Verdict aftermath

Looking back, I see a huge irony. Bear with me while I spell it out.

Let's start by saying it like it was. On April 15^th 1989. many ordinary South Yorkshire Policemen regarded the Liverpool fans attending Hillsborough as scum. They treated us like scum. A number of SYP pushed fans back as they tried to escape over fences, they refused to open exit gates, they ignored our pleas for help, they literally turned their backs on us in our hour of need.

Half a pitch away, some SYP followed orders and quickly formed a line to separate fighting fans - only there were no fighting fans. As body after body came past on stretchers, most of the police did nothing. I'll repeat that: they did nothing. How many bodies do you need to see before you go to help? For the majority, the answer was not even 96, they never did go and help - they held their line. Cos they had been told to? Cos they didn't care? You tell me - because I can never understand how a policeman can stand and do nothing when he sees somebody dead or injured.

Some SYP even hindered the fans trying to pull down advertising hoardings to ferry the dead and injured to medical assistance. The testimony is there for all to read - how the SYP spoke to, treated and reacted to supporters that day. At the height of the disaster, they even called for dogs and turned away ambulances.

Later the same day, their first question to many grieving parents was to ask how much alcohol their kids had had. The parents of scum, were treated as scum. That was the SYP mindset, of that I have no doubt. How else can you explain their conduct to people who have just been told their children are dead? How else do you explain a SYP telling me 11 months later that “95 dead was a good days work.” [95 excludes Tony Bland who died 3 years later]

How else do you explain a West Midlands Policeman accusing me of being a left wing agitator because I dared to criticise the SYP? Or the WMP officer who after taking her statement, went on to make a sexual advance to Diane, one of our IP applicants, at a time she was traumatised and vulnerable. The police looked at us as scum. That's how it was. It may not make easy reading, but that is how it was. That is how we were treated.

Then the next day, with the reality of their role in killing 95 fans dawning on them, the SYP started to tell the world their version of the truth, namely that we were scum. Murdering scum. Violent, drunk, ticketless yobs. Scum who stole from the dead, scum who urinated on the police as they tried to help. They knew it was a pack of lies, so why did they think they could get away with it? Easy, cos in their view we were scum - a disparate bunch of poorly-educated, working class, voiceless and faceless people that the SYP and their friends, thought they could label as murderers, as scum.

No more. It took a while, a disgusting length of time, if truth be told. So long that many mothers, fathers died without seeing their children vindicated. Many parents died before the inquests, with their children still labelled as contributing to the deaths, still labelled as part of the mob, part of the cause why so many people had died at a match. My very own mother died 6 years ago, before there was even a sniff of a new inquest, never mind the final exoneration of her son and thousands of others.

So to our little gang. I salute everyone of you. I salute every person who has been involved. I do more than salute you, I thank you. Being labelled as murderer when you have done nothing wrong is a disgusting, horrible and vile accusation – and I am labelled a murderer no more. Thank you to every survivor who gave a statement, who took to the stand, who held up a placard, who signed a petition. To every member of the HJC, the HFSG and HFH, Anne Williams' group. Every person who supported the fight for justice, I salute you and I thank you.

And now the irony, the beautiful irony. I salute you all the more because so many of the very people seen as scum by the SYP were the very people who played crucial roles in the fight for justice. The SYP, the Coroner and Mr Beggs...they all underestimated us, underestimated our determination, our tenacity and our fight.

And be clear, these 'scum', are the very people who the nation should be thankful to. These people from ordinary families, these supporters and survivors...they stood their ground and they campaigned for years. However much they fell out with each other, or disagreed over tactics, or over how best to achieve what they wanted, they always had certain crucial things in common: They had truth on their side, they had determination on their side and they had suffered a huge injustice that they needed to put right. The injustice of not just seeing your loved one killed, but then shamefully, seeing them blamed, too.

Every single person in our country, who values police accountability, who values truth and justice, who wants our police, our politicians and our institutions to act in the right way - every one of them owes a huge debt of thanks to the campaigners. For we might, we just might, have changed things in the UK. If nothing else changes, every single police officer in the UK now knows one simple truth: you are not, nor will you ever be, above the law. You can lie, intimidate, threaten witnesses, fabricate evidence, alter statements and get the press on your side - you can even cosy up to the PM and their press officer and you can lie under oath all you want...but you just might one day get found out. It might not be tomorrow, but you risk getting shown up and you risk the world finding out exactly what sort of person you are.

Let's go back to the pub in London, six months earlier when the MITP first told us about Q7 and how he thought the Coroner was looking to stitch up the fans. It struck me that the Coroner, much like the SYP 27 years earlier, had assumed we were a disparate, poorly-educated, voiceless and faceless bunch of non entities. He hadn't fallen for the “robbing the dead” nonsense, but he seemed to believe that the Liverpool fans could be treated as a sacrificial lamb, to placate the SYP. He seemed to think that Liverpool fans, the families, the survivors and the campaigners would accept this injustice and melt away. His view seemed to be that the survivors were expendable and not worthy of the truth or justice.

In the pub, with fellow survivors talking to the MITP, 6 months before the verdicts, I had asked: Who does the Coroner think we are? Does he think we are idiots? Does he think any of us will accept this? Any of us?

Well, in the case of 6 survivors, he now knows who we are, boy does he know who we are now... 

Verdict day

26th April 2016, like April 15^th 1989 and Sept 12^th 2012 before them, are now etched on every Survivors brain as hugely significant dates. Sept 12^th has become known as truth day, yet somehow we are here 3 ½ years later and the truth so devastatingly and dramatically revealed by the HIP report has for 25 months, in a courtroom has been challenged yet again, by police witness after police witness. Many ageing men, who once served the good people of South Yorkshire as police officers, stood up, they took an oath and they then have proceeded to paint the fans as drunken yobs, tied to their testimony made more than 2 decades earlier.

On this day, the jury would speak, they would tell the world whose version of events they believed. Were the police over run by a drunken mob, hell bent on gaining entry, arriving late and en mass to intentionally create a situation where a number without tickets could bunk in. This was the SYP lie they created and the one many SYP were sticking too. Whilst the HSE evidence had fully discredited the suggestion of a mass of “bunking in” fans (They had counted the numbers and proven that the total number of fans on the Leppings lane terraces matched the tickets sold) how could you disprove the SYP lies about widespread drunkeness and “non compliant” fans?

Policeman after policeman took to the stand and used what seemed to me, to be standard phrases (The IPCC I hope are looking at exactly this) “over 50% of fans were drinking”, the exact same phrase added to my statement. My own statement said I saw over 50% of fans drinking, added later by someone, without my consent. The other phrase I noticed was of “Animalistic behaviour”. I have read a few SYP statements and this phrase seems way too common. It is hardly the language of your ordinary copper, if people were genuinely misbehaving I'd expect a copper to use 'yobs' or 'violent' but not 'Animalistic behaviour'.

The jury has listened to account after account, most challenged by the family lawyers with 2 key weaknesses being probed time and again. The first, the changing of their statements, the failure to date some statements, the addition of critical (of fans) phrases, the removal of critical (of police) phrases. Quite simply the way SYP statements were pulled together was highly irregular and the content clearly designed to tell a consistent and damaging narrative. Apparently these drunken fans were not just outside, police even gave evidence that the fans in the gym, those who had carried the dead and injured, that they also stank of alcohol.

Secondly, the SYP could never explain why, if there was a significant 'non compliant' drunken section of fans, why was there no corroborating evidence? Why had significant numbers not been arrested? The video pictures spoke for themselves. As did the thousands of photos. They even photographed the bins at Hillsborough, but found just a bin mainly full of soft drinks cans. They blood tested the dead, yet only proved that the majority of fans had no alcohol at all, some had had literally had a pint or two and I one or two had had around 5 pints or so. At an FA Cup semifinal.

But when the lies are repeated by so many, so many ex and current police officers, of different ranks, there is the risk they are believed. Some SYP to their credit broke rank. A few stated that any isolated drunkeness they saw was no different to any big match. Others, shamefully, maintained this was the worst match they had ever policed. If you want a taste of how vile some of the SYP witnesses were watch this report from Skynews. This is what was broadcast to the nation by the same NewInternational that brought us the S*n lies 27 years ago.

http://news.sky.com/story/1340160/hillsborough-fans-spat-at-me-says-policeman

Myself, Ade, Debs and Jim have all travelled upto Liverpool and wake up and get a meal down our necks, aware we could be in court most of the day. We had a couple of pints last night and have been going over the scenarios again and again, not just last night but for weeks now. We think there are 5 possible verdicts on Q7 and our group have prepared press releases to cover all possible outcomes. The hope is that we win, but we are not sitting back waiting for a victory.

The statements are different dependent on the outcome. In the best case, we will happily put the boot into the SYP. The jury will have found, as we have been saying for 27 years, that they have lied through their teeth about their own culpability and have lied about the behaviour of the fans. The SYP have a record of letting down ordinary people (Rotherham) and they have a record of fabricating evidence (Orgreave). Their culture is such they have operate as if they are above the law, with no ability to stop, reflect and learn from their mistakes. They are, simply, rotten to the core and beyond reform. They need to be disbanded / merged with another force so the people of South Yorkshire can be served by a police force they deserve.

In the worst case Scenario, the jury find 'unlawful killing' and they find the fans caused or contributed to the deaths. This will be outright war and in this scenario we need to hit the media quickly with our refusal to accept a finding that we believe is wrong and unfair. Our press release highlights a number of serious shortcomings of the inquests, namely that the fans were not represented and that a number of SYP who are under criminal investigation for perverting the course of justice, were allowed to present evidence as “untainted” without the jury being made aware of this.

Our London lawyer is on the ball and our legal appeal / judicial review is pretty much ready, with our main card agreed to be “How can you find against a set of people who were denied legal representation?” Natural justice screams this is wrong and we are determined to carry on the fight if needs be. Any judicial review we mount would be to find Q7 an unsafe finding, rather than to seek to have the whole inquests rerun. We would simply seek to have Q7 removed from the inquests findings.

But even if successful, we know the damage would be done. Forever we would be reminded that a jury had found us as contributing to the deaths of our own. That we were unrepresented would be ignored by those who believe that Liverpool fans bare some of the responsibility for the deaths.

We jump in the car for the 45 minute drive to Warrington. We have been allocated seats in the overflow building, rather than the main court, where family members have been allocated just 2 tickets each. The lack of space is a huge oversight in our opinion and many with a vested interest have to follow the proceedings from a different room, with a video and audio link to the courtroom.

The traffic is mental as word comes of an over turned milk lorry on the M62 causing tailbacks. The good news is everyone coming from Liverpool is in the same boat and I am confident they can't start without the bulk of the families in attendance. Jim decides to trust his prat-nav, boy does she have an irritating voice. “At the next junction”...just shut up you stupid cow, we know the fucking way, been here a dozen times. I get smug and point out that on my motorbike I'd have been booting it down the middle of the motionless traffic. Someone points out that I couldn't get four of us on my motorbike but that doesn't stop me and my little “Bikes are the only way to travel” sermon.

The tension in the car is palpable, the moment people have waited for is minutes away and we have done all we can. We are, to quote a famous footie phrase, all played out. The energy this has taken has been palpable. Physical and emotional. Travelling up from Suffolk to Liverpool, during the months of January to April, in the coldest of weather is no fun. One time I arrived at 11.15, got off by bike after 4 ½ hours in freezing temperatures, looking like I had been in snow drift. I was literally shaking with the cold and it took me about 2 hours to regain movement in all my fingers.

We park up at Warrington and Jim unpacks his huge flag. I tell him we are waving it, don't give a fuck for court etiquette. All through our 'operation vigilance', and we have spent hours in court, not once have I stood up and bowed to the Coroner on his entrance or departure. Who the fuck does he think he is? He expects me to bow to him, to show him deference or respect? Well get this Goldring, I think you're a twat, simple as. Despite protestations from legal teams, you have allowed the SYP to repeat their disgusting lies, lies about me, about my friends, lies about 96 fans who can't defend themselves. Goldring has allowed it and he has denied me or any other fan the right to legal representation. I think 'twat' is too polite but I am aware children might read this so will keep it civil.

On the walk down Ade and Debs walk a few feet behind us, Ade is in his own world no doubt going over the enormity of what's facing us all. Ade is definitely more reserved, calm and assured than me. He is a top man who has done so much in the past few months, his knowing so many connected people at the inquests, who will have to remain nameless, who have offered him (and us) advice on how the inquests were going and what (if anything) we could do at each stage.

But I am not reserved, nor indeed am I calm. I am shitting myself and incredibly nervous. But either way, I am walking into these inquests with my head held high and Jim's flag “We climbed the Hill in our own way” speaks volumes for the fight Liverpudlians have had to make. Years of sneering, of accusations of being “whinging scousers” yet they have stood their ground, refused to be bowed. They knew they had the truth on their side, and today, just maybe, the world would hear the truth from a jury.

We get to court and it takes a while to sort out tickets. Ade has been a star and wangled us into 401 the overflow building. There are mainly family members here and we sit all on one row. I scout around and can't see any other obvious groups of survivors. I know a handful are in the main court room too, but this is predominantly an occasion for those bereaved 27 years ago. They are here to learn officially the cause of death for their loved ones. We officially should not be here at all. But we are clearly more than random observers. I suspect that Ade's press pass and the fact that the Solcitior to the Coroner knows Ade is writing a piece for the Observer may have swayed him from his initial refusal to allow us tickets.

I would have been quite happy to stand outside the main court room, knowing that if Q7 went badly, we were next to the media and could get straight in with our “What was wrong with the inquests” line, but more important was sitting with people I knew, people I had faith would do what was necessary to protect me from doing something stupid. Another good reason not to be in the main court room to be honest as am not sure the Coroner would have got out unscathed had we been found to have contributed to deaths we never caused.

We sit down in a row, Ade and Debs at one end, Richie and his wife Lou, Tim, Jim, Chris and I am next to Damian and a Welsh lad Dean. Both are survivors and both are incredibly strong people. The sort of people it is a privilege to know, who have stood up and shouted as loudly as they could about the injustice. Some survivors are quiet, some are outspoken. Some are broken and some are no longer here, unable to cope with the demons, the nightmares and the survivor guilt. Heap on that a nation that labels you a murderer and many chose to end their lives early. Some simply can't speak about their experiences, much as I was for 6 years before receiving counselling. Even then it took me another 17 years to fully write down my experiences.

But I am next to good people and we have a shared experience and a bond I hope I never repeat. Nearly dying isn't a nice bond to have, being labelled a murderer isn't a nice label to share. I truly wish I had never met any of these people before. Wish I had never answered the bloody door 27 years ago when a scouse mate came round to offer me a ticket for a football match involving 2 teams I didn't support.

I truly wish I hadn't been so stupid as to walk out of my A'level Geography exam an hour early so I could catch the England v Holland match in the 88' Euros. I missed going to Leeds University by 1 grade and ended up with my fallback, Sheffield City Polytechnic, all because I wanted to watch the England v Holland match. Marco Van Basten took the p*ss out of Tony Adams and we got dicked anyway. Hardly worth leaving an exam early for. Hardly worth missing a place at University for. Fucking idiot.

We are sat down and some official comes and tells us that we are part of the court, and as such should show no emotion. Yeah, good luck with that love. 27 years being labelled a murderer and you think we are just going to shrug our shoulders if the result goes our way?

The first question that matters goes our way. Dean leans over, squeezes my leg and I give him a nod. We are all hopeful but know that juries can be unpredictable. I had a few weeks earlier chatted with a leading lawyer from the HJC who said he felt the evidence was strong, but that sometimes juries make “perverse” findings. People don't like to convict the police and although this is not a criminal court, we all know what 'Unlawful Killing' means. It means that the SYP and Duckenfield were responsible for the killings, end of. No accident, no “imperfect storm”, the SYP were responsible for unlawfully killing 96 football fans who simply went to watch a game of football.

The various failings of the SYP are detailed by the jury. The lack of planning coming out clearly. But Q6 and 7 are the only two that are really in doubt. The Coroner asks the question about unlawful killing and the the answer is positive. I punch the air, and manage not to shout. I know this is only half way there and we still face the nightmare scenario. Quickly the Coroner moves on and he answers No to Q7 and critically No to the supplementary question, whether the fans “May have contributed” to the deaths.

We shout out - “Yes, Yes” and Dean is stood up too. Poor bloke has his arm in a sling but that's not going to stop me giving him first, then Damian an almighty hug. I lean over and Richie and Tim soon get the same. People are hugging all around and my handed is welded tight into a fist as I continuously punch the air. Be clear, we have won, we have won. All those lying bastards, the hundreds of lying police have been shown up for what they are. A disgrace. An utter disgrace to their uniform, to the police, to the country. Their lies have been shown up, now everyone knows the truth.

I refocus on the question and they are on Q11. What happened to 8,9 and 10? Who cares? The South Yorkshire Police are getting an almighty kicking, a kicking from a jury who sat and listening to their bullshit for 2 years, just like Taylor had done 27 years ago. He rejected it and so have they. Do I feel an ounce of sympathy for them? Do I fuck. Of course their were a few good coppers there, coppers let down by their leadership. But what did they do the next day? Or after the disgusting lies in the press being fed by their own Federation rep? They said nothing, they nodded away and allowed their statements to be changed, on an industrial scale.

So no, I don't feel an ounce of sympathy towards the SYP. Not one. I won't lie, not one ounce. They collectively concocted the very lie that has labelled me a murderer for 27 years. There have been suicides amongst Survivors and I was on the phone to the Samaritans myself 21 years ago before I got counselling. Their lies were no accident. They repeated them again, at these very inquests and they were reported again, all these years later almost as facts. I fucking hope they choke on their disgusting lies, hope they can't look at their wives or their kids without thinking – “Even you now know what we did.” I hope they can't sleep at night and I hope their disgusting actions haunt them.

We leave the court room and Richie gets his “We told you they lied” flag out. Many people want photos of it and we are happy to be free. Free? Yes free, free from the distasteful lie that we killed our own, officially exonerated and free to tell anyone who cares the Truth. Later we head over to the main court and the phone is ringing. The next couple of days are busy as we start to tell our stories. How it feels to be lied about, to be labelled a murderer and to be exonerated so many years later. Tim always says there are no winners in this and he is right. But if feels like a big victory and we head off to celebrate.

I bump into possibly the nicest person I know. Doreen Jones. I have seen her 2 years earlier on the banned Hillsborough documentary (Not for public viewing until after the inquests) and had chatted to her many times at the court. Her son, like me, was in Sheffield as a student. Like me, he had been through Gate C unable to make entry due to the disorganisation of the turnstile areas. Like me he had followed the signage and headed for the tunnel onto the central pens. Like me he had simply gone to a football match. Unlike me, he left Hillsborough in a body bag.

Doreen jokes she and her daughter Steph (another Survivor) have slipped their husbands and I insist on buying them a drink. Doreen is smiling, something I have never seen before. This lady who had her son stolen from her, who was cruelly refused the right to hug her dead son, inhumanely told “He is the property of the coroner”, this lady, for that is what she is, she is smiling. Not celebrating but smiling, still dignified in a way I could never be and in a way that brings shame onto everyone in the establishment who even suspected there was a cover up and yet did nothing to expose it.

She brings shame to a coroner who over saw a process where policeman after policeman labelled her son was yet again as a drunken yob who fought his way into a match. Why? Because irrespective of what the Coroner might say, you can't simply differentiate between fans when you can't identify who was misbehaving. They had hours of footage but could identify not one misbehaving fan, so had to label “the fans” as a generic mob. Each of the 96, who drank in pubs with us, who came entered the stadium with us, who stood next to us, each of them was effectively labelled a murderer by the lying SYP officers, just as we were.

The SYP brought only their discredited lies to court, so why they were allowed to regurgitate them for 2 years only the coroner knows. Why Doreen Jones was made to sit and listen to the same lies again, only the Coroner knows. Why we were put back on trial, only the Coroner knows. But tonight, Doreen is softly smiling. An old lady finally, finally knowing that the truth about her son's death, is now officially recorded and the world knows her son, her daughter too, played no part in the killing of anyone. Exonerated, in full. Richard and Steph Jones, just like me, Ade, Richie, Tim, Damian, Dean, Val, Diane and thousands of others, each and everyone of us exonerated.

I am proud to say Doreen is one of many family members who offered us her support and encouragement when we pulled together our letters and applications. Some people may snipe, who knows what they say, who cares to be frank. When someone like Doreen is on your side, that is good enough for me.

She is such a wonderful lady and I give her a hug, knowing I'll probably never have the honour of chatting with her again.

We sit down for our first pint and Radio 5 phone me up, and ask if I can do a live interview. Of course, when are we on? In 3 hours they tell me. Well, am not being funny, but you may want someone else, cos in 3 hours I am going to be well pissed. And I was.

The Inquests 4: Decision time

So we have two choices, go to high court for a JR on our being refused IP status. Or keep our powder dry. As ever, we talk through the options. We have another survivor and a campaigner on a conference call and a decision is made. If we go for the JR and lose, we are all played out, we have lost and we can no longer influence the Coroner.

Or hold off, inform the Coroner that we have instructed our lawyers we will JR the minute we feel our interests are not being fully represented in court during the summing up. (One of his arguments was that the family lawyers were already representing us, as they had survivors who lost loved ones within their ranks.)

We also now had a huge ace up our sleeve – If you shit on us and we lose, we will be in court within days asking for Q7 to be found unsafe, as the people you found against were unrepresented. Not because we didn't ask, but because the Coroner refused to allow us to defend ourselves.

That is a pretty strong card and we are happy that whilst we haven't got IP status confirmed, we have managed to ensure the Coroner knows, not suspects, he knows that the fans will be making merry hell if things go against us. We now have the legal argument, the lawyer, the families' support, the funding (from families) and we also have the press. Two of our gang are journalists. One of our supporters used to work at the Sunday Times and is well connected. We have contacts at the BBC, ITV and C4 News. I have already done interviews with the BBC and ITV about the WMP. If things go against us, getting access to the media will not be difficult.

So the final stage comes into play, We called it Operation Vigilance. Get to the inquests and be visible. The Coroner's team know who we are, and I take every chance to make sure they know I am there. During the legal arguments I make a point of sending lots of emails, lots of texts, to be outside for phone calls. I even take my own dongle so I can email without using the court wifi.

In the breaks I chat to family members, initially as we need to build relations in case things go against us. Soon we chat for no other reason than that they are really nice people. Humble and reassuring, they reassure us we did nothing wrong and that they don't believe the SYP testimony. On a couple of occasions I get upset by the evidence, once literally walking out in tears after hearing yet another lying SYP calling us “animals” and this is presented by the Coroner in his summing up. The family members are supportive and I get a couple of hugs, much appreciated and much needed.

At one point a guy from the court team even comes and sits behind me. I give him a proper stare and move my seat to the back row. We are here, we are watching and we have a fcking great big pile of dung we are going to drop on your head Mr Coroner if you shit on us and if your jury find against us. You will be vilified in the press as the man who refused to allow survivors the right to defend themselves. Unprecedented, unfair and highly questionable legal decisions. That's some legacy you are being left with.

Well did we make a difference? Who knows and we never will know. What I do know is that I was told that 95% of the families' lawyers submissions towards the summing up were successful. Our little intervention came at just the right time, just as the Coroner was considering all the submissions, we helped to turn the screw. The submissions were accepted, the summing up was changed (we felt it largely fair having heard it) and jury did the rest. We know the Coroner took notice, as he name checked Richie in his summing up about 5 times. That was no doubt his attempt to placate our anger, that or he was trying to undermine our appeal that he knew was coming if Q7 went wrong for us.

The beautiful thing for me, is that it was survivors. We got 3 more survivors to apply, including Di and Val, a horrible decision for them as they, like us, risked getting the IP status and holding things up. Luckily they were are brave as we were. Like many that had been through unspeakable trauma on the day and many times since. Like many they were worried about Q7 and distraught at the idea they and we could take any of the blame. But they were determined, determined to do anything, anything that might help the fight for justice, no matter how small.

So we had six of us rejected and ironically we were all formally cleared as part of the rejection. Six of us exonerated but as Val said, that means nothing without the jury clearing everyone.

The Inquests 3: Yer name's not down, yer not coming in.

Our requests have caused a bit of a stir and some family members are telling us “We have heard you are representing the fans.” What? Hardly, we are 4 guys who are representing ourselves. It's not for us to represent the fans. I am not even a Liverpool fan! The SoS or LFC or FSA, now they could represent the fans but like us, have chosen to keep away from the families' inquests. Unlike us they probably don't know about Q7 and about the summing up that is about to shaft us.

One of our options, if we get IP status granted is to speak to another group so they can then represent the fans. An informal approach is made to the SoS to make them aware of our plans and they also seem supportive of what we are trying to achieve. Nothing formal is agreed, but we are confident they would help mobilise 100s maybe 1000s of survivors if necessary.

Back in Warrington and we are getting informal support from family members, who support our IP application even though it may mean a 4 week delay. They tell us ' “We've been waiting 27 years, another month isn't ideal, but you should do what's right for you”. We are getting big grins and thumbs up from the legal teams and word is coming through that they want us to apply. Are we being played? For sure, but we are willing participants and after much soul-searching we apply. One of the original applicants drops out, but we don't fall out. We all know it is a personal decision and we are all wanting the same thing.

Our application goes in and we await the solicitor inviting us into the proceedings. We get ahead of ourselves and I start working out which SYP I would request are re-examined. Which of the lying bastards, and there are many, should we pull over the coals one more time. I joke to the others of the irony of our “Turning up last minute and demanding to get in” and we can all laugh at this despite the stress / tension.

We soon get our response, which is basically fck off again. The response seems to be all over the place and full of contradictions, as if it were pulled together hurriedly and late into the night. The most bizarre of the arguments against us being legally represented at proceedings in which we are being accused of contributing to the deaths of 96 people, is that the survivors of 7/7/ bombings were refused IP status at the inquests of those who died.

Seriously? These guys have no idea of what natural justice is do they? Or that anyone reading that will laugh. The survivors of 7/7 were not being accused of anything, we are. How can they use that as some sort of precedent?

We are passed the name of a lawyer in London who will assist us, for free, presumably knowing he would get to represent us if we get our IP status granted. He prepares us a response, a really aggressive letter to the Coroner and states again we want IP status, this time in legal talk. Again we are knocked back and left deflated.

Another bizarre twist is that the response now includes the fact that we are exonerated. Part of the reasoning not to give us IP is that the coroner, nor indeed any of the Interested Parties who have been made aware of our application, none of them raises any misconduct on our part. We are formally cleared of any wrong doing. Of course this means little, to exonerate us, yet blame the fans, as this will still mean a stain on our name. The argument is made often and we are steadfast on this, that to blame one fan, you blame us all.

But there is a silver cloud here. The Coroner has stated we are blameless, so exactly who is to blame? Who are these fans who caused the problems. If you can't identify them, then it seems you are on weak ground regarding Q7. Your question is against a catch all “the fans” yet everyone who has come forward is blameless. Jim loves his strategy stuff and highlights an anomaly in the Coroner's position. “There are now 3 categories of supporter. A, those who died, who are are blameless. B, those who by chance applied for IP status, all now officially blameless too, and C – the rest, who are still subject to Q7, although no one can name them, or show any misbehavior on their part.”

The Coroner's arguments seems weak and we speak again to our London lawyer who says we can judicially review the decision. This means the proceedings are held at a court in Manchester and that the inquests stop for 24 hours only. 3 judges would rule on whether the refusal of our IP request is legal in law. Or whether the Coroner was right to exclude us from the proceedings. Again, after much soul-searching we instruct our lawyer to go for a JR.

This is big, as if successful, this would destroy the Coroner's reputation. Given that he is in the middle of summing up, this could work against us, Making him look like a useless twat, whilst very satisfying, does not necessarily play into our hands. The papers are served and we attend the pre-court meeting on a Thursday in London. We meet with the barrister who will argue our case and we are due in court 10am the following morning.

The barrister takes us through all the legal arguments and we have one weakness to our case, namely that the proceedings have been going on for 2 years so why did we not apply 2 years ago? Our position is that we did not know 2 years ago that Q7 would be on the table. But whilst it is understandable, would it stand up to 3 high court judges? 4 hours of discussions and we ask the key question to the barrister – Are we going to win? As ever we get a load of legal talk but the message is simple – unlikely. High court judges don't like to overrule other high court judges, so they will find a way to reject your claim, probably on the fact you are late.

The inquests 2: A shot across the bows

We go through our options. We could picket the inquests, we could go now to the press, my idea is to shut down the M6/M62 interchange every day for a week. With banners, get arrested, back the next day. Maybe the M25 too. Cause merry fucking hell. Direct action is all these bastards understand. Try the nice approach and you get shafted, time to take the gloves off.

Whatever we do is for one purpose only, to let the Coroner know “We are here” and “We are going nowhere”. Let him think about his summing up and about the appropriateness of including Question 7 at all. He is due to break in early January and to start his summing up we estimate in February. We guess he will already be preparing his summing up, certainly in his mind.

The summing up is important too, as a Coroner who is (as we suspect) determined to shaft the fans, can almost direct a jury to a certain finding. We agree on our strategy. Calmer and saner voices than mine prevail and we agree to write a polite letter. (Apparently “Oi Goldring you cunt, shaft us and we promise we will make you wish you were never born” doesn't cut it.) I go along with the consensus that it needs to be polite or we risk antagonising him and making things worse.

Our letter would set out our concerns and would ask the Coroner to consider these when he is summing up. It is really a “shot across the bows” - all our arguments will have already been made – but coming from some survivors, he will know we are around and not in the mood to take a share of the blame.

We co-opt some help. Chris and Jim are experienced in the campaign, Jim was with us in the pub too. Chris is good mates with Tim and knows senior people in the HJC very well. They are rock solid and are fully committed to helping with our letter. Four has become six. Ade often comes back with legal input, only later do I find out it is his wonderful girlfriend, a lawyer! Six has become seven.

We identify a number of legal arguments/concerns we wish to put to the coroner, namely

The arbitrary split of the 96 (exonerated) and the fans (not exonerated)

The inclusion of Q7 when no new evidence has been presented

The “May have” supplementary question that sets such a low bar and is so ambiguous, as to be meaningless in our opinion.

The fact that fans were not represented at the inquests and could not defend our reputations.

In a nutshell, we aren't happy, we are here and we are going nowhere, as per our strategy. We toy with whether we should ask for Interested Party status but know the families would not want this. It would hold things up and they have already been waiting for years. We would suddenly become the least popular people on Merseyside. The guys who held up the inquests for a month whilst they got a legal team together.

So we agree to state on our letter, that due to our desire not to hold up proceedings, we merely ask that our concerns are passed onto the Coroner for his consideration when he is summing up. We know the families have been to hell and back many times and these are the inquests for their loved ones. Is it our place to interupt them at all? We share many worried communications, emails, texts, phones calls and meets in the pub debating our best move. The families are key here, but we have our own reputations to defend. This is a proper tight rope and how to proceed in our interests without causing them anguish from delays is difficult.

We decide to run our letters past the families' legal teams and past the key people / leaders in the two family groups. We are confident the HJC guys will be onside, 2 of our gang know people at HJC personally. But no one has knows anyone at the HFSG. I know a HFSG family member, but only loosely through a Facebook campaign page.

We travel en mass to Warrington, paying our own train fares, hotel expenses. It is important we build some relationships here, with key players. If things go tits up at the inquests, we could be hung out to dry. The general public has no more appetite for the campaign for justice and many family members do not have the energy. To be blunt, many are dying off. Stalwarts of the HJC like Maureen Church and John Glover are no longer able to fight for the reputation of their children. We do not have the funds.

One of the most shameful aspects of the cover up, is how many people, good honest people, have not lived to see their children vindicated. Not lived long enough to pick up their death certificates, denied that basic right by the deceit and lies of so many people. The list is long and if I try and complete it I would only upset some by missing out important people. But that injustice is one that can never be righted, can never be corrected. Shameful doesn't seem adequate, but that is the only word I know that gets close.

This really is the last chance saloon it seems, so we need to do all we can to make sure the Coroner's summing up is a fair one. The morning we arrive is tense as the Coroner is to start his summing up. We have heard rumours that the family lawyers are unhappy, but we have not seen sight of the draft summing up sent to the lawyers prior to the Coroner delivering them.

Our worst fears are confirmed when as we sit outside in the common area, family members come out of the HJC room in tears. One who knows Tim has tears down her face. “Good luck lads, you're going to need it, they are sh*tting on you big time.”

Slowly word comes out, that the Coroner's summing up is pretty much a public execution of the fans. He has even included 7 pages from 'pissgate woman' as she is known, a local resident who complained vociferously about Liverpool fans urinating in her garden. Whose evidence was so inconsequential that she admitted she knew nothing of the events at Leppings Lane. Yet her evidence was to be given large billing by the Coroner.

Then there was the evidence of SYP, to be presented without reference to the cross examination and to the photos and audio visual that helped the family lawyers take it apart during the inquests. To present for example Lomas' evidence as if it were accepted is do such a disservice to justice as to convince everyone, the lawyers, the family members, that we are being set up. The families are given their unlawful killing and the SYP get to pin some of the blame on the fans. That way everyone is happy.

Not quite Mr Coroner, not everyone, cos we are not happy, and we soon learn neither are family members. They, and I mean every one of them we speak with at the inquests, agree with our views. They see a slight on the fans, as a slight on their loved ones who died. We were next to them when they died. 30 of them came through Gate C with me. Whilst the SYP and commanders' lawyers can argue, we are not of course accusing the 96, that is exactly what they are doing.

And so it is, that we are met warmly on our visit. A leading member of the HJC approaches us. He has seen a copy of our proposed letter to the Coroner and indicates his strong support. “My brother” he says “was a fan, until he died. Blame the fans, you are blaming him.” Similar sentiments are heard from many family member attending the inquests. Someone points out that Margaret Aspinall's husband, Trevor and Jenni Hicks were all at the match and are no more likely to accept the authorities blaming the fans than we will.

Emboldened we agree to put the letter to the Coroner. We have been clear, we do not want to hold up proceedings, we merely wish the Coroner to consider our points, to ensure a fair summing up, not one that over-emphasises evidence against the fans and barely mentions evidence that exonerates us.

We get the response from the Coroner's solicitor, which I will paraphrase in non legal terms. “Who exactly are you? You have no legal standing so I won't pass on your letter. Now fuck off.”

Seriously? We are in the frame for contributing to / causing the deaths for 96 fellow fans and we cant even write a letter? We can't even have one little voice amongst the 112 legal teams paid for by the state? Our polite request, to consider some issues is met with a “Fuck off”, nicely dressed up in legal speak with the threat that we would be in contempt of court if we publicise our knock back.

We are enraged and we are emboldened. Every family member we have spoken to has done more than say they are “ok” with our intervention. They have encouraged us, told us they agree with all our arguments and tried to reassure us that we will not be alone if things go badly on Q7. The anguish on our faces must be clear as time and again people approach us to reassure us and to thank us for our trying to help. We all want the same thing and it is becoming clear that we have the support of the families, certainly every family member we have spoken with at Warrington.

So we decide, knowing the families we have spoken to are supportive, that we will ask for legal status, we will ask for Interested Party status. If that is the only way our views can be heard / considered then fair enough. We know what this means, it means we will possibly hold up the inquests. If awarded we will get a legal team who will have access to the summing up and will be able to put its submissions like all the other Interested Parties. Could we also put up witnesses as other IP s have? Could we call back witnesses and have our team re-examine them? Witnesses like PC Scott who the family legal teams went easy on as he was in a wheelchair. We are less forgiving, given the nature of his evidence which is toxic and damaging to our reputations.

And so it is that four of us, myself, Ade, Richie and Tim put our names to a letter formally requesting Interested Party status be granted. We are, if successful, about to risk becoming the most unpopular people on Merseyside outside the SYP. We may have the whispered support of the families' legal teams and the family members we know, but that can't be publicised. We will just be 4 trouble makers, 4 Jonny-come-latelys who are interfering in a legal process that is nothing to do with us.

Except it is to do with us, as we are being accused and we are demanding our right to defend our names and reputations. It may mean public and/or private criticism, but we believe we have every right to defend our reputations.

The Inquests 1: Bolt from the blue

Everybody knows the Hillsborough verdict. After 27 years, the families finally got justice. An inquest which lasted two years, a record in English law, resulted in the jury saying that the 96 people who were crushed to death at the Hillsborough stadium in 1989 were unlawfully killed. To call this an epic turnaround in the legal system is an understatement.

The verdict of Unlawful Killing overturned a verdict of Accidental Death which a previous inquest had passed in 1991 - and it is almost impossible to describe the pain which that first verdict caused to the families and friends of those who died and to people like myself who narrowly escaped death at Hillsborough. We knew it was wrong. We knew Hillsborough was no accident and that its many causes, but notably police incompetence and negligence, had been repeatedly covered up ever since.

People close to the inquest knew that literally thousands of people - family members, survivors, campaigners, lawyers - did their bit to bring about the new and just verdict. There were many high profile campaigners you won't need me to name, but there was equal commitment from innumerable survivors who relived difficult memories to give fresh statements and many took to the witness stand at Warrington and before that at the first inquest and at the Taylor inquiry.

But what nobody, even those involved throughout the inquest knows, is that a small group of survivors and campaigners campaigned behind the scenes on an aspect of the verdict which, had it gone against the survivors, would undoubtedly have cost lives.

We'll never know exactly how much influence we had in heading off that danger, and I want to be clear upfront that we don't claim any more than that we did our best, as thousands of others have, to try and help bring justice for not just the 96, but for the thousands of fellow survivors appallingly labelled by the SYP as having contributed to the deaths of their fellow fans.

Ours was just one piece in a huge jigsaw, but a significant piece nonetheless, and I do want to record our little gang and our efforts we made and how the system was stacked against us at every step of the way. How we were denied legal representation at the inquests and how we sought to bring pressure on the Coroner at the very time he was reviewing his critically important summing up of the evidence. It is indicative, I believe, of how the British legal system is stacked so heavily in favour of those with vested interests and against the ordinary member of the British public. But before you (as others have done) label me an agitator or someone with a grudge, read for yourself our experiences and make up your own mind.

We need to go back three years to the quashing of the verdicts. The Lord Chief Justice in so doing completely exonerated the fans and asked that the inquests be fact-finding rather than adversarial. His wish was that organisations and individuals would accept this, would defend their corner and that the Coroner's legal team could lead the jury through the evidence to enable the inquests to find the correct cause of death.

The preamble to the inquests takes some time, but we are confident they will find the truth. This time the discredited SYP are now largely ex-police officers. The Coroner won't apply the bizarre and hugely contested 3.15 cut off. The families' legal teams will be state funded, and it won't be the West Midlands Police preparing the testimony etc. for the Coroner.

At this point, I am actually living/working in Lagos Nigeria, so am a bit out of touch, but I follow the Liverpool Echo updates and am delighted to read that the HFSG lawyers will include Michael Mansfield. He needs no introduction and is, imho, one of the finest lawyers in our country.

The formal list of Interested Parties is many, with legal teams for the SYP, for the Police Fed, for the match commanders (Duckenfield, Marshall and Greenwood) and for Duckenfield's bosses (Jackson, Anderson and Hayes). They announce fairly early on they will be introducing alcohol and other aspects of fan behaviour into the proceedings, and we wonder what they have up their sleeve? If it is the same old SYP lies, well Taylor discredited at them, as did the HIP authors and the Lord Chief Justice. As did the Prime Minister come to think of it.

Either way, I am overseas so trust in the legal teams for the families and hope they can do the necessary to defend our corner. After all, the 96 dead were fans, they travelled with survivors, they drank in the pubs with them, they stood outside the turnstiles, they entered the stadium and stood on the same terrace with survivors. The only difference is that in the lottery of Pens 3 and 4, 96 fans were crushed to death.

Over time, and the testimony is all available to read, I grew more and more confident. Initially I was exasperated at the seemingly constant references to Heysel, to hooliganism and to alcohol by John Beggs (Duckenfield's main man) who seemed to throw in references to hooliganism at every opportunity. Over time, it is clear that even the Coroner was getting fed up of this and rumours circulate of a big falling out between Beggs and the Coroner. Indeed you only have to read the cross examination of Kenny Dalglish, where three times proceedings are halted for “legal arguments” when Beggs is cross examining Dalglish. It is clear reading between the lines that Beggs is doing all he can to mention hooliganism and the Coroner is getting fed up with him.

As an aside, if you want to know exactly what Beggs thinks is reasonable in a court, then read the Guardian report of his cross examining the parent whose daughter died at Deepcut. You can make your own conclusions as to the sort of person he is.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/08/deepcut-death-evidence-soldier-cheryl-james-did-not-kill-herself

The most momentous testimony over the course of the inquests is of course from David Duckenfield. He gives evidence over I think 7 days and is finally broken by the legal teams' persistence. He admits his errors and crucially that those errors caused the deaths. He also admits himself that his conduct fell below that expected of him. Game over we thought, or it should have been.

In the autumn (2015) I meet with a journalist who wishes to do an interview for transmission post verdict. He has seen many of the closed sessions (that you can tell people about, but may not publish or put on social media in case the jury hear of them) and informs me that the only cause of death under consideration is “Unlawful Killing” and that this is the only option the jury will be asked about. Now this is game over surely? If the evidence pointed even maybe to accidental death, surely this would be a question for the jury to consider? I leave the interview very happy, increasingly confident we are looking good.

About this time I start to meet socially with some fellow survivors / campaigners – to support ourselves as only fellow survivors can. We all have a common bond – yet we all have unique experiences too. We were all young men, unprepared with what we were going into. We all, at various times struggled with our demons and a couple of us had spent time in the cells following confrontations with the police.

Yet we were all unique too. Ade had struggled in the pen, been really poorly treated by the WMP and had struggled to cope with things. Tim had gone with 10 mates, only 7 coming home. I still don't understand how strong Tim is, so sure that it would have broken me losing a mate, let alone three. Richie had escaped and had carried bodies like Ade. Tim and Ade had been in the gym, something I was mercifully spared. Richie had also given evidence at both inquests. And I had my WMP experiences which seem so utterly disgusting reading them back.

So it's good to talk, to share, self-counselling in effect, at a time when Hillsborough was literally in the news (or the Echo at least) every day if you wanted to know about it. As people effectively labelled murderers by the SYP, we were very interested in it, fair to say.

So it is that we came together a fateful day in December, in a pub in London where we meet with the express intention of discussing the making of a documentary. Our stories are so strong, so powerful, so shocking and yet so few people understand. We had approached a few people in the media and had had some interest.

But at this point, everything changed. We arranged to meet up for a beer with a man who has spent some considerable time attending the inquest. He knows the families and lawyers well, is very well informed as to how proceedings are going and has some power behind the scenes. Starting that night and continuing to the present day, we referred to him as the Man In The Pub, (the MITP), as he wishes to remain anonymous and we continue to respect that wish.

The purpose of meeting him that night was to learn first hand how things were progressing. Given his connections, we are a bit in awe of him if truth be told. Ade has met him a couple of times but that is pretty much that. We meet in a pub before we meet the MITP and Ade is looking glum. Until that point, we had all been on the same page, aware of the jury only being asked about unlawful killing and happy we will soon see inquests with the right result

What's up Ade? He starts to explain that the MITP will know more, but it looks like the Coroner is trying to shaft us, trying to apportion a share of the blame on the fans. I stand in stunned silence, disbelieving what I am hearing. Why would he do that we ask, and plenty of theories abound. Another bent freemason? A mate of the SYP. He's been knobbled? Who knows but one thing we are adamant of is we aren't just going to accept a share of the blame and go “Ok then”.

The MITP turns up slightly later and confirms our worst fears. The Coroner has introduced a question, number 7 of 14, specifically relating to fan behaviour. “Did the fans cause or contribute to the deaths.” Worse, he has introduced a supplementary question, “If not, may the fans have caused or contributed...?”

What does 'may have' mean? We either did, or we didn't. What the fck does 'may have' mean? Tell me one case where a jury has been asked whether something 'may have' happened? It's ambiguous and it's an invitation to the jury to shit on us. We come to the conclusion we are being set up, set up to take a share of the wrap due to a Coroner who seems to think we will accept it. There will be an almighty shitstorm if we cop the blame. People won't be able to cope with it. Some survivors over the years have committed suicide, you want half a dozen more? Just to keep a load of bent SYP happy and placate their legal team? Really?

The implicit trade off seems to have been done, The families get unlawful killing, the SYP get to say that the crush outside the turnstiles was caused by the fans, not their own incompetent lack of planning.

We promise the MITP that we are not idiots. We may not have the influence of top lawyers etc. but we are all intelligent, educated and most key, we are determined. We are not being labelled murderers, it is isn't happening. We all agree we need to influence the Coroner, we need to make sure he understands that if he shits on the fans, there will be an almighty shitstorm.

And so it started, 5 determined Survivors, Survivors with attitude start to work on a plan. How can we get the message to the Coroner that he can't just shit on us. We may not be represented at the inquests, we may not have legal teams defending our corner, but you are going to get the most almighty shitstorm if we are labelled murderers, solely on the basis of the testimony of corrupt SYP officers.

Couple of corrections / ammendments

Am not going to change previous posts, but some things to correct in previous blogs.  Things I have learned from evidence in the inquests since writing my accounts:

On the day....

More fans died in Pen 3 than Pen 4.  I thought it was the other way round.

The timing of the barrier going is interesting.  In the blog I mention Beardsley hitting the bar.  I was actually out at that point as I have seen a photo of me outside the pens at 3.03pm.   That means the barrier went before Beardsley hit the bar.  I was stood in front of it, so know it went.  It may have broken in stages as I know many people believe it was the near miss that caused it to break.

I also mention Duckenfield first lying at 3.50pm.   Turns out he lied closer to 3.15pm.  Certainly when a number of the 96 were still fighting for their lives.  

WMP Interview

Don't think my interviewer was WMSCS - rather just an ordinary WMP copper.  That said, we know some WMSCS were on scene, so strongly suspect they were behind the counter narrative that was being pulled together.   

I wrote my blog before seeing my statements via the IPCC.  IT actually gets worse as they have added writing into the questionnaire after my interview.   The writing is in a different style to all the answers I made.

Worst is the answer to did I see fans drinking.  I replied yes and it is written as YES.   Then, in different style (Lower cursive writing, the YES and all other answers were written in block capital letters) is added the comment "Saw 50% of fans drinking"

This matters why?  Well for starters I never saw or said I saw 50% of fans drinking.   Secondly it matches the evidence of many dishonest SYP whose statements said exactly the same thing.  My statement was changed to match the SYP narrative.