Trevor Hicks just been on BBC news calling for an umbrella 'hit squad' to carry forward the inquiries for justice henceforward. Trevor, I bow to you and the Hillsborough groups experience, perservernce and dilligence over the last 20 years (I hope Hicks stands for police commissioner of Liverpool, should we decide to have one) but he's suggesting having police and judges on it. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The last 23 years has proven that it's like putting the SS in charge of an inquiry into Auschwitz. Keep the police and judiciary out of it.
The Independent Panel had a former NI senior police officer advising on police procedures. I understand the need for some sort of body taked with ensuring that the 'justice programme' does not get lost in a morass of legal or political procedures.
And as hard as it may be, we have to allow a new generation of police etc to prove they really have moved on & become the public servants they should always have been. You can guarantee that the situation focus wise is now completely reversed. Everyone will be looking for any hint of a fudge or cover up in the new criminal investigations. You might actually find the new criminal proceedings will have to be careful not to step outside the law in an attempt to get justice. The last thing we want is some of these bast*rds getting away on appeal because of a technicality.
You just saved me 5 minutes writing those sentiments out (less eloquently than yourself) There is an inherent danger that by not involving them could lead to whoever is involved overcompensating to take their side into account. It might seem far fetched after this past week but there has to surely be a few honest, good and fair men left within the "establishment". The good thing is the families now have the best legal support imaginable. I guess we have to trust their judgement on it.
I'm not so sure frank. The law is a very strange beast indeed. Some of it's senior practitioners are more concerned with letter of the law itself than they are with the concept of justice. If I were paying an advocate to plead my case then I would want/expect him/her to do the job as well as possible - even if that did mean that justice was perverted.
Putting the police in charge of an investigative panel is like putting Hitler in charge of a barmitzvah. They should be kept away for it, and then nothing whatsover will be hidden.
There does seem to be an attempt by police everywhere to distance themselves from the discredited South Yorkshire police. But we were lied to just recently by an inquiry into phone hacking, with the complicity of the Met and officers who took bribes, that there was only one rogue reporter at a Murdoch newspaper now closed down after the truth came out. It makes me wonder what else we've been lied to about and very uncertain of any officer's integrity.
It's a double-edged sword. You need people of authority to be on the "squad", but with the distrust surrounding the police force it will be hard. Then again they could always get a foreign force to assist.
I'd trust a selection of Colombian, Burmese and Apartheid -era South African police to be less corrupt than ours (and judiciary). Get the danes or New Zealanders to do it. People who could show our Establishment how not to be bent.
So long as there are no personal or professional interests and everything in transparent, I don't see the problem
It is quite difficult for one to keep totally objective if there are terrible consequences for your profession. The minimum should be that any police or judiciary member of that panel should have had no prior involvement with hillsborough and no involvement whatsoever with any of the players. However I agree with Darko I would not have any member of the police or judiciary. They have the ability to sway the committee their way and it takes a very strong committee to go against them. Why do you think ll the previous panels and inquiries got it so wrong?
Hence me saying no professional interest. In other words, any officer should be from a different section of the country that as absolutely nothing to do with South Yorkshire Police, West Midlands Police or Merseyside Police (not involved but would more than likely have a personal interest and would certainly effect they views or job depending on the outcome). It would be easier to not have a member of the police or judiciary involved though
There is the question of brotherhood and betraying your fellow peers and being ostracised ...the suggestion of getting a non Brit lawyer or police of international repute and unimpeachable integrity is a good one...
Fair point. However, I think with any acting person having seen the way the public have reacted to the people that have been deceitful, they would be unlikely to want to repeat that act
ok ok... so i know guys have issues here but be practical.... if you want people CONVICTED, LOCKED UP, or at minimum OUTED IN AN INQUEST then sorry but the police and judicary have to be leading it.. thats a fact of life and how the law works. with orders from on high to do the job right not to cover up then theres some chance but i still beleive no cop will ever be put in court over this.
Let's be honest here. This far removed from the incident itself, the chances of ANYBODY being locked-up are very very slim. That individuals will be covicted and/or judged as culpable is possible. That various organisations will be found as being negligent is highly likely and serious fines imposed is also likely.
Given the role of James Jones in the enquiry, i think we should slow the steady trickle of antidisestablismentarianism in our society over the last century. The CofE (and I'm sure the RC could have played this role too) have shown themselves to be a more vital component of our country than many of the organisations that are supposedly here to defend us, and i say that as a non-church going humanist. And a pretentious twat who was determined to get that word into the debate....
antidisestablishmentarianism used to be the longest word in the English language. I've no idea what the record holder is now. The word itself was coined to describe those who opposed the movement to separate the Church of England from the State.
"antidisestablismentarianism" = record for the longest word EVER used in the Liverpool Board!! Thinking about it, is there a longer word in the Oxford dictionary?? Any one for a go at explaining what it means in less than half a dozen words?
