Wednesday, August 17, 2011

#Hillsborough : Ther were TWO Taylor reports...

Snipped from article.

Major criticisms to levelled at the Taylor Report:

1. The fact that it was split into 'Interim' and 'Final' has led to a situation where the Final Report is seen as just that Taylor's final word on the subject of Hillsborough when in fact it about all seater stadia. Ask for the Taylor Report in any library and you are likely to be handed the Final Report. In effect this lessens the impact of the criticism of the police made in the Interim Report as this first report becomes lost over time.

2. The second major criticism of the Taylor Inquiry is that the evidence was not taken under oath. The long-term impact of this cannot be emphasised enough. It means that in any subsequent court proceedings where people have brought Taylor into the equation, the person presiding has diminished the evidence by stating that it was not sworn evidence. The inquests are probably the clearest example of this. So when Duckenfield admitted at the Inquiry that he had lied when he said that fans forced the gate open that statement has little or no validity as it was not said under oath.

In concluding many people feel that Taylor was well received in the first instance ( i.e. the Interim Report) because there seemed to be a real acknowledgement of the breakdown of police control. Perhaps it was politically expedient in the early days after the disaster when feelings were running so high to appear to be giving the people what they wanted. However, it clearly ended there. The Final Report was a shift away from away from the cause of the disaster and ever since families have been trying to regain the ground lost between the Interim Report and the present day.