There are spikes on top of the gate. Which would suggest that climbing over it was something which wasn't advisable. Which didn't stop someone deciding they were going to go ahead anyhow. And when it went wrong it was everyone's fault but theirs. No doubt he might have dobevsomething similar with the floodlights if he had been about then.
Doubtful. There weren't as many ambulance chasers and health and safety people justifying their salaries in those days. It was still thought that people bore some responsibilty for the consequences of their actions.
Has the lad that climbed the gate contacted an ambulance chaser? Has he publically stated it was someone else's fault? The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
And many with the opposite view. Meanwhile at this time, as far as I'm aware, the lad himself has made no public comment, so is perhaps accepting he himself is responsible for own actions. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
If you took the trouble to read the posts that I made. You may see that I am posting about the liability cover that the SMC has to have. There has to be an expectation that someone may climb the gate. If there was no expectation why did they bother to put spikes on the gate?
There are only spikes on top because it's too short to be an anti terrorist gate. For it to be genuinely effective it needs to be taller to remove the temptation to climb it but you need planning for that. People need protecting from themselves because half of all humans are of below average intelligence.
It is a bit of a strange one, I assume West Park is still a park area, if so where does the boundary, if there is one, come, between the KCOM boundary and West Park? Are the SMC denying access to a public park area? If not, anyone scaling the gate are they trespassing on KCOM land? It all seems very woolly to me.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ice-officers-ride-dodgems-duty-Hull-Fair.html clearly no terror threat
Well done HDM... Sorry Sun but we think police officers had earned 5 minutes of fun at Hull Fair http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/sorry-sun-think-police-officers-637835
This is all about boundaries and the demarcation is very clear. The SMC has the lease of the KCOM, Airco and the Astro pitches. It has a right of way across West Park. West Park and the Fairground is still under the ownership of HCC. The bridge is a public pathway under the control of HCC but at the KCOM end it opens to land owned by HCC but leased to SMC.
No, its not. The Council could declare it one. The Council own the land and can agree with the declaration. There is a period of time for objections to be lodged. If the SMC, or anyone else, object it goes to the Secretary of State for a decision. Could take over a year for them to make a decision. It all depends on whether Brady has the balls to make the declaration. In the meantime the question of the gate's height and whether the SMC needs planning permission has to be settled.
Of course you have to wonder why in the years since the stadium was built no one has thought to have it declared a public right of way. Other than the incompetence and lack of forward thinking which everyone has come to expect from Hull councils down the years.
They wouldn't have envisaged this scenario though!! Would anybody on here have thought this would have happened a decade ago ???
It is reasonable for the Council to have assumed that the owner of the SMC wouldn’t act like a massive arsehole.
I suppose you think the Council should have realised that someone like Ehab Allam and his dad would one day be owner of the SMC when they did the deal with Adam Pearson. I think that would be a bit harsh. However I see no reason why they shouldn't declare it a public right of way now. As well as looking at terminating the lease. if they don't that may be incompetence, cowardice or just trying to please a well known Labour Party donor. the choice is yours.
