Unbelievable reading Reds. -Al- A former senior policeman said a report of his concerns about the policing of the fateful FA Cup semi-final at Hillsborough was suppressed by his bosses, the inquest into the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans has heard. Frank Brayford said that following the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest on 15 April 1989, a senior officer told him it was not in his interests to become involved in giving evidence. Brayford said that was like confirming suspicions that there was something sinister going on within the South Yorkshire police in the days following the disaster. Brayford, who had been involved in the previous years semi-final at Hillsborough between the same clubs under the former Ch Supt, Brian Mole, said he had concerns about the staffing and operational policing at Hillsborough in 1989, and did write a report, which he sent to South Yorkshire police. Subsequently, he said, he was called by a Supt, Ian Mountain and told: My office now. Brayford said that Mountain then told him: Stop putting reports in about Hillsborough. Youre not a witness, you werent there. Its nowt to do with you. He was then visited in his office by a police constable, Greenway, who he said purported to be from West Midlands police, the force appointed by South Yorkshire police to investigate the disaster. Brayford said that Greenway stood at his office door and said: You will never give evidence to Lord Justice Taylor[s public inquiry]. Brayford told the inquest he was incensed by that and ran after Greenway, but could not find him. He said he did make his concerns known to two MPs, but was not satisfied by their response, and heard no more about it until he was contacted this year by Operation Resolve, the police investigation for this new inquest, 25 years after the disaster. Until shortly before the disaster, Brayford served as the staff officer for Ch Supt Mole in South Yorkshire polices F division, which covered Hillsborough. Mole, who was experienced at policing matches at Sheffield Wednesdays Hillsborough ground, was moved from that division to Barnsley on 27 March 1989, 19 days before the semi-final. Brayford said Mole told him he had been moved not for career development, as the force said officially, but to make him take responsibility for a brutal prank played on a probationary constable involving a gun, for which several officers were disciplined. Brayford was also moved; he said an assistant chief constable, Stuart Anderson, told him, because Brayford had usurped the authority of another officer, Supt Roger Marshall, which he said was untrue. Fiona Barton, representing South Yorkshire Police, asked Brayford: The evidence that you are giving now is that there was some sort of concerted effort on the part of a number of officers of South Yorkshire Police at the time to suppress your reports, that is your account? He replied: That is the strength of it. He agreed with Barton that he had not shown his reports to the then Police Complaints Authority or the Home Office at the time. Barton asked him why he did not pass on his report to the Taylor inquiry or attend the public hearing. He said: I would not be allowed in there and you know it too. Barton continued: This account about the concealment of your reports is a complete fabrication and these reports were never written, were they? Brayford replied: I am not lying today and I were not lying when I wrote that statement I have come here to tell the truth. It has been very, very difficult. I must tell you I did speak to two members of Parliament about it but the answers were not satisfactory, they didnt throw any light on it all. Wherever I went I got the impression you have no chance. I know I have no chance here this morning telling you this. People thats concerned are not going to change their evidence. I dont want them to, They cant. Theyll go straight to prison but that doesnt mean that its not true. Mole was replaced by Ch Supt David Duckenfield, who the jury has heard had never policed a match at the Hillsborough football ground before. Brayford said their only previous contact had been at a football match, when Duckenfield had given him a masonic handshake. He told Duckenfield he was not involved with the freemasons, and Duckenfield, he said, had replied: Well, you ought to be. Brayford said that after Mole was told he would be transferred, they invited Duckenfield to a semi-final planning meeting on 22 March 1989, but Duckenfield refused because he had not yet had his promotion to chief superintendent confirmed. He said: Look Frank, Ive got a crown on my shoulder, and when Ive got a crown and a pip Ill be a chief superintendent. Then Ill come into your police station, and not before. Brayford said that Mole had called Duckenfield, who had refused again to come to the planning meeting. It was like a punch, like a kick in the nuts; Mole took it badly, Brayford said. The day before the semi-final, Mole had come to his home, Brayford said, had a gin and tonic, and told him he was worried about the handling of the match by Duckenfield, who had reduced the staffing by 10%, 1100 officers, leaving him short of men. He said that after the 96 Liverpool supporters died at the match, Mole had said that in his evidence he was going to be loyal to South Yorkshire police. Brayford said a sergeant, William Crawford, told him after the match he had been on duty outside the tunnel leading to the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace where the disaster happened, but Crawford had not known that barriers left there were for closing off the tunnel when the pens were full. The jury has been told that the tunnel was never closed off. Brayford said Crawford told him that officers had been told not to record evidence about the disaster in their official police notebooks, but on slips of paper. Brayford said that was the first time he had ever known that to happen in the service, which he joined in 1967. He said he told Crawford he would be mad to agree not to write in his notebook. Brayford rejected the suggestion from John Beggs QC, representing Duckenfield and the former superintendents Roger Marshall and Roger Greenwood, that he was embittered and was giving untrue evidence out of spite because he had never forgiven Duckenfield and Marshall for moving him out of F Division. Beggs pointed to the evidence Mole and four other officers had given in statements, that Duckenfield was at the 22 March planning meeting. Brayford replied that this was the closing of ranks, and part of the dirty tricks brigade. He said it was part of the culture to tell lies out of loyalty to the force, and that the chief constable, Peter Wright, had told Brayford he had been disloyal for refusing to tell lies on occasions. The jury had already been told that no minutes of that meeting or list of attendees recorded by South Yorkshire police have ever been found. Patrick Roche, representing 75 families who lost relatives in the disaster, showed Brayford an internal South Yorkshire police memo which showed that notes of the meeting had been typed up and were last known to have been given to Duckenfield. Brayford said of that: I dont know what he did with them. Beggs took Brayford through three internal South Yorkshire police reports, dated 31 March 1989, which referred to him kissing or embracing the female administrator within the police offices, and a memo of the same date, in which Duckenfield was recommending Brayford be moved for his inappropriate behaviour. Brayford said he had been having an affair with the woman, but it was untrue that he had been behaving improperly with her at work. We used to call it a fit up, he said. He said he blamed ex assistant chief constable Anderson, and his mate, Duckenfield, for then leaking a story about Brayfords alleged frolicking to the Yorkshire Post.
Posted on: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 17:09:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015