Hillsborough jury: How they answered the 14 key questions

Following the longest jury case in British legal history, the Hillsborough disaster inquests have found that 96 Liverpool fans who died in 1989 FA Cup semi-final were unlawfully killed.

After hearing evidence for more than two years, the six women and three men concluded it was unlawful killing by a 7-2 majority.

The had to answer 14 key questions in order to reach their findings.

They were all yes/no answers but the jury was allowed to give a further explanation for their decisions if they wanted, here's what they said:

  • Question 1: Basic facts of the disaster

Do you agree with the following statement which is intended to summarise the basic facts of the disaster: "On April 15, 1989, 96 people died in the disaster at Hillsborough Stadium as a result of crushing in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, following the admission of a large number of supporters to the stadium through exit gates."

Answer: Yes

  • Question 2: Police planning

Was there any error or omission in police planning and preparation for the semi-final match on April 15, 1989, which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed on the day of the match?

Answer: Yes

Former chief superintendent David Duckenfield was match commander on the day Credit: PA

  • Question 3: Policing of the match and the situation at the turnstiles

Was there any error or omission in policing on the day of the match which caused or contributed to a dangerous situation developing at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "Police response to the increasing crowds at Leppings Lane was slow and un-coordinated.

"The road closure and sweep of fans exacerbated the situation. No filter cordons were placed in Leppings Lane. No contingency plans were made for the sudden arrival of a large number of fans. Attempts to close the perimeter gates were made too late."

Relatives of the victims react to the findings outside court Credit: PA

  • Question 4: Policing of the match and the crush on the terrace

Was there any error or omission by commanding officers which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?

Answer: Yes

The jurors unanimously found that policing of the match caused or contributed to a dangerous situation developing at the Leppings Lane turnstiles.

Commanding officers also caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace, the jury decided, as did those senior officers in the police control box when the order was given to open the exit gates at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium.

Jury explanation: "Commanding officers should have ordered the closure of the central tunnel before the opening of gate C was requested, as pens three and four were full.

"Commanding officers should have requested the number of fans still to enter the stadium after 2.30pm. Commanding officers failed to recognise that pens three and four were at capacity before gate C was opened. Commanding officers failed to order the closure of the tunnel as gate C was opened."

96 fans were unlawfully killed as a result of a crush at the stadium in Sheffield in 1989 Credit: PA

  • Question 5: The opening of the gates

When the order was given to open the exit gates at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium, was there any error or omission by the commanding officers in the control box which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "Commanding officers did not inform officers in the inner concourse prior to the opening of gate C.

"Commanding officers failed to consider where the incoming fans would go. Commanding officers failed to order the closure of the central tunnel prior to the opening of gate C."

  • Question 6: Determination of unlawful killing issue

Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed?

Answer: Yes

This key question was answered "yes" by a 7-2 majority.

relatives outside court Credit: PA

  • Question 7: Behaviour of the supporters

a) Was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

b) If your answer is "no", please answer the following: Was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

Answer: a) No, b) No

  • Question 8: Defects in Hillsborough Stadium

Were there any features of the design, construction and layout of the stadium which you consider were dangerous or defective and which caused or contributed to the disaster?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "Design and layout of the crush barriers in pens three and four were not fully compliant with the Green Guide.

"The removal of barrier 144 and the partial removal of barrier 136 would have exacerbated the 'waterfall effect' of pressure towards the front of the pens. The lack of dedicated turnstiles for individual pens meant that capacities could not be monitored. There were too few turnstiles for a capacity crowd. Signage to the side pens was inadequate."

The specially built court in Warrington where the inquests were held Credit: PA

  • Question 9: Licensing and oversight of Hillsborough Stadium

Was there any error or omission in the safety certification and oversight of Hillsborough Stadium that caused or contributed to the disaster?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "The Safety Certificate was never amended to reflect the changes at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium, therefore capacity figures were never updated. The capacity figures for the Leppings Lane terraces were incorrectly calculated when the Safety Certificate was first issued. The Safety Certificate had not been reissued since 1986."

Advertising boards which were used as stretchers at the 1989 match Credit: PA

  • Question 10: Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC before the day of the match

Was there any error or omission by Sheffield Wednesday FC (and its staff) in the management of the stadium and/or preparation for the match which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed on the day of the match?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "The Club did not approve the plans for dedicated turnstiles for each pen. The Club did not agree any contingency plans with the police. There was inadequate signage and inaccurate/misleading information on the semi-final tickets."

  • Question 11: Conduct of Sheffield Wednesday FC on the day of the match

Was there any error or omission by Sheffield Wednesday FC (and its staff) on April 15, 1989, which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?

If your answer is "no", please answer the following: Was there any error or omission by Sheffield Wednesday FC (and its staff) on April 15, 1989, which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west terrace?

a) No

b) Yes

Jury explanation: "Club officials were aware of the huge numbers of fans still outside the Leppings Lane turnstiles at 2.40pm. They should have requested a delayed kick-off at this point."

Relatives of the victims react to the unlawful killing ruling:

  • Question 12: Conduct of stadium engineers Eastwood & Partners

Should Eastwood & Partners have done more to detect and advise on any unsafe or unsatisfactory features of Hillsborough Stadium which caused or contributed to the disaster?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "Eastwoods (sic) did not make their own calculations when they became consultants for SWFC, therefore the initial capacity figures and all subsequent calculations were incorrect. Eastwoods failed to re-calculate capacity figures each time changes were made to the terraces. Eastwoods failed to update the Safety Certificate after 1986. Eastwoods failed to recognise that the removal of barrier 144 and the partial removal of barrier 136 could result in a dangerous situation in the pens."

  • Question 13: Emergency response and the role of the South Yorkshire Police

After the crush in the west terrace had begun to develop, was there any error or omission by the police which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "The police delayed calling a major incident so the appropriate emergency response was delayed.

"There was a lack of co-ordination, command and control which delayed or prevented appropriate responses."

Survivors of the Hillsborough disaster Julie and Beryl Clayton after the findings Credit: Granada Reports/Rob Townsend

  • Question 14: Emergency response and the role of the South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service

After the crush in the west terrace had begun to develop, was there any error or omission by the ambulance service which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster?

Answer: Yes

Jury explanation: "Symas officers at the scene failed to ascertain the nature of the problem at Leppings Lane.

"The failure to recognise and call a major incident led to delays in the responses to the emergency."