Hillsborough trial: David Duckenfield 'unfairly singled out' for manslaughter prosecution, defence claims
Prosecution says match commander's 'extraordinarily bad' series of failings led to fatal crush
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
David Duckenfield has been “unfairly singled out” for prosecution over the Hillsborough disaster, his defence lawyer has claimed.
The match commander “was not equipped with special powers to anticipate things that everybody else didn’t,” Benjamin Myers QC told a jury at Preston Crown Court.
He added: “It can hardly be fair to judge Mr Duckenfield by different standards from everyone else.
“The prosecution are blaming him for ... events that can’t be attributed to the fault of any persons in particular.
“What happened on 15 April 1989 was brought about by a combination of factors great and small, some with their roots in events years before and some that emerged in the hours and minutes before disaster struck.”
The prosecution had previously told the court that Mr Duckenfield’s “extraordinarily bad” failings as match commander was a substantial cause of the deaths.
Richard Matthews QC said it “required no hindsight” to realise the risk of a fatal crush in fenced pens at the Leppings Lane end of Hillsborough stadium.
Mr Duckenfield did not consider the consequences of an influx of thousands of Liverpool fans down a tunnel into the already overcrowded pens when he ordered a large gate to be opened to ease a separate crush outside the stadium, the court heard.
Prosecutors said he then failed to take action as the disaster was unfolding, with survivors and witnesses recalling how they shouted at police officers for help, and to be let out, but got no repsonse.
Excerpts of statements from officers were read showing that they were operating without orders from Mr Duckenfield, or the police control box, to try to manage crowds at the Leppings Lane end.
Even as the victims were being crushed to death, police communications played to the court suggested that some officers believed the incident to be a pitch invasion and responded accordingly.
When the match was stopped at 3.05pm, police triggered operation support, which was not a safety operation but a “contingency plan to deal with spontaneous disorder”.
Mr Matthews said: “No matter who else could have done better, done more, done things differently, Mr Duckenfield’s failures continued.
“Each flowed from his own decision making and fell squarely within his personal responsibility as match commander.
“Ultimately Mr Duckenfield failed in the most appalling manner to monitor what was happening in pens three and four, and to prevent or avert the inevitable consequence of the flow of many spectators into the central tunnel, crushing the life out of so many people.”
But speaking later on Thursday, Mr Myers told the jury a combination of factors “came together in catastrophic fashion … and to single out David Duckenfield is artificial and unfair”.
The defence lawyer said that the fencing that contributed to the disaster was common at football stadiums in the 1980s and that safety risks that may seem obvious now “were a fact of life in 1989”.
Mr Myers asked the jury to “keep in mind the danger of hindsight, the historical context and the possible unfairness of applying unreasonable standards to Mr Duckenfield from what is expected for others”.
Mr Myers pointed out that the prosecution has accepted that other people are at fault “but they are not accusing them of gross negligence manslaughter”.
He added: “You may be wondering how it can be fair to single out one man for prosecution when there are so many other people at fault – so are we. Looking back now, there may be things that could be done differently or better, and the same can be said for a good many people.”
Mr Myers said his client believes he was not negligent and “did his best”, and that “bad stadium design, bad planning, some aspects of crowd behaviour, some of police behaviour, and genuine human error” contributed to the disaster.
He reminded the jury that Mr Duckenfield is not representing South Yorkshire Police or any other agency, adding: “Our sympathy for others can never be a reason to convict another for events beyond his control or repsonsiblity.”
Mr Duckenfield, now 74, denies manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 victims.
There can be no prosecution over the death of the 96th victim, Tony Bland, as he died more than a year and a day after his injuries were caused.
Graham Mackrell, Sheffield Wednesday’s former club secretary, denies health and safety offences.
The trial continues.
Read our live coverage below:
Please allow a moment for the live blog to load
Mr Hicks recollects that just before kick-off, a second officer with a flat cap was on the steps of police control box being shouted at by fans to help pens three and four, but the officer "told him in no uncertain turns to shut up".
Mr Hicks moved towards pen 3 and saw his daughter Vicky being passed over a fence. Mr Matthews says he went on to the pitch and saw officers were lined up, as if reacting to a pitch invasion.
He saw both his daughters laid out on the ground and was later informed they had died.
The jury is also to hear from Ian McDermott who was in pen 3
He fell unconscious in the crush and came round on the floor of the terrace with "a lot of people on his legs" after being given CPR that saved his life
The jury has been shown a distressing photo of survivor Deborah Routledge being crushed against the front fence of the pen with her friend Lisa with a St John Ambulance man in front of them.
Miss Routledge was on the pitch by 3.15pm and had got out with help after someone allowed her to climb over his knees. At 3.23pm her friend Lisa Riding was removed from pen 3 into pen 2. She was brought onto the pitch and got up. She was placed on an advertising hoarding. Both women survived – others next to and around them did not, Mr Matthews says
David Cannon, a press photographer, described noticing "a girl against the fence, her face had gone blue" shortly after kick-off
"He realised something awful was happening," Mr Matthews said. "There was nothing he could do to help the people being crushed behind the fences ... he took photographs of what was the horrific scene with the remainder of the film in his camera. From the AV footage it is clear Mr Cannon took photographs from about 3.01 pm to about 3.05 pm. It is Mr Cannon’s recollection that he pressed a senior officer to stop the match."
Mr Matthews says video footage analysis shows that at least 23 of the deceased entered during the openings of Gate C and at least 42 have been identified on the video footage coming through turnstiles A to G.
Most of those who died lost their lives in Pen 3 – 85 have been identified as being recovered from Pen 3; 6 have been identified as having been in Pen 4 but it has not proved possible to identify from which pen six of those who lost their lives were situated.
"The difference between those who received fatal crush injuries and who survived crushing had little to do with when they entered the pens nor where they stood," Mr Matthews says
"Debra Routledge and Lisa Riding are two examples of those crushed who survived. Ian McDermott an example of someone who was revived by CPR."
Mr Matthews is giving examples of the wide differences between when and how the victims entered Hillsborough' stadium
Thomas Howard Junior, 14, and his father Thomas Howard senior, 39, came in together during the second, opening of Gate C at 14.52 and both died
Adam Spearitt, 14, entered gate C with his father and they both went into pen 3, but his father survived
Henry Rogers, 17, was shown at 2.56pm some distance from the front of the pen but was photographed near the front minutes afterwards
Victim David Brown was identified coming in through turnstiles at 2.11pm
Mr Matthews says: "IAnyone, showing a reasonable degree of care, who turned their mind to it, should have and would have recognised that there was an obvious risk of overcrowding from the uncontrolled entry of spectators into the concourse at the mouth of that tunnel if pens 3 and 4 were full ... That such overcrowding, if nothing were done to stop it or very swiftly done to alleviate it, would bring with it at the very least a serious risk of death is something that is established beyond argument."
Mr Matthews says survivors "escaped death by the narrow margin of fate in how and when they escaped the terrible effect of the crush"
"The press of persons was caused by David Duckenfield’s failures to know and understand the potential confining points of the stadium that confronted 24,000 people entering from the Leppings Lane end; to sufficiently monitor and assess the number of spectators yet to enter; to take action, in good time, to relieve the crowding pressures on and from those seeking entry , to sufficiently monitor and assess the number and situation of those in pen 3 and 4; and, finally, in good time to take action to prevent crushing of those persons in pen 3 and 4 by the flow of persons through the central tunnel."
The jury is being played footage from the time of the disaster until the match was stopped at 3.05pm. Images show fans pouring on the pitch and people lying unconscious or dead on the ground, surrounded by fellow fans.
At that time, the control box radioed for "Operation Support". As the disaster is still unfolding, fans can be heard booing that the match was stopped