"Unlawful Killing" - Thoughts on Hillsborough

The ninety six victims of 1989's Hillsborough disaster.

I was only six and a half years old.  But it remains one of my oldest, clearest memories.  I can vividly remember the moment my dad sat down in his armchair, on 15th April 1989, to watch the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, played out at Sheffield Wednesday's Hillsborough Stadium.  I was sitting on the floor, playing with toys, not really paying much attention to what Dad was watching.  At least, not until I noticed his brow furrow.  Not until I saw him sit forward in his seat, concerned eyes fixed to the screen.  Not until I heard him say: "Something's gone wrong."

Something did go catastrophically wrong, that day.  As the tragic events unfolded live on television, commentator John Motson announced that he'd been given information that the disaster had been caused by Liverpool fans without tickets, breaking down a gate and forcing their way into the stadium.  But the information he was given was false.  The world now knows - as it should have twenty seven years ago - that that gate was not forced down by violent Liverpool supporters.  It was opened by the police, who offered no direction to the thousands of fans who then went straight forwards down the narrow tunnel into the Leppings Lane end of the stadium, into two already dangerously over-crowded pens.  The police officer in charge, David Duckenfield, confessed in this final inquest into the tragedy, that he hadn't given any thought as to where the thousands of fans outside the stadium would go, upon the gate being opened.  He hadn't thought to close off the tunnel leading to the central pens opposite and direct the fans to the sides of the stadium, instead.  Because of this sheer lack of foresight, those fans headed straight down that tunnel and into a nightmare.  Ninety four people died as a result of the resulting crush, with two more dying from their injuries in the days and years that followed.  

Ninety six people went to a football match on a bright, Spring day.  They never came home.  And for years, their families suffered the heartbreak of those ninety six deaths being blamed on fan violence.  Lies were told about the Liverpool supporters being drunk, stealing from the dead and hampering the police efforts to assist the injured and dying.  It wasn't enough that those families had lost their loved ones in the most shocking, horrific manner.  Now, they had to hear senior police officers and members of the press blame the tragedy on the very people who'd been caught up in it.

Those families showed incredible strength as they refused to accept that version of events.  They campaigned with dignity and passion to have the truth unearthed.  And this week, after almost three decades of tireless fighting, they got it: "Unlawful killing."

Hillsborough Justice Campaign logo

The final inquest into Hillsborough took two years to reach its completion.  Over the course of those two years, the families of those who lost their lives that day in April twenty seven years ago - as well as several survivors of the tragedy - finally heard the catalogue of errors by senior police officials in the run-up to the game.  They finally heard the enormous mistakes that were made on the day.  But, crucially, they finally heard how those facts had been covered up and lies told to absolve those responsible from blame.  They heard how police statements, in which officers at the game admitted to poor direction from those in charge, were altered.  They heard how the story of drunken, violent fans was concocted immediately, with police officers being told to grill the families of those killed as to how much the victims had had to drink that day.  Medical professionals were even told to test the blood of every single victim for alcohol, despite the fact that the youngest killed was only ten years old.  They heard firsthand evidence that, contrary to the despicable smear conducted by the police and the press, the Liverpool fans who attended that fateful football match had behaved incredibly well, with many rushing to help those who were trapped in the ensuing crush.  They heard that the Hillsborough Stadium didn't even have a valid safety certificate at the time of the disaster.

A human error is one thing.  A mistake - however horrifying - can be admitted to and, in time, forgiven, if the person who made it shows contrition.  But for years after Hillsborough, those whose actions - or inaction - led directly to the deaths of 96 innocent people, maintained their lies.  It took twenty seven years - and an official inquiry, private prosecutions and more than one inquest - for the full truth to finally come out.  Twenty seven years to get any kind of justice for those people who only wanted to go to see their team play a football match and paid for it with their lives.  Twenty seven years in which those left behind had to keep hearing the same lies retold over and over, repeated by everyone from senior MPs to tabloid journalists.  That it took so long for those lies to be unmasked is difficult to comprehend and deeply, deeply troubling.

Everton's tribute to the 96, in 2012, following a report into the Hillsborough disaster.

From a young age, we're taught to respect the police.  We see them as people who will help us if we're in need.  People who protect us.  And yes, there were many officers at Hillsborough that day who worked tirelessly to try to save lives and assist survivors.  But, right at the very top, there were senior officers from South Yorkshire Police Force who, from the very first minutes after the tragedy began to unfold, were seeking to place blame where it did not belong, in order to cover their own backsides.  And they didn't just lie, they needlessly smeared the victims, survivors and other Liverpool supporters.  They referred to them as a "tanked-up mob."  They suggested that the Liverpool fans were drunken, violent thieves.  The press accepted those lies as truth and published them, whilst those who were truly guilty of causing the deaths of 96 people continued with their lives unaffected.  Senior politicians repeated those lies, whilst the families of the victims continued their dignified pursuit of the truth.  In short, what took place at Hillsborough led to one of the most shameful cover-ups in British history.  Yesterday's verdict finally gave us the truth and exonerated those who had been so viciously smeared:  The 96 fans who died as a result of the crush at Hillsborough stadium were unlawfully killed.  The Liverpool supporters did nothing to bring on the disaster.

As I said, mistakes can be apologised for and rectified.  The opening of the gate and the failure to close off the tunnel to the central pens could, if you're being lenient, be referred to as a mistake.  But the resulting cover up was no mistake.  It was a cold, calculated attempt to escape blame by instead placing it on the shoulders of those who were no longer there to defend themselves.  And, for a shamefully long time, it worked.  Plenty of people from all walks of life fell for the lies and the smears. 

But then the tide began to turn.  Then, we finally started to listen to the families of those who never returned from that football match.  We started to question what we were being told about events that day.

Now, the families finally have the verdict they always believed their loved ones deserved.  The complicated web of lies spun by South Yorkshire Police and the press have been sensationally unpicked for all to see.  

But there is more that needs to be done.  96 people were unlawfully killed and an elaborate cover-up staged; those responsible need to be brought to justice.

Floral tributes at Hillsborough.

We have to send a very clear message that the people of Britain will never stand for another cover-up on this scale.  We must ensure that those with blood on their hands - who spent so many years trying to evade the truth - are brought to account.

As a six and a half year old girl, I sat on the floor of the lounge, watching the tragedy at Hillsborough unfolding, thinking: "That's someone's Daddy."  Fifty eight children lost a parent that day.  Thirty eight of the victims were children or teenagers.  We use the term "the ninety six," but we must never forget that these were people, not numbers.  They were parents, brothers, sisters, friends and partners, all with hopes, dreams and families awaiting their safe return.  That safe return never came and the responsibility for those ninety six deaths rests upon shoulders that have yet to face any real consequences for the events of that day.

Imagine losing a loved one in a shocking, violent manner and being force-fed lies about how and why they died.  That's what happened to the families of those killed at Hillsborough.  The cover-up shames our police, our press and every single politician who repeated the lies, or insisted there was no need for further investigation into the disaster. 

Now, we know the truth in no uncertain terms.  And we must applaud the dignified, determined campaign led by the families of those lost at Hillsborough, for never giving up hope that the full truth would, one day, come out.  We must honour the memory of those whose lives were taken so needlessly, by ensuring that none of this ever happens again.  

Only by moving forward in a world where justice prevails and where those responsible for human tragedy are not allowed to simply wash their hands of guilt, can we truly show the families of the men, women and children who died at Hillsborough, that they do not - and will never - walk alone.

Ched Evans: A Few Thoughts.

Ched Evans.  Convicted of rape in 2012.

For the last few months, we seem to have been in an endless state of anticipation, waiting to see which football club might sign Ched Evans.  But this is no ordinary transfer window signing.  This is no casual spectator entertainment.  Or at least it shouldn't be.  Each and every club that so much as moots the idea of an interest in signing Evans has been met with an outcry and threats from sponsors to pull out of lucrative deals.  Each and every club that has expressed an interest in signing Evans has, therefore, pulled out of the deal well before it was finalised.  Why?  Because Ched Evans is a convicted rapist.  Footballers are, no matter who wants to argue to the contrary, role models.  Young kids watching will quickly pick a favourite player whose skills they want to emulate.  For me (yes, I'm a girl who likes football, try to look less shocked), it was Alan Shearer and Teddy Sheringham.  The thought of youngsters looking up to Ched Evans leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.  As did his recent "apology."  Why?

Well, firstly, were I a parent, I wouldn't want my child looking up to someone who has been tried in a court of law for the despicable crime of rape and who has been found guilty.  Evans is currently putting his case up for appeal again.  To date, he has attempted this twice before and had the appeal rejected out of hand.  Four - yes, four - judges have dismissed the idea that there is any further evidence that could prove his innocence and instead have chosen to agree with the guilty verdict reached in the original trial.

It's not hard to see why.  It's difficult to imagine what further "evidence" Evans could possibly present that would overturn the original verdict.  After all, this isn't a man who denies ever meeting his victim, or who claims that they consensually went back to his place together.  This is a man who openly admits that he "stepped over" the victim when he saw her lying on the floor of a kebab shop, in a state of non-sobriety.  This is a man who was in a taxi home with his brother and a friend when a second footballer (cleared of rape) sent him a text that said simply "got a bird."  This is a man who decided that text was an invitation and turned up at the hotel he knew his friend would be taking the victim to (having actually booked the room for him, earlier, with the express intention of finding a woman to have sex with).  This is a man who openly admits to lying to the hotel receptionist, in order to get a key to the room.  This is a man who knew that his friend would be in the room with the "bird" he had picked up, quite probably naked and engaged in sexual activity, yet let himself into the room to watch and allowed his brother to attempt to film the events through the hotel window.  This is a man who then "got involved" (his words) and had sex with a victim who told the court that she was so drunk by this point that she couldn't have consented and that she had no recollection of what had been done to her when she awoke the following morning, confused and in a strange place.  And this is the man we want to reward with a high-profile job as a sportsman?  A position which would make him a role model?!

First use of my big "no" of 2015!

Supporters of Evans - and he has many - will tell you that those who don't wish to see him back playing professional football whilst on license as a convicted rapist (he was released after serving half his sentence and can be recalled to prison if he breaks the terms of his release) are an "angry mob," who don't believe in rehabilitation and who wish to see him jobless for the rest of his life.  That simply isn't true.

Firstly, rehabilitation is something that can only be achieved if a person accepts that they committed a crime and that it was wrong.  I absolutely believe in rehabilitation and I'm not sure I would want to live in a society that didn't.  But Ched Evans believes he's innocent.  He doesn't think that lying in order to get into a hotel room in which a woman who hadn't given consent for him to be there is wrong.  He insists that the girl consented to the sexual intercourse they had, despite evidence proving that she was - as she claims - heavily intoxicated and unable to give clear consent.  He doesn't see a problem with the events of that night in 2011, after which he fled via a fire escape so as not to be spotted.  Coincidentally, his friend Clayton McDonald (the second footballer mentioned) may have been cleared of rape, but his actions - picking up a drunk girl for sex and allowing a friend to barge in and "get involved," whilst others tried to film the events through the window, before leaving said girl unattended the following morning - make him equally morally reprehensible in my view.  But as I mentioned, Ched Evans doesn't seem to have a problem with any of the above.  How can a man be rehabilitated if he views himself as having done nothing wrong?

For three years, following the events of that night in 2011, Ched Evans maintained his innocence (and continues to do so).  In statements to the press at the time, his only apologies were reserved for his girlfriend (now fiance) for "cheating on her."  So, as I mentioned earlier, it leaves a rather bitter taste in my mouth that Evans has conveniently chosen now - after several clubs have pulled out of prospective signings amid public outrage - to suddenly apologise to "the woman in question" for "the effects of that night in Rhyl."  Laughably, he also claimed to "condemn" the actions of the many, many trolls who've publicly named and shamed his victim, sending her rape and death threats and causing her to have to change her name and address multiple times.  However, this is utterly hypocritical.  Evans' own cousin was one of the people ordered to pay compensation to the victim, after she named her on Twitter and referred to her as "a money-grabbing slut."  His own mother has also made derogatory remarks about the victim, as has Evan's fiance, Natasha Massey.  Perhaps most disturbingly, Natasha's father, Karl Massey has funded a website, full of "evidence" that Evans' victim is a liar and a money-grabber, even going so far as to post a CCTV video of her entering the hotel with Clayton McDonald on the night in question and suggesting that she doesn't look drunk enough for her "too drunk to consent" argument to stand up in court (except it did, because Evans was found guilty) and potentially identifying her, despite her right to anonymity.  Considering the defamatory nastiness written about the victim online, ruining her life and meaning she didn't even spend this Christmas with her family out of fear, the website even goes a step further and asks people to provide "evidence" about the girl that could clear poor old Ched's name.  It doesn't take a genius to work out that the "evidence" Karl Massey and Evans' other supporters are looking for is anything that makes the victim look bad.  Karl Massey is - for reasons I genuinely can't get my head around, because there's no way my father would be protecting a boyfriend who'd cheated on me and been found guilty of rape - even offering to pay for a football club to take on his future son-in-law.  He promised Oldham Athletic that he would make up any financial shortfall they suffered, should their sponsors pull out of advertising deals as a result of Ched Evans signing for the club.  He even offered to pay Evans' wages.  So whilst Ched himself puts out a supposed heartfelt apology (three years too late), it's somwhat ludicrous to claim that he's distancing himself from those seeking to discredit and attack his victim, when his own family and future in-laws are amongst those doing the discrediting.  If he was really concerned for her well-being, he'd have told Massey to take down the website.  I just checked and it's still there, still requesting "evidence" against the victim's character and making her out to be the "money-grabbing slut" Evans' cousin was so quick to bad-mouth online.  You only have to search for Ched's name on Twitter and you soon come across men referring to his victim as a "drunken slag" and a "lying slut."  Evans may want to distance himself from these trolls, but the very website his father-in-law is bank-rolling is making pretty much the exact same claims, only with fancier wording.  That, combined with the fact that Evans has only chosen to apologise to his victim now, when he's probably getting fed up of not being able to waltz back into his footballing career, rather than at the time of his arrest, or even his release from prison, makes the whole thing look like a carefully scripted PR stunt, rather than anything remotely genuine.  And that means that rehabilitation is a long way off.

I am apparently a member of an "Angry Mob."  I read the papers every day...

The second charge levelled at those of us who believe that Evans was rightly found guilty of rape is that we don't want him to ever work again.  That's simply not true.  As I said before, I believe in rehabilitation.  If Evans could admit to what he did - and it doesn't help that he has his father-in-law throwing so much cash at his "CHED IS INNOCENT" campaign - then he could begin rehabilitation.  If he was willing to speak to professionals who work with rape victims, in order to really rehabilitate himself and learn why what he did was so vile, I would think that was an honourable thing to do.  If he wanted to use his celebrity to speak out against rape, perhaps even to do some voluntary work at an associated charity (although I admit I don't know what the likelihood of that even being allowed is, given that he's a convicted rapist), then from that point I would consider whether he could begin working towards a return to football.  Perhaps in those circumstances, others - if they believed his admission and his actions were genuine - might feel similar.

However, Evans is, despite his more than likely solicitor-scripted apology, unrepentant.  As I've already said, that makes rehabilitation improbable, if not downright impossible.  Evans himself has referred to being a professional footballer as a "rare and extraordinary privilege."  Indeed it is.  Like I mentioned earlier, it's a position in which you become a role model.  A hero even, if you're a scorer of many goals, as Evans was before all of this.  So do I think a man who sees nothing wrong in his actions that night in 2011 should be afforded the "rare and extraordinary privilege" of returning to a position in which youngsters may look up to him?  No.  But nor do I think he should never work again.  We live in a society in which rehabilitation is available and Evans should make a return to some form of employment, not only for his own benefit, but to show he's contributing to society.  But he should not simply be handed a job that makes him an idol.  Especially not when he's insistent that he did nothing wrong.

Someone suggested earlier that I have double standards - I think Evans should be rehabilitated into society eventually and given a job, just not as a footballer.  Well, I dispute that as a double standard.  It's simply a case of not wanting to reward a convicted, as yet unrepentant rapist with a "rare and extraordinary privilege."  Nobody is stopping Evans from getting a job elsewhere, away from the celebrity limelight.  If that seems hypocritical of me, let's remember:  Evans is on the sex offenders register as a result of his being found guilty.  Football is a world that attracts fans of all ages, including impressionable young women.  Would you really want a convicted rapist in that world, with all that world entails?!  There's a reason that those who work in teaching can never go back to the profession if found guilty of any form of sexual assault.  They can go and attempt to find employment, but not in the career path they had been on beforehand.  Similarly, Evans could find gainful employment somewhere.  Just not in a job where he'd be feted and seen as a role model to impressionable fans.

Those who believe that Evans is guilty of rape may be loud in their views (although if there's even a grain of truth that Oldham Athletic received rape threats from his detractors then I condemn them as thoroughly as I condemn Evans himself), but I don't believe that we're an angry "mob," as Evans suggested in his "apology."  I believe that we're people disappointed that the events of that night in Rhyl haven't been seen as being as morally repugnant as they were.  I believe that we're people who don't wish to see an unrepentant man rewarded with a speedy return to his career, whilst his victim lives in hiding, under constant attack from trolls and abusers.  I believe that we're people who know what rape culture is and how this case - and the way some of Evans' supporters have reacted to it (some have taken to Twitter to exclaim "I'd proper Ched Evans that bird," as though using his name as a euphemism for sex, possibly without consent, is somehow acceptable) emphasises the problem we have with it.  And as for Ched's victim?

I believe her.