Jurors told to be ‘dispassionate’ considering Duckenfield verdict
JURORS IN the trial of Hillsborough match commander David Duckenfield have been told to be “cold, calm and dispassionate” when considering their verdict.
The retired Chief Superintendent, 75, denies the gross negligence manslaughter of 95 Liverpool supporters who were fatally injured in a crush on the terrace at the FA Cup semi-final on April 15, 1989.
Under the law at the time, there can be no prosecution for the death of the 96th victim, Tony Bland, as he died more than a year and a day after his injuries were caused.
As he began summing up the case at Preston Crown Court yesterday, judge Sir Peter Openshaw said: “The deaths of 96 spectators, many of whom were very young, is, of course, a profound human tragedy attended by much anguish and anger which for many has not passed with time.
“But, as both counsel have advised you and I will now direct you, as you go about your duty you must put aside your emotions and sympathies, either for the bereaved families or indeed for Mr Duckenfield, and decide the case with a cold, calm and dispassionate review of the evidence that you have heard in court.
“You should not be overawed by the seriousness of the charge or the public interest in the trial. English juries have, for centuries, heard and determined such cases.”
He told the seven women and three men on the jury the trial was taking place 30 years after the event.
Sir Peter said: “Such a delay is bound to place the defendant at a serious disadvantage in challenging allegations made years later.”
Sir Peter also told jurors the results of any other proceedings were irrelevant and they should decide whether the charge had been proved based on what they had heard or seen in court.
He told the jury football matches had a “very different atmosphere” in the 1980s because of “hooligan elements” within clubs.
The court was adjourned until today, when the judge will continue his summing up.