewhat perverse decision.
To allow that bloke on the radio to parrot the old lies without being challenged was another piece of really poor editorial judgement from BBC News.
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 07:41 - May 27 by Steve_M
I'll be interested to read some legal commentary on the judge's decision here, it might be that the CPS were wrong to try the case in law, although morally it's a different matter, or it might be the judge made a somewhat perverse decision.
To allow that bloke on the radio to parrot the old lies without being challenged was another piece of really poor editorial judgement from BBC News.
The bit I dont understand is why only now has it come out that the police misleading a public inquiry into the deaths of people is perfectly legal.
The comments from Metcalf's solicitor won't have been made without his consent. Seems the guy is standing be the SYP lies and is unable to accept any wrong doing on his part in putting those lies together in the "blame the fans" narrative. Much like the vast majority of the police.
The idea that the structures that police the police are fit for purpose is laughable. The police are above the law, they can unlawfully kill people, lie about, cover it up and there is no consequences for their actions.
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 07:54 - May 27 by bluelagos
The bit I dont understand is why only now has it come out that the police misleading a public inquiry into the deaths of people is perfectly legal.
The comments from Metcalf's solicitor won't have been made without his consent. Seems the guy is standing be the SYP lies and is unable to accept any wrong doing on his part in putting those lies together in the "blame the fans" narrative. Much like the vast majority of the police.
The idea that the structures that police the police are fit for purpose is laughable. The police are above the law, they can unlawfully kill people, lie about, cover it up and there is no consequences for their actions.
Chilling but undenialable.
I've just read the Secret Barrister's take on the legal nature and it makes a degree of sense legally in that it would be difficult under 1989 regulations for these specific actions to have perverted the course of judgement. The last sentence, below, I agree with wholeheartedly.
"“What was in Mr Metcalf’s mind is not the issue”, the judge said in reaching his decision. In other words, however improper or pure his motive may have been — and there was no finding on that front — his actions simply didn’t carry a significant risk of perverting any proceedings that would, in law, amount to “the course of justice”. As a matter of law, the court found that the charges that the CPS had chosen to pursue could not be proved.
That’s outrageous after all that’s happened. There is no point interviewing the berk if all you do is let him peddle his nonsense unchallenged. Chiles didn’t do his homework or his job.
I’ve never had a clue why that morose bore has had a career in tv. He’s as thick as slurry and just about as interesting..
0
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 08:12 - May 27 with 1230 views
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 08:03 - May 27 by Steve_M
I've just read the Secret Barrister's take on the legal nature and it makes a degree of sense legally in that it would be difficult under 1989 regulations for these specific actions to have perverted the course of judgement. The last sentence, below, I agree with wholeheartedly.
"“What was in Mr Metcalf’s mind is not the issue”, the judge said in reaching his decision. In other words, however improper or pure his motive may have been — and there was no finding on that front — his actions simply didn’t carry a significant risk of perverting any proceedings that would, in law, amount to “the course of justice”. As a matter of law, the court found that the charges that the CPS had chosen to pursue could not be proved.
"This was an acquittal. Not moral absolution."
Has anything changed? Do those giving evidence at the Grenfell inquiry have similar protection/ability to lie and mislead an inquiry? The CV inquiry next year?
By omitting all references to the 'freeman tactic' Metcalf facilitated an attempt to mislead a public inquiry, parliament and the british public to exonerate those responsible for killing 96 football fams. And it was perfectly legal for him to do so.
And that's before all the other SYP led cover up. All without any consequences. Utter joke.
I just left a comment on Chiles' latest Guardian column. It's an article about how lovely it is that everyone was going to the pub again. I replied that I went to the pub but that the mood was quite low as everyone was talking about a BBC Radio host, and TV football presenter, failing to challenge a lawyer making offensive and untrue allegations against Liverpool fans.
It lasted less than two minutes before being pulled.
Comment is Free my a*se!
3
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 10:37 - May 27 with 1029 views
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 08:12 - May 27 by bluelagos
Has anything changed? Do those giving evidence at the Grenfell inquiry have similar protection/ability to lie and mislead an inquiry? The CV inquiry next year?
By omitting all references to the 'freeman tactic' Metcalf facilitated an attempt to mislead a public inquiry, parliament and the british public to exonerate those responsible for killing 96 football fams. And it was perfectly legal for him to do so.
And that's before all the other SYP led cover up. All without any consequences. Utter joke.
So firstly it's possible I completely misunderstood the situation but wasn't the reason because it wasn't a the statutory public inquiry, at which evidence is given on oath? Therefore if the Greenfell inquiry (for example) is a statutory public inquiry and the evidence given on oath then anyone who does lie could/would be prosecuted
But as I've said before public inquires in this Country are a waste of time in terms of holding people to account / prosecutions you only have to look at the Iraq one to understand that. Yes they will show failings and recommendations and those are implemented, but prosecutions, nah nothing
0
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 10:46 - May 27 with 1011 views
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 07:54 - May 27 by bluelagos
The bit I dont understand is why only now has it come out that the police misleading a public inquiry into the deaths of people is perfectly legal.
The comments from Metcalf's solicitor won't have been made without his consent. Seems the guy is standing be the SYP lies and is unable to accept any wrong doing on his part in putting those lies together in the "blame the fans" narrative. Much like the vast majority of the police.
The idea that the structures that police the police are fit for purpose is laughable. The police are above the law, they can unlawfully kill people, lie about, cover it up and there is no consequences for their actions.
Chilling but undenialable.
I've read a few newspaper articles on this judgement and I now understand why the judge aquitted the defendants. My problem with this is not that they didn't break any laws, it's that they didn't have to.
Don't believe a word I say. I'm only kidding. Or am I?
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 08:05 - May 27 by Churchman
That’s outrageous after all that’s happened. There is no point interviewing the berk if all you do is let him peddle his nonsense unchallenged. Chiles didn’t do his homework or his job.
I’ve never had a clue why that morose bore has had a career in tv. He’s as thick as slurry and just about as interesting..
Bagpuss was paid over £150,000 a year by the BBC. Nice work if you can get it. Sadly, plenty of people still believe that Hillsborough was partly due to the behaviour of drunken, ticketless Liverpool fans, despite the complete lack of evidence to support this view.
After all that’s been learned about what happened at Hillsborough on 09:48 - May 27 by baxterbasics
I think we are seeing here the difference between a presenter and a journalist. Chiles is very much the former.
He apologised on his radio show this morning and seemed genuinely aghast as he was at the 2016 verdict. We all make mistakes innit.
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
