Hillsborough campaigner: 'They did lie, they did cover up, they did alter statements'

Key Concepts

• Hillsborough Law: A proposed law mandating a duty of candor for individuals in public roles, compelling them to tell the truth.
• Duty of Candor: The obligation to be open and honest, particularly in official capacities.
• Cover-up and Lies: Allegations of deception and concealment of facts by authorities following the Hillsborough disaster.
• Accountability: The principle of being responsible for one's actions and facing consequences.
• Cultural Change: The aim to reform corrupt and unjust practices within public institutions.
• Legacy: The lasting impact of the Hillsborough disaster and the families' campaign for justice.
• Named and Shamed: The desire for individuals involved in wrongdoing to be publicly identified and face public disapproval.
• IOPC Report: The Independent Office for Police Conduct report that publicly named officers involved.

The Hillsborough Law and the Fight for Truth

The discussion centers on the ongoing campaign for justice and accountability following the Hillsborough disaster, with a particular focus on the proposed "Hillsborough Law." The speaker expresses a sentiment that those responsible for the events will likely not be held to account in a traditional sense. However, the primary motivation for their continued efforts is to "do the right thing for the people of this country" and to "change a culture that's so corrupt and so morally wrong and unjust."

The Core of the Hillsborough Law: A Duty of Candor

The Hillsborough Law is described as a measure that "compels people in public roles to tell the truth." The speaker finds it "astonishing" and "absolutely ridiculous" that such a fundamental principle, taught to children, needs to be enshrined in law. The law aims to establish a "duty of candor," addressing the revelation that police officers involved in the Hillsborough disaster "did lie, they did cover up, they did alter statements." This deception is believed to have been ongoing for "decades."

The Legacy of Hillsborough: A Catalyst for Change

The speaker views the Hillsborough Law as a potential positive legacy stemming from the tragedy. They acknowledge that while the disaster resulted in the deaths of "97 innocent people," it has also led to significant changes, particularly for football supporters who are now treated "completely different" compared to the 1970s and 80s. The hope is that the Hillsborough Law will provide a lasting change for "generations to come," ensuring that the deaths of the 97 were "not in vain." The speaker feels a responsibility to be "the voices of them 97" and to advocate for a "level playing field" for "ordinary people."

Public Naming and Shaming: A Demand for Accountability

The importance of the IOPC report, which publicly named police officers involved, is highlighted. The speaker supports the idea of these officers being "named and shamed," stating they "ought to be ashamed of themselves" given the suffering endured by the families. The speaker reflects on the personal toll of this long fight, noting that they have gone from a "relatively young woman" to an "old woman" still campaigning for change. They lament that if such accountability measures had been in place earlier, the tragedy might have been averted, and their son might still be alive.

Reaction to Police Federation Statements

The speaker expresses strong disapproval of statements from the South Yorkshire Police Federation warning about the "mental health of some of these officers." They describe such statements as an "absolute disgrace," particularly in light of the fact that many officers are now old or have died. The speaker contrasts this with the fate of their son, who "didn't reach the age of 18 and a half" and died "for no reason" due to police "incompetence." The speaker also points out the perceived "luck" of the officers who died natural deaths, having been "with their family" and reaching "an old age," while many families of victims died "listening to the evidence that was hidden." The speaker concludes by questioning the audacity of such statements, asking, "How dare they insult us like that? How dare he?"