Duckenfield Pointless Trial ?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40432671
read the part about gross negligence manslaughter, especially this bit:
"Secondly, the jury must be sure that the individual's decisions - or lack of action - breached that duty and caused the death. It can't just be a case of a simple mistake - prosecutors have to prove that the defendant's behaviour was so bad as to be reprehensible and outside what a reasonable person would do in the same position. " - QED a turkey shoot for any half decent brief. I'd say he's 99% likely to be acquitted, looks like another huge waste of public resources, as usual the CPS mess up and their lawyer buddies make a fortune out of the public.

[jackthehat]

Better wait for the trial....

At least, and at last, someone is finally going to be held to account in a court of law.

[agchristie]

99%??

There have been many twists and turns in the last 28 years that I am predicting nothing.

[ToraToraTora]

doesn't matter who eh JTT? just someone?

[ToraToraTora]

"prosecutors have to prove that the defendant's behaviour was so bad as to be reprehensible and outside what a reasonable person would do in the same position" - mmmm

[Mamyalynne]

As someone (Dave I think) said on one of the numerous threads on this today - it's a disgrace this has dragged on so long.

The result will be what it is, trust me I don't brush it aside lightly I had family there, those who suffered (from all sides) need an end to it.

[agchristie]

Mamya - you can bet your bottom dollar that if there are any convictions there will be appeals.

I heard one relative on the news earlier saying he was frightened that they are going to be let down.

[ToraToraTora]

ag: "I heard one relative on the news earlier saying he was frightened that they are going to be let down. " - by that I assume they mean that the patsy my not be found guilty, speaks volumes, they want a guilty verdict regardless of the facts.

[Mamyalynne]

I'm quite sure appeals would follow any convictions, yes.

[Peter Pedant]

absolutely JTH- let's not prejudge the issue !

all 3Tz much vaunted bit means is that you have to show causation
that is his order to open the gate caused the deaths

a lot of it at the inquiry and I think any half decent brief blah blah blah would be able to do so

one of the leading cases is R v Adomako
http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Adomako.php

[Peter Pedant]

// they want a guilty verdict regardless of the facts.//
well of course they do - they are bereaved relatives who think their children/spouses should not have died and wouldnt have if it had been policed adequately
as 3T might write - f/ff/s - jesus wept ( mong-head etc)

[youngmafbog]

The whole thing is just a big show. We've not put up the lambs for sacrifical slaughter, only problem being that it may backfire.

Firstly I wonder how they will find a Jury that has not been influenced by the media?

Secondly how are they going to ensure the Jury see things in the light of the time it happened, not in todays enlightenment,technology, laws and regulations. (and hindsight)

I understand people want to understand why their loved ones died but sometimes it really is a series of things that come together to cause the disaster.

[chelle7272]

No most definitely not pointless. Let's see what the trial brings.

[ToraToraTora]

PP:"all 3Tz much vaunted bit means is that you have to show causation
that is his order to open the gate caused the deaths " - err no, did you read it? to show an error is not enough you have to show the "defendant's behaviour was so bad as to be reprehensible and outside what a reasonable person would do in the same position. " - let he who is without sin etc, what would any of us done? He'd have had to something much worse than merely open some gates in the hope it would ease the situation. What would have happened had he not opened the gates? I suspect, the same thing. We'd still be here trying to hang draw and quarter a bloke for trying to resolve a difficult situation.

[furrypusscat]

I agree with Mamy, there needs to be a closure for the sake of everyone who lost relatives & friends and for those who were there that witnessed the scenes that unfolded. The lies and cover up that have come to light since are an utter disgrace and prove how corrupt the legal services have been. Yes, it has been going on a very long time but the truth needed to come out and that is down to the persistence of the campaigning group.
As for the trial, anything can happen and it would be foolish to speculate.

[New Judge]

First of all, it is not at all certain that Mr Duckenfield will face trial at all. He has already been prosecuted once (in 2000, privately) for the offences and the jury was unable to agree. The Attorney-General could have had this prosecution transferred to the CPS (who could have halted it) but did not do so. Although the prosecution was allowed to remain on file he was assured that he would not face a further prosecution for the same maters. There is a hearing in the High Court in a week or two to determine whether he can be prosecuted again.

If he is prosecuted my prediction is that, whilst he might (and it’s a very big might) be convicted if jury members, even if properly directed, want to see a scapegoat as some others seem to do, he will certainly succeed in having his conviction overturned on appeal. He made a mistake. Lots of people make mistakes but, as has been succinctly explained by 3Ts, simply making a mistake does not lay one open to a serious criminal charge. Also in Mr Duckenfield’s favour is the fact that he was recently promoted and had virtually no experience or training in aspects of command at such events. That was not his fault; his superiors authorised his deployment to the match and he did as he was told.

None of that excuses his subsequent contention that he had not authorised the opening of the gates and that it was drunken fans that had forced their way in. But he’s not facing charges in connection with that. I would be extremely surprised if Mr Duckenfield is convicted and the conviction is upheld. In fact, although I have not read the full details, if Mr Duckenfield has a “Get Out of Jail Free” note (similar to those provided to many murderers of people during the Irish “troubles”) it would be manifestly unjust to see him prosecuted at all.

[ToraToraTora]

this is jjst the CPS playing to the crowd, almost no chance of a conviction. The CPS have many times demonstrated they are not fit for purpose.