Bradford Fire - Not an accident? (Merged)

[Fodbarmyarmy]

There's no smoke without fire....

[Roger Red Hat]

With every tragedy, there are always those who push for alternatives to the "official" outcome.

 

Whether it's JFK's shooting by the CIA, military planes hitting the WTC, Diana murdered by MI5, Chernobyl was deliberate, Holodomor Denial.

 

This is no different.

.......Hillsborough...........

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/16/oliver-popplewell-bradford-valley-parade-disaster

[BTRFTG]

Having been there Tuesday night I'll certainly read the book (cf the selected extracts) but one wonders whether the linked events lay more with the activities (lack of) of the penny-pinching chairman rather than the final event being a malicious act. Few remember the match against Lincoln was the last time the stand was to be used (demolition was due to start the following week and steelwork for its replacement was stored nearby.) Maintenance, including cleaning, had been run down for years and much like the later Kings X fire was deemed to have originated in debris. The memorial to this day remains truly moving.

[Monkeh]

.......Hillsborough...........

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/16/oliver-popplewell-bradford-valley-parade-disaster

as I said its worth looking at but I don't think its a big cover up like hillsborough, after all the emergency services did absolutely everything they could,

 

If it was for insurence money then again I don't think you'd do it in a packed stand on a match day you'd do it at night when no one is about,

 

the authour of the book needs to work cloely with the police and I hope he can find the closure he needs and deserves,

[Avalonred]

The guy that wrote the book, Martin Fletcher, was on Jeremy Vine's show on R2 at lunchtime.

VERY moving account of the day, he was 12, lost his brother, his brothers mate, his Dad and his Grandad.

The last time he saw his Dad alive he was telling him that everything would be fine.....he said his Dad never lied to him so he believed him.

 

Pretty sure I was in the Enclosure at AG that day when the news broke, awful to hear what was going on during our game but I can't imagine what it was like to be there.

Thoughts go out to all the families of victims both alive and dead. I can't imagine what the metal scars would be like for survivors.

[The Batman]

as I said its worth looking at but I don't think its a big cover up like hillsborough, after all the emergency services did absolutely everything they could,

 

If it was for insurence money then again I don't think you'd do it in a packed stand on a match day you'd do it at night when no one is about,

 

the authour of the book needs to work cloely with the police and I hope he can find the closure he needs and deserves,

 

It's interesting you say that. I was in NYC last month and I got chatting to some locals and some police officers when I went to the 9/11 memorial.

 

They say they get conspiracy theorists protesting down there who say that the FDNY and NYPD were in on it all and it was only those who didn't know about it were the ones who went up into the towers to try and evacuate and save those who were still in there. They also have others who say that no emergency services personal died in it, they've simply been relocated and given new identities by the government. All those funerals held were simply for show. The videotapes of conversations between Orio Palmer (first and only 1 of 2 firemen to reach the impact zone on the 78th floor) and the other firemen going up the stairs behind him were faked and it's why they took so long to be "released"

 

Fair enough, they make their points about whether the planes were real, inside job, controlled demolition etc, but to extend it to that extent by saying that the Emergency Services were in on it is taking it way too far.

[handsofclay]

It transpires now that the stand wasn't insured as it was due for demolition, so what would the Bradford chairman have gained from burning it to the ground?

[Red Exile]

Having been there Tuesday night I'll certainly read the book (cf the selected extracts) but one wonders whether the linked events lay more with the activities (lack of) of the penny-pinching chairman rather than the final event being a malicious act. Few remember the match against Lincoln was the last time the stand was to be used (demolition was due to start the following week and steelwork for its replacement was stored nearby.) Maintenance, including cleaning, had been run down for years and much like the later Kings X fire was deemed to have originated in debris. The memorial to this day remains truly moving.

 

Agreed. One of my best friends from uni was a Bradford fan and I'd sat in that stand several times watching Bradford with him. It was truly decrepit. Although no one would have guessed it was such a death trap. Whatever the truth of this particular account there's no getting away from the fact that football fans were treated abysmally in the 80's, facilities were dire and the Bradford fire was the culmination of years of neglect of facilities for supporters. It's hard to remember how bad the image of football, and football supporters, was at the time.

 

Anyone interested in a gripping account of English football should have a read of David Goldblatt's book "The Game of Our Lives". I'm told he's a Rovers fan, but despite that (!) he certainly understands football, is fair to us, and he's one of the best writers on football history. It's a cracking book.

[CotswoldRed]

When there is a tragedy often you'll find those most afflicted look for someone to blame and if you look long enough you often will find at least circumstantial evidence to support your views.

For one, that article tells us very little of those other fires. It reads as if each fire resulted in a total write off, whereas in reality some of those could be completely trivial fires which were dealt with and put out without much or any damage. Also, if you look at the timeline this goes back to 1967 and through to June 1981. What was the prevalence of fires then? What were fire safety practices like then? Another quirk, 3 fires between August and December 1977 - that'd be a pretty cavalier timeline if the fires were not innocently started. Look at where the fires started also - factory, factory, factory, factory... What sort of industries were these in? Who were the insurers - was it always the same company or were they related?

It also talks of Heginbotham lying about seeing some safety certificates. Well, if he was as involved in business as this article suggests its perfectly reasonable perhaps it slipped his mind. Or frankly yes he may have lied, but that could be panic and just a poor choice. It is an assumption that this indicates something untoward.

These are interesting finds and perhaps indicate it's worth digging up the old enquiries and ensuring the process was not flawed. But it proves nothing and, being polite, seems like it's still a work in progress.

Personally I believe the insurers involved would have carried out their own independent and thorough examination likely to uncover something untoward if it was there.

It doesn't prove this fire, specifically, was more than an accident, but it certainly comes close to proving that someone was involved in insurance fraud.

[Roger Red Hat]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/16/bradford-fire-secretary-supporters-club

[T R]

It was a terrible tragedy, thank god they didn't have any metal fence at the front or it would have been far worse. My sympathy to the families of those who died.  

I was just reading this article, it suggested that a smoke bomb may have caused it. Is that the reason why smoke bombs have been banned in this country? http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/1985/may/13/fromthearchive

[CotswoldRed]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/16/bradford-fire-secretary-supporters-club

Bloody hell. How did the man live for 10 further years without being properly challenged or investigated?

[Guest]

It doesn't prove this fire, specifically, was more than an accident, but it certainly comes close to proving that someone was involved in insurance fraud.

No, it raises suspicions but nothing more. Would your opinion change if those other premises were I don't know a fireworks factory?

There's a million different perfectly legitimate explanations. Perhaps he used a particularly shoddy, but cheap, firm of electricians throughout - or a mate, turns out they were electrical fires.

Perhaps he was a victim of arson - a personal vendetta.

What about a meth lab?

I'm being facetious granted but this is what is lacking in the report - detail, detail and detail. Without detail it proves nothing and doesn't come close to proving anything. All it shows is a line of enquiry worth following.

[ten minutes of rough]

It seems pretty in-plausible to set fire to the place, besides it would have been better to have done it on a non match day, I mean what person(s) in their right minds would actually set fire to a football stadium?   

[CotswoldRed]

No, it raises suspicions but nothing more. Would your opinion change if those other premises were I don't know a fireworks factory?

There's a million different perfectly legitimate explanations. Perhaps he used a particularly shoddy, but cheap, firm of electricians throughout - or a mate, turns out they were electrical fires.

Perhaps he was a victim of arson - a personal vendetta.

What about a meth lab?

I'm being facetious granted but this is what is lacking in the report - detail, detail and detail. Without detail it proves nothing and doesn't come close to proving anything. All it shows is a line of enquiry worth following.

You'd have enjoyed debating on the radio the other night with a forensic expert in fires. He was utterly convinced that there must be something deliberate going on. There is simply no way that it's just bad luck - something has gone on,irrespective of the Bradford fire.

[Guest]

[Esmond Million's Bung]

[Guest]

I suppose technology moves on, like the DNA revolution, who knows?, but certainly needs a thorough looking at I would say, to satisfy the families.

A good point and quite right. Techniques are now no doubt far far far more sophisticated. I suppose that's the problem with progress!

But, unfortunately evidence disappears also. I agree it's worth investigation, I've said that throughout. But, just based on what was serialised, I'd absolutely stop short of reopening an enquiry. If police opening the file finds some stones worth turning perhaps then.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

A good point and quite right. Techniques are now no doubt far far far more sophisticated. I suppose that's the problem with progress!

But, unfortunately evidence disappears also. I agree it's worth investigation, I've said that throughout. But, just based on what was serialised, I'd absolutely stop short of reopening an enquiry. If police opening the file finds some stones worth turning perhaps then.

 

Let's put it another way, I don't believe in that many coincidences and like most police cold cases it's going to depend on what evidence if any the police or fire service kept that can be analysed.

[Monkeh]

Let's put it another way, I don't believe in that many coincidences and like most police cold cases it's going to depend on what evidence if any the police or fire service kept that can be analysed.

It's hard for a dead man to defend the allegations against him,

But it is worth looking into

[Esmond Million's Bung]

It's hard for a dead man to defend the allegations against him,

But it is worth looking into

 

I agree but the author of the book must one tortured soul given what happened that day.

[Monkeh]

I agree but the author of the book must one tortured soul given what happened that day.

Indeed which is as apr out a one sided story,

They will only reopen it if new eviedance comes to light which to be honest I think is doubtful

[cider-manc]

I agree but the author of the book must one tortured soul given what happened that day.

I read today that the poor guy was also at Hillsborough watching from the forest end. tortured probably doesn't touch on what he has lived through and seen at football matches.

[Roger Red Hat]

Bloody hell. How did the man live for 10 further years without being properly challenged or investigated?

Quite. 

There's things that went at that time we mere mortals can only wonder about.

[RumRed]

Agreed. One of my best friends from uni was a Bradford fan and I'd sat in that stand several times watching Bradford with him. It was truly decrepit. Although no one would have guessed it was such a death trap. Whatever the truth of this particular account there's no getting away from the fact that football fans were treated abysmally in the 80's, facilities were dire and the Bradford fire was the culmination of years of neglect of facilities for supporters. It's hard to remember how bad the image of football, and football supporters, was at the time.

Anyone interested in a gripping account of English football should have a read of David Goldblatt's book "The Game of Our Lives". I'm told he's a Rovers fan, but despite that (!) he certainly understands football, is fair to us, and he's one of the best writers on football history. It's a cracking book.

And this is why some of the suggestions of the young un's with ideas of flares etc get met with derision occasionally from us old gits. Romantic, and passionate, as it looks we were treated like Cr@p by everyone in the 70's and 80's. Just look at the death toll in only a few years from people heading out just to support their boys for 90 mins.

I know it's a balance but we don't want to go back to those days.

[BTRFTG]

I'm guessing many here are too young to have remembered what these turn of the century (20th) stands were like yet old enough to be cogniscent of the H&S culture which, thankfully, reigns today. Bradford's chairman didn't construct the stand (which was pre first war) and few those days gave thought to the consequences of design (open latticed wooden bleacher terrace above banked earth, wooden double-eaved roof with tar and bitumen cover.) With access only at the rear, at the top of the bank, you don't need to have been a Boy Scout to work out that's the basis for constructing a camp fire - air drawn off the pitch fuelling any flames and rising up the bank along the roof.

Where the chairman is wholly culpable is in the procedures he introduced to save money. Having run out after replacing only a few rows of terrace with concrete he skimped on maintenance, specifically; the terrace was swept after a match with litter being brushed between the floor and banked earth. Previously, a regime had been in place to clear this out several times a season, hence the reason the stand hadn't caught fire earlier. It was suggested,though never proven, that the cleaning regime was deliberately halted to exacerbate matters and support funding applications to the Football Trust in respect of the replacement stand(s). The chairman went so far as to use letters from the local authority and fire brigade highlighting their concerns as to the potential hazard less than one month before the tragedy. No evidence emerged to show the under terrace debris had been cleared that season (it was the last match recall) and indications are there were two or more years worth of debris under the floor. Further, despite being champions and with a bumper crowd expected the chairman didn't put on additional staff to re-instate the rear exits with which the stand had been designed. Exits were either end with the remainder locked to prevent fans letting others in free of charge. If the chairman used such cavalier mindset throughout his other businesses , is it really that surprising misfortune was never far from his door?

[Guest]

I'm guessing many here are too young to have remembered what these turn of the century (20th) stands were like yet old enough to be cogniscent of the H&S culture which, thankfully, reigns today. Bradford's chairman didn't construct the stand (which was pre first war) and few those days gave thought to the consequences of design (open latticed wooden bleacher terrace above banked earth, wooden double-eaved roof with tar and bitumen cover.) With access only at the rear, at the top of the bank, you don't need to have been a Boy Scout to work out that's the basis for constructing a camp fire - air drawn off the pitch fuelling any flames and rising up the bank along the roof.

Where the chairman is wholly culpable is in the procedures he introduced to save money. Having run out after replacing only a few rows of terrace with concrete he skimped on maintenance, specifically; the terrace was swept after a match with litter being brushed between the floor and banked earth. Previously, a regime had been in place to clear this out several times a season, hence the reason the stand hadn't caught fire earlier. It was suggested,though never proven, that the cleaning regime was deliberately halted to exacerbate matters and support funding applications to the Football Trust in respect of the replacement stand(s). The chairman went so far as to use letters from the local authority and fire brigade highlighting their concerns as to the potential hazard less than one month before the tragedy. No evidence emerged to show the under terrace debris had been cleared that season (it was the last match recall) and indications are there were two or more years worth of debris under the floor. Further, despite being champions and with a bumper crowd expected the chairman didn't put on additional staff to re-instate the rear exits with which the stand had been designed. Exits were either end with the remainder locked to prevent fans letting others in free of charge. If the chairman used such cavalier mindset throughout his other businesses , is it really that surprising misfortune was never far from his door?

 

A good point. Also, as someone aluded to above, when judging his actions in a legal context you have to judge as what was reasonable to expect at that time, not in today's modern climate. Morally, however, I think we'd all come to a similar position.

 

One thought that occurred to me with your final sentence however, and again back to the point I made about having half a story; how involved was he with these other businesses? Would it change opinions if say 4 or 5 of them he was a silent partner, minority shareholder or NED?

[Esmond Million's Bung]

A good point. Also, as someone aluded to above, when judging his actions in a legal context you have to judge as what was reasonable to expect at that time, not in today's modern climate. Morally, however, I think we'd all come to a similar position.

 

One thought that occurred to me with your final sentence however, and again back to the point I made about having half a story; how involved was he with these other businesses? Would it change opinions if say 4 or 5 of them he was a silent partner, minority shareholder or NED?

 

Whether he was a silent partner, minority shareholder, NED, receptionist or cleaner, nobody IMO is so unlucky to be 'involved' with at least 8 business's that all happen to spontaneously combust, to ensure a similar fairness that belatedly the Hillsborough families are being afforded, it needs robust investigating by experts to see if there is actually anything in this allegation that could lead to a new coroners enquiry, let's see if from footage, written and stored evidence there are experts using new technologies that can perhaps bring doubt on the original enquiry or de bunk this book.

 

My first question would be of course, what did the police know?, was this ever a line of police enquiry?, did they ever make a connection? and if not why?.

[Monkeh]

Whether he was a silent partner, minority shareholder, NED, receptionist or cleaner, nobody IMO is so unlucky to be 'involved' with at least 8 business's that all happen to spontaneously combust, to ensure a similar fairness that belatedly the Hillsborough families are being afforded, it needs robust investigating by experts to see if there is actually anything in this allegation that could lead to a new coroners enquiry, let's see if from footage, written and stored evidence there are experts using new technologies that can perhaps bring doubt on the original enquiry or de bunk this book.

 

My first question would be of course, what did the police know?, was this ever a line of police enquiry?, did they ever make a connection? and if not why?.

ether that or he upset the mafia

[Esmond Million's Bung]

ether that or he upset the mafia

 

or indeed liked playing with matches, stranger things have happened, who would have believed for instance the Dr Shipman case had it been a fictionalised film? and not reality.