Hillsborough campaigner says families should have been informed of pathology review

Margaret Aspinall with Andy Burnham outside the Hillsborough memorial Credit: PA

A Hillsborough campaigner has criticised the Home Office's decision to launch a pathology review without telling the families of those who died.

The department said it had established an independent review to consider what went wrong with the original pathology report into the deaths at the 1989 FA Cup semi-final.

It says it is to ensure similar mistakes were not made in the future.

Pathology into original Hillsborough inquests to be reviewed

Margaret Aspinall said: “Why weren’t the families informed? No media should have been told before the families.

"The families should have had an input from the start. Why did they wait until now to do the review?

“It’s really upsetting after everything that has happened in the last 33 years.”

The campaigner, lost her 18-year-old son James who died as a result of the disaster.

Andy Burnham, who has campaigned alongside Margaret also gave his thoughts on the Home Office's review.

Further wait for Hillsborough families over final report

He said: "Bereaved families knew nothing about this. They are who matter.

"It's frankly disgraceful after everything they have been through over the years. Something as sensitive as pathology, personal details of their loved ones."

Speaking about Labour's recent pledge to introduce a Hillsborough law if elected, Margaret Aspinall said: “I met with Keir Starmer and the first thing I asked him was 'are you going to implement the Hillsborough law?'

Labour leader commits to new 'Hillsborough Law' in pitch for Prime Minister

"He said 'yes Margaret' and I was extremely pleased to hear that.

“I hope the Conservative Party do the honourable thing and back that pledge.”

The pathology review, which will be chaired by forensic science expert Glenn Taylor, was set up following a recommendation in a 2017 report by Bishop James Jones.

Original inquests, which were quashed by the High Court in 2012, heard no evidence from after 3.15 pm on the day of the disaster.

The decision was based on pathology evidence that all the victims suffered the injuries which caused their deaths before that time.