Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Idiot.
    Have you not followed it at all?
    Ther were no evidence of ticketless fans. None. The thousands upon thousands of documents found not a shred of evidence for that. A 296 day inquest, the longest in British history found NO evidence of ticketless fans.

    It was entirely the police's fault for ordering the gate to be opened, not closing off the middle pen, preventing ambulances from reaching the dying people and then covering it all up using public money to make up stories about the fans.
    The Rush was due to the police ordering the gate to be opened and not directing people to the side pens.

    Actually read up on it.
    Watch out arguing with him. He's a supposed man of law.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moonstruck16)
    Watch out arguing with him. He's a supposed man of law.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I have done before. He's one who'd argue that black is white and try and justify it on some ridiculous technicality.

    He also outright lies. The 296 day inquest and thousands of documents found not a jot of evidence of ticketless fans. None. Nil. Nada.

    Yet two days after the trial he seems to have found this extra evidence that wasnt available. Strange.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    On that day at Hillsborough, Liverpool were playing Nottm Forest. In 1968 the main stand at the City Ground caught fire during a game between Forest and Leeds. The entire stand was evacuated onto the pitch. The fire was so intense all the club trophies were lost. Not a soul was injured.

    Why did 96 people die that day at Hillsborough? Because the pitch was surrounded by a cage to keep apart the thugs that had bedevilled English football for the previous 15 years.

    Why did the policeman panic and open the Leppings Lane gates? Because he feared that the Liverpool fans would try and force the gates for free entry and if they couldn't manage it they would riot. How reasonable were those fears? Every club knew that Liverpool fans would wait until just before a big game started and try and force the away end gates. Read any reminiscences about football in Merseyside before Hillsborough and there would be stories about forcing the gates or climbing the gates. Only 26 Liverpool fans were prosecuted after Heysel. Hundreds were involved. Where were the remainder on FA Cup semi-final day? No one at an English football match in 1989 would suggest that the fear of a riot was an unjustified one.

    At Heysel the Liverpool fans were angry that there seemed to be more space for Juventus fans because expat Italians had bought tickets for the neutral section. In the days leading up to Hillsborough, I was in Nottingham at the time, the radio was full of Liverpool fans angry that Forest had been given the bigger end despite having the smaller support.

    Hillsborough in 1989 wasn't in very good condition. But neither were the enormous stands at Twickenham; or the stands at Silverstone or Aintree or Epsom. Most sports grounds in the 1980s were in a very poor way. They were staging showjumping, speedway and dog racing before the 80 year old stands at White City. Only football grounds however were unsafe and that wasn't because of the infrastructure but because of the behaviour of the crowd.
    There was also a cover-up involving altered documents and CCTV footage 'gone missing'... which is IMO the main reason why this has been going on for so long.
    Probably it's swung to far in the direction of not blaming the liverpool crowds on the day enough... but the cops made mistakes and then acted badly.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    That's simply untrue. This inquest was only started in 2014. The original inquest was in 1989/1990.

    The reason all this is being raked up again is because on the 20th anniversary, Andy Burnham who was a senior minister in the Labour government decided to institute a new inquiry into the events (clearly for political reasons). That led to a chain of inquiries and a new inquest which we've just seen.

    The original inquest verdict in 1989/1990 was sound.
    You have to be on a wind up and it's a pretty tasteless one at that/
    A 'sound' verdict.
    Are you actually joking? Do you know nothing of the tragedy? It was a massive cover up of the police in which they invented stories of mass ticketlessness, and accused the fans of urinating on dying people. They prevented ambulances from entering the ground after 3-40 despite it since being proven that many of the 96 were still alive.

    In addition over 150 police statements were edited by the chief Constable to remove any negative comments towards the police.

    There was also huge amounts of evidence which was not allowed at the trial, like any evidence after 3-40 on the presumption they were all dead by then, something we know now is categorically not the truth.

    Do you think it's okay for our police to lie and cover up their failings and blame it on the public when their grossly negligent actions caused the deaths?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    LOL I love how they sang outside the courtroom.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You need to appreciate the history, claims, lies by police to understand why it has ‘rumbled’ on for so long with good reason. Fans were blamed by Police, suggestions in the press that some fans spent time going through pockets of dead fans and so much more.I agree that it was a tragic accident, there was no intention to injure or kill anyone.

    Extremely bad policing and fault with other emergency services caused more deaths than there should have been. But when those services, amend statements and try to cover up their actions you would expect as in every miscarriage of justice that people continue to campaign for truth.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Idiot.
    Have you not followed it at all?
    Ther were no evidence of ticketless fans. None. The thousands upon thousands of documents found not a shred of evidence for that. A 296 day inquest, the longest in British history found NO evidence of ticketless fans.

    It was entirely the police's fault for ordering the gate to be opened, not closing off the middle pen, preventing ambulances from reaching the dying people and then covering it all up using public money to make up stories about the fans.
    The Rush was due to the police ordering the gate to be opened and not directing people to the side pens.

    Actually read up on it.
    Well that's hardly surprising, I doubt the police went round checking tickets after the game. Jumping over turnstiles is the behaviour of fans with tickets? What about the estimated 150 or so who rushed in through gate c the first time it was opened to let someone out, is that what people with tickets do? The surveillance footage shows there were too many Liverpool supporters there.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moonstruck16)
    Watch out arguing with him. He's a supposed man of law.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I have done before. He's one who'd argue that black is white and try and justify it on some ridiculous technicality.

    He also outright lies. The 296 day inquest and thousands of documents found not a jot of evidence of ticketless fans. None. Nil. Nada.

    Yet two days after the trial he seems to have found this extra evidence that wasnt available. Strange.
    Haha awwww this is cute, I've got a little fan club.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Nobody ever blamed the south, Liverpool fans and the city has been treated like **** by the south Yorkshire police, governing bodies and some media and its about time we got some justice for the mistreatment
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    Well that's hardly surprising, I doubt the police went round checking tickets after the game. Jumping over turnstiles is the behaviour of fans with tickets? What about the estimated 150 or so who rushed in through gate c the first time it was opened to let someone out, is that what people with tickets do? The surveillance footage shows there were too many Liverpool supporters there.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You literally know nothing about the case.
    There was a 296 day inquest with thousands upon thousands of documents of evidence, hundreds of eye witnesses and there was not a shred of evidence of mass ticketlessness. Not one. It's amazing that you seem to have some, perhaps you should have gone to the inquest and presented it.

    The fans didn't 'jump over turnstiles' that's not what happened. The rush was caused by the police ordering the gate to be open and not closing off the middle pen despite the fact the police could see it was already full.
    You say there were too many fans, there were not. The side pens were relatively empty. If the police had done their duty of care and directed people to the side pens then none of this would have happened
    The reason they rushe through the gate is becaus the police ordered the gate to be open.


    Agai zero evidence of mass ticketlessness. None. The longest inquest in British history in a court of law admits that, even the police at this inquest admitted that yet you seem to think you have evidence that no one else has. Pretty amazing:

    And how about the police cover up? How about the cctv footage they took and destroyed? How about the hundreds of police statements they edited to remove an criticisms of the police? How about the fact they stopped ambulances coming on to the pitch when it was shown many of the 96 was still alive? How about the fact they invented stories about the fans such as them urinating on dead people when there is a jot of evidence? How about the fact that the police lied and said the fans forced the gate open when it was in fact opened by police on police orders?

    You've said some bizarre things but this takes the biscuit.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You literally know nothing about the case.
    There was a 296 day inquest with thousands upon thousands of documents of evidence, hundreds of eye witnesses and there was not a shred of evidence of mass ticketlessness. Not one. It's amazing that you seem to have some, perhaps you should have gone to the inquest and presented it.

    The fans didn't 'jump over turnstiles' that's not what happened. The rush was caused by the police ordering the gate to be open and not closing off the middle pen despite the fact the police could see it was already full.
    You say there were too many fans, there were not. The side pens were relatively empty. If the police had done their duty of care and directed people to the side pens then none of this would have happened
    The reason they rushe through the gate is becaus the police ordered the gate to be open.


    Agai zero evidence of mass ticketlessness. None. The longest inquest in British history in a court of law admits that, even the police at this inquest admitted that yet you seem to think you have evidence that no one else has. Pretty amazing:

    And how about the police cover up? How about the cctv footage they took and destroyed? How about the hundreds of police statements they edited to remove an criticisms of the police? How about the fact they stopped ambulances coming on to the pitch when it was shown many of the 96 was still alive? How about the fact they invented stories about the fans such as them urinating on dead people when there is a jot of evidence? How about the fact that the police lied and said the fans forced the gate open when it was in fact opened by police on police orders?

    You've said some bizarre things but this takes the biscuit.
    At what point did I claim to have evidence? You've got a habit of misquoting me.

    If you watch the video I'll link at the bottom you'll see plenty jumping the turnstiles. I notice you also ignored the point about the 150 rushing in through gate c the first time it was opened.

    What the video will also show is an estimated 5,000 people outside of the Leppings Lane stand trying to get in around 20 minutes before kickoff. There were 10,100 ticket holders for the stand. As someone who frequently attends football matches I can tell you there's no way half of the people with tickets would be outside that close to kickoff.

    I'm not disputing the police acted negligently, I'm saying they aren't the only people to blame.

    What's funny is you're so sure of this finding in a court room yet when we had a debate on rape a while ago you were no where near as keen to rely on a courts findings

    hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/repository/media/VID0002.html
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    At what point did I claim to have evidence? You've got a habit of misquoting me.

    If you watch the video I'll link at the bottom you'll see plenty jumping the turnstiles. I notice you also ignored the point about the 150 rushing in through gate c the first time it was opened.

    What the video will also show is an estimated 5,000 people outside of the Leppings Lane stand trying to get in around 20 minutes before kickoff. There were 10,100 ticket holders for the stand. As someone who frequently attends football matches I can tell you there's no way half of the people with tickets would be outside that close to kickoff.

    I'm not disputing the police acted negligently, I'm saying they aren't the only people to blame.

    What's funny is you're so sure of this finding in a court room yet when we had a debate on rape a while ago you were no where near as keen to rely on a courts findings

    hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/repository/media/VID0002.html
    150 people did not cause the crush. The pen should have been closed. Thousands of people rushing in after that police had orered the gate to be open did.

    You claimed it was caused by ticketless fans yet there is zero evidence that there were ticketless fans. None. The most comprehensive and lengthy inquest in British history and you seem to think they missed out on some evidence that only you have Because you go to football matches now apparently.

    The reason anyone jumped over a turnstile was not becaus they were ticketless but because there were 7 turnstiles for 10000 people which meant thousands would miss the start of the game.
    It was far too few turnstiles. I don't care if you've been to a football game before.
    What the police should have done as was common practice is ordered the kick off to be delayed. Instead they ordered the gate to be opened and did not close the main pen.

    It was the opening of the gate and not closing the middle pen which led to the rush and the deaths.
    The police then lied and covered it up. Which you have glossed over.

    The polices negligent actions caused the deaths. Firstly in not checking out the ground before and realising 7 turnstiles for 10000 people was not enough. Secondly for not delaying the kick off to prevent people rushing. Thirdly for opening the gate then claiming they didn't. Fourthly for not closing off the middle pen despite the fact the police could see it was full and instead when they should have directed people to the side pens where there was plenty of space. Fifthly for stopping ambulances entering the pitch when people were still alive.


    There is no evidence of mass ticketlessness. None. yet you seem to think there was. You seem to know what no one else does.

    You really will argue that black is white.
    To blame it on ticketless fans when's there is zero evidence of them having been there is pretty astonishing. Despite the fact the police have now admitted responsibility you seem to know better.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    150 people did not cause the crush. The pen should have been closed. Thousands of people rushing in after that police had orered the gate to be open did.
    I did't say that they did, I said that isn't the behaviour of fans with tickets.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You claimed it was caused by ticketless fans yet there is zero evidence that there were ticketless fans. None. The most comprehensive and lengthy inquest in British history and you seem to think they missed out on some evidence that only you have Because you go to football matches now apparently.
    So you also ignored the part where I said I didn't claim to have evidence? You seem to have a real problem with selectively reading as well as misquoting and putting words into peoples mouths.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    The reason anyone jumped over a turnstile was not becaus they were ticketless but because there were 7 turnstiles for 10000 people which meant thousands would miss the start of the game.
    It was far too few turnstiles. I don't care if you've been to a football game before.
    What the police should have done as was common practice is ordered the kick off to be delayed. Instead they ordered the gate to be opened and did not close the main pen.
    I wouldn't call delaying kick off a common practice, it very rarely happens. Even if we suppose it is true that they climbed over the turnstiles to make the start of the game (something you just explicitly denied happening) does that make it acceptable? Trespassing to make the start of a game is okay?

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It was the opening of the gate and not closing the middle pen which led to the rush and the deaths.
    The police then lied and covered it up. Which you have glossed over.
    I haven't glossed over it but it simply is irrelevant to my point. The police handled the situation awfully and I haven't said anything to the contrary. My point is that you can't remove all blame from the supporters.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    The polices negligent actions caused the deaths. Firstly in not checking out the ground before and realising 7 turnstiles for 10000 people was not enough. Secondly for not delaying the kick off to prevent people rushing. Thirdly for opening the gate then claiming they didn't. Fourthly for not closing off the middle pen despite the fact the police could see it was full and instead when they should have directed people to the side pens where there was plenty of space. Fifthly for stopping ambulances entering the pitch when people were still alive.
    Be realistic, how do you propose they would have announced this delay of kickoff to the estimated 5,000 people outside of the stadium? As for the ambulances that was, I'd imagine, because they did not recognise the severity of the situation. Being as they were police officers and not doctors that is not a breach of duty. A policeman doesn't have a duty to recognise the medical state of another person.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    There is no evidence of mass ticketlessness. None. yet you seem to think there was. You seem to know what no one else does.
    Show me where I explicitly said there is evidence of ticketlessness.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You really will argue that black is white.
    To blame it on ticketless fans when's there is zero evidence of them having been there is pretty astonishing. Despite the fact the police have now admitted responsibility you seem to know better.
    You argued there are tens of thousands of rape every year when there is no evidence to support that. What you seem to missing is just because there isn't evidence for something it doesn't make it untrue. You're also still ignoring the part where I explained that getting evidence for who had tickets and who didn't would have been virtually impossible, what were the police supposed to do? Go around checking all of the fans before letting them leave the stadium?
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    The families should be allowed to seek justice at least and now they have got some justice.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    The surveillance footage shows there were too many Liverpool supporters there.
    Not according to the Taylor Report, it doesn't.

    Before you dig the hole you are in any deeper I suggest you read this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-35473732
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    I did't say that they did, I said that isn't the behaviour of fans with tickets.



    So you also ignored the part where I said I didn't claim to have evidence? You seem to have a real problem with selectively reading as well as misquoting and putting words into peoples mouths.



    I wouldn't call delaying kick off a common practice, it very rarely happens. Even if we suppose it is true that they climbed over the turnstiles to make the start of the game (something you just explicitly denied happening) does that make it acceptable? Trespassing to make the start of a game is okay?



    I haven't glossed over it but it simply is irrelevant to my point. The police handled the situation awfully and I haven't said anything to the contrary. My point is that you can't remove all blame from the supporters.



    Be realistic, how do you propose they would have announced this delay of kickoff to the estimated 5,000 people outside of the stadium? As for the ambulances that was, I'd imagine, because they did not recognise the severity of the situation. Being as they were police officers and not doctors that is not a breach of duty. A policeman doesn't have a duty to recognise the medical state of another person.



    Show me where I explicitly said there is evidence of ticketlessness.



    You argued there are tens of thousands of rape every year when there is no evidence to support that. What you seem to missing is just because there isn't evidence for something it doesn't make it untrue. You're also still ignoring the part where I explained that getting evidence for who had tickets and who didn't would have been virtually impossible, what were the police supposed to do? Go around checking all of the fans before letting them leave the stadium?
    You almost couldn't make it up.
    Your initial point was that if it wasn't for ticketless fans the crush would not have happened. And your defence to that is you have no evidence that there were ticketless fans. Wow.

    So you're making a huge claim with not a jot of evidence to back it up. Not only was there not a jot of evidence the inquest unveiled huge amounts of counter evidence to show that such claims were fabricated by the police in a cover up which you admit happened.

    David Duckenfield could from his position or certainly should have seen that the middle pen was full. Yet he did not order the pen to be closed. He instead ordered the gate to be opened. That was grossly, grossly negligent.

    People were in a rush because they would have missed the kick off. Announcing that the kickoff would be delayed would certainly have eased the tension somewhat.
    Why was the middle pen not closed? Why did the police lie about opening the gate? Why did the police hide and destroy CCTV footage? Why did the police edit hundreds of statements to remove criticism of the fans? Why did the police test the blood alcohol levels of children as young as 10 to invent a narrative?
    Why did they make up stories about fans urinating on dead bodies?

    Yet you blamed it all on ticketless fans despite not having a shred of evidence that there were ticketless fans.
    The reason many were outside the ground was simply because there were not enough turnstyles. There were 7 turnstyles for 10,000 people. There were far too few and that was down to bad match planning by the police for not realising that.
    It was perfectly reasonable for fans to arrive half an hour before kick off. I do that. Normally in my seat about 10-15 minutes before kick off. The problem here wasn't the fans, it was the lack of turnstyles. 7 for 10,000 people and that shows how badly the police planned it.
    Police by the way do have a duty not to prevent a dying person receiving treatment.

    You even admit you have no evidence yet you are still claiming that there were huge numbers of ticketless fans despite NOTHING proving that and the police themselves now taking responsibility.

    There's nothing to blame the supporters for. The police didn't inspect the ground before the game. The police didn't delay the kick off. The police ordered the gate to be opened then denied they did. The police didn't close off the middle pen when they could see it was full. The police stopped ambulances from getting on to the pitch. The police lied about it all and engaged in a huge cover up, perverting the course of jutice in the process.
    What part of that did the supporters do?

    A 296 day inquest found no evidence which indicated the supporters were to blame. They found no evidence of mass ticktelessness yet you seem to be challenging that and your argument is based on the fact you have no evidence.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    ITV news kept going on and on about it. I'm happy the families have got justice though.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Not according to the Taylor Report, it doesn't.Before you dig the hole you are in any deeper I suggest you read this:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-35473732
    So its reasonable for Lord Justice Taylor to say that small groups of people turned up without tickets but not have any evidence of that but I can't say large numbers of people didn't? He also shows a lack of knowledge of football; it might be reasonable from a legal stand point to turn up fifteen minutes before kick off but anyone who goes to football matches regularly would know that isn't a good idea. At no point have I denied the situation was poorly managed by the police but to take all responsibility away from the fans is ridiculous. Like I've also said, even if people did have tickets they were still trespassing in order to get into the game on time which would have added to the crisis. The tickets also would have had allocated areas of the stand. Instead of doing as the ticket instructed some fans simply rushed to the nearest spot they could find which caused the crush.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You almost couldn't make it up.
    Your initial point was that if it wasn't for ticketless fans the crush would not have happened. And your defence to that is you have no evidence that there were ticketless fans. Wow.
    You seem to mistaking lack of evidence for lack of existence. I've explained, using logic, why it is almost inevitable that fans didn't have tickets but still tried to get in. Even some of those who did have tickets either trespassed or ignored the area of the stand they had been allocated.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    So you're making a huge claim with not a jot of evidence to back it up. Not only was there not a jot of evidence the inquest unveiled huge amounts of counter evidence to show that such claims were fabricated by the police in a cover up which you admit happened.
    There was no counter evidence. Counter evidence would only have been possible if they had gone round and actually checked who had tickets and who didn't. There was evidence that the police said people didn't have tickets but didn't truly know how many did and how many didn't.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    David Duckenfield could from his position or certainly should have seen that the middle pen was full. Yet he did not order the pen to be closed. He instead ordered the gate to be opened. That was grossly, grossly negligent.

    Why was the middle pen not closed? Why did the police lie about opening the gate? Why did the police hide and destroy CCTV footage? Why did the police edit hundreds of statements to remove criticism of the fans? Why did the police test the blood alcohol levels of children as young as 10 to invent a narrative?Why did they make up stories about fans urinating on dead bodies?
    Stop making irrelevant comments. I haven't denied the police handled the situation badly, in fact I've explicitly said they did. The mistakes of the police are not what I'm contending, I'm arguing that some of the fans must bear some responsibility.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    People were in a rush because they would have missed the kick off. Announcing that the kickoff would be delayed would certainly have eased the tension somewhat.
    But how do you propose they announce it? Shout to 5,000 people?

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Yet you blamed it all on ticketless fans despite not having a shred of evidence that there were ticketless fans.
    The reason many were outside the ground was simply because there were not enough turnstyles. There were 7 turnstyles for 10,000 people. There were far too few and that was down to bad match planning by the police for not realising that.
    It was perfectly reasonable for fans to arrive half an hour before kick off. I do that. Normally in my seat about 10-15 minutes before kick off. The problem here wasn't the fans, it was the lack of turnstyles. 7 for 10,000 people and that shows how badly the police planned it.
    That was a contributing factor but not the only cause. Had people not trespassed (both by jumping over the turnstiles and by going to a part of the stand that they weren't allocated) then there would have been less of a problem.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Police by the way do have a duty not to prevent a dying person receiving treatment.
    1. I'm not sure that's strictly true, I'm not aware of any case that has ever held that. 2. I said police don't have a duty to recognise the medical state of another person.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You even admit you have no evidence yet you are still claiming that there were huge numbers of ticketless fans despite NOTHING proving that and the police themselves now taking responsibility.
    Yes because the police are partially responsible so it's only fair they do.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    There's nothing to blame the supporters for. The police didn't inspect the ground before the game. The police didn't delay the kick off. The police ordered the gate to be opened then denied they did. The police didn't close off the middle pen when they could see it was full. The police stopped ambulances from getting on to the pitch. The police lied about it all and engaged in a huge cover up, perverting the course of jutice in the process.
    What part of that did the supporters do?
    As I've said numerous times the supporters trespassed which worsened the situation.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    A 296 day inquest found no evidence which indicated the supporters were to blame. They found no evidence of mass ticktelessness yet you seem to be challenging that and your argument is based on the fact you have no evidence.
    I don't see why you're so focused on the length of time. Inquests and trials go on for as long as it is seen necessary to examine the relevant evidence. Having a longer inquest or trial doesn't mean that a more thorough examination of the evidence has occurred it just means there was more presented.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    So its reasonable for Lord Justice Taylor to say that small groups of people turned up without tickets but not have any evidence of that but I can't say large numbers of people didn't?
    The thing is, he didn't say that without any evidence. His conclusions followed an exhaustive inquiry that considered a great deal of evidence about the matter. You, by contrast, have stated you have no evidence at all to back up your position. Can you understand the difference, and why it makes you look foolish and ill-informed?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ladymusiclover)
    ITV news kept going on and on about it. I'm happy the families have got justice though.
    Like all the media do about any major news headline.

    Give it a week and they'll be on to something else.

    The media has an attention span < a goldfish.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.