Respects paid at the old Hillsborough memorial outside Anfield.
Advertisement
The jury in the inquests into the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans at the 1989 Hillsborough disaster has retired to consider its verdicts, more than two years since the hearings began.
It will now have to answer 14 questions including whether the victims were unlawfully killed and whether opportunities to save lives were missed.
There are 13 other considerations listed on the jury questionnaire, some of which refer to the Hillsborough stadium itself and match hosts Sheffield Wednesday and its staff.
Sir John told the jury of seven women and three men the inquests are at a “very important stage”.
He told them audio visual evidence they had seen was “plainly very important”..
“You will need to consider this evidence because, if you were to take the view there was some deliberate decision, you might think it reflected a view of the facts of the disaster taken by the senior officers”.
Police planning for the game.
Four sections of it asks whether police “errors or omissions” caused or contributed to the unsafe situation at the match and the crush on the terraces.
He added that it was suggested to many witnesses that footage taken on the day actually did not show any unruly behaviour by the fans or heavy drinking, as was suggested by some police officers.
Barry said Bettison said police would say “we were afraid they were going to break down the gates so we made a decision to open them”.
Sport understands that one question asks if the fans were unlawfully killed in the tragedy which has haunted Liverpool Football Club for over 25 years.
Licensing and oversight of the stadium.
Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC on the day of the match.
But he did not accept it amounted to police “abdicating their responsibility” for the safe populating of the terraces.
Emergency response and the role of South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service.
“It requires you to work together to discuss the evidence in a civilised manner”.
He added: “It is of the highest importance that all of you work together in the interests of justice”.
Explaining the need for the jury members to work as a team, he said: “It requires you to make your decisions together”.
“It requires you to put aside personal issues that sometimes arise”. The fresh inquiry in Warrington has overseen 267 days of evidence regarding the tragedy, with testimonies concluding earlier this year.
The jurors have been armed with a laptop to view video footage of the day, should they want to see parts of it again, and also a series of thick files containing documents and chronologies.
Goldring’s directions state that the jury must be sure that Duckenfield’s actions “were not those which a reasonably careful and competent match commander would have taken in 1989 so that the 96 people could attend, watch and depart reasonably safely”.
Advertisement
To answer yes to that question, jurors must be “sure” that Ch Supt David Duckenfield, who was in overall command of the police operation, was “responsible for the manslaughter by gross negligence” of the 96 who died.
