M I R . 15

D ate and t im e raised I s ) / ? f ~ ) N um ber

ssOTHER DOCUMENT FORM

n . <2><rTitle V v e ^ - p ^ v / V U x

^jfnclude source and any document number if relevant) £ 5 3 ^ \ \

V ■*’ Receiver’s instructions — urgent action — Y es /N o

Receiver

D o cu m en t registered/indexed as indicated

No(s) o f actions raised

Indexer

Statem ent reader's instructions Statement Reader

Indexed as indicated

No(s) o f actions raised

Indexer

Exam ined - fu r th e r action to be taken jf ' S | t ' “

F urth er action No(s) Indexer

When satisfied all actions raised O ffice Manager to endorse other D o cu m en t Master N um ber Form

HER MAJESTY’S CORONER FOR SOUTH YORKSHIRE (WEST DISTRICT)

INQUESTS INTO THE DEATHS OF THE

VICTIMS OF THE HILLSBOROUGH FOOTBALL

STADIUM DISASTER

ON THE 15TH APRIL, 1989

INQUEST INTO THE DEATH OF

VICTORIA JANE HICKS

Before

DR. S.L. POPPER, LL.B, B.MED.Sci, BM, BS, MRCGP

(Her Majesty's Coroner)

At

The Medico-Legal Centre, Watery Street,

Sheffield.

On

24th April 1990

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

From the Notes of J.L. Harpham, Ltd., Official Shorthand Writers,

55, Queen Street, Sheffield SI 2DX

APPEARANCES:

MR. D. FRASER

MR. S. SMITH

MR. CALLAGHAN

MR. GREGORY

MISS THORPE

MISS A. ADDLEMAN

MR. P. ISAACS

MS. B. NORCLIFFE and MR. P. METCALF

MR. S. CATCHPOLE and MR. JACKSON

Hillsborough Solicitors’ Group Steering Committee

Medical and Dental Union of Scotland (Representing Dr. A. Forrest)

Trent Regional Health Authority and South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service

Sheffield City Council

Eastwood & Partners

Police Federation of England and Wales

Chief Superintendent D. Duckenfield

Chief Constable, South Yorkshire Constabulary

Sheffield Wednesday Football Club

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J. L. Harpham Ltd

INDEX TO TRANSCRIPT

Pa&e

OPENING BY THE CORONER 1.

DR. DENMARK Called

By THE CORONER 2.

DETECTIVE SERGEANT BRIAN JOHN McCOMBIE Called

By THE CORONER 8.Cross-Examined by MR. FRASER 11.

DETECTIVE INSPECTOR MICHAEL LAYTON Called

By THE CORONER 12.

Tuesday, 24th April, 1990

THE INQUEST INTO THE DEATH OF

VICTORIA JANE HICKS

MR. FRASER: Sir, we now turn to deal with thecase of Victoria Hicks and, of course, I appear in exactly the same guise as I did in the previous case we did.

THE CORONER: Mr. and Mrs. Hicks, I am not goingto repeat how we are going to proceed because that will obviously be very similar.

This then is a resumed inquest which was opened on the 18th of April, 1989. On that occasion Neil Anthony Parkin, acting Coroner's Officer said:

"The body which is the subject of this inquest has been identified to PC 3038 Cruttenden of the South Yorkshire Police as that of Victoria Jane Hicks, by Trevor Hicks, her father.

She was 15 years of age, having been born on the 20th July, 1973 at Bedford.

She was a single girl and she lived at ___Pinner, Middlesex.

She was a schoolgirl by occupation.

She died at Hillsborough football ground following an incident there on Saturday, 15th of April,1989. PC Cruttenden caused the body to be removed to the Medico Legal Centre and there she identified it to Detective Constable Simon Weigold who subsequently identified the same body to Dr. Denmark.

It is the family wish that the body should be buried.11

I then signed the burial order and adjourned it, but a few minutes thereafter we added a further sentence, still dated the 18th, saying:

"Further information has come to light in that the deceased was found to be dead at the Northern General Hospital on 15.4.89, and not at Hillsborough at stated above."

Then I adjourned it again.

Now there are several things which are not quite right in that opening and I will deal with those now. The first one is you very kindly again on the 27th of April signed this form which I sent to you. I think we had got it right except you added the registration details, but Bedford was actually correct.

In addition to that, in fact Simon Weigold did not identify the body to Dr. Denmark and we will deal with that in the summaries.

The alcohol in this case, as in the case of Sarah, was negative, so Victoria's alcohol level was negative.

Now we are going to turn to a different pathologist, Dr. Denmark. The reason why the pathologists differ is, of course, because the bodies were being deal with as quickly as possible, but there is no significance in it.

DR. DENMARK Called

By THE CORONER:

Now, Dr. Denmark, you have already taken the oath on a previous occasion? - A. Yes.

You actually came - I use the word "late" not in the sense that you were not there on time but that arrangements were made for you to come in the afternoon and evening? - A. Yes.

At the time when you arrived Simon Weigold was not actually there to do the identification. Can.you just confirm to me how you satisfied yourself that the body we are now going to talk about was in fact that of Victoria Jane Hicks? - A. I was given a sheet of details. I then confirmed that the details on the sheet matched with the name of the deceased which was written on the leg. There was also a tag present, as I remember it and we took a photograph as well.

In fact you recorded in your PM report that her name was Victoria Jane Hicks, number 89? - A. That is right.

There is one correction in your PM report, the date now should be the 15th of April? - A. Yes, it is a typing error.

Now Dr. Denmark, if you would be good enough to give me your cause of death and take me through the relevant parts of your post mortem report please? - A. The cause

B

D

E

H

of death was traumatic asphyxia. The key findings on the outside of the body were the presence of petechial hemorrhages over the face, where they were confluent and over the eyelids in the conjunctiva.

Yes, anything else that this was to do with traumatic asphyxia, pathologically speaking, apart from the history? - A. In this particular case, no, sir, because the purplish discolouration above the shoulders was not as prominent as in some of the other cases.

What about internal findings? - A. I suppose the other significant external finding is there was no other large bruises or abrasions noted on the body.

On internal examination I noted that there was some vomit material in the windpipe and that there was some approximately 500 ml - half a litre - of blood in the left side of the chest. This is between the lung and the chest wall. I thought that this was due to some tearing of vessels at the back of the check wall.There was no damage to the ribs at that point, no fractures. It was also noted there was congestion and bruising at the backs of both lungs and so some of this bleeding may well have come from there.

I think also to expand on how that blood may have got there, I was not impressed by the volume of blood in that given that somebody who has had this sort of crushing is very congested with blood, then a lot of that blood could have run there after death, given that there is a tear there for it to run out of. I found, just possibly coming to a question which may come, I did find needle puncture marks in both elbows when I examined the outside of the body. I found no needle puncture mark over the chest. No evidence of a needle track at that point. Do you want me to expand on why that might be?

Yes. My understanding is that there may have been an intracardiac injection of adrenalin attempted during the resuscitative effort. If that were so, could that have played any part in the hemothorax which you found?- A. In my opinion, no. I think I would have seen some sort of entry track. It would not be the sort of injury to cause that sort of tear in the back of the pleura, anyway. That sort of tear was an avulsion- type tear which one might see in soft tissue injury due to crushing. The fact that I did not notice a needle puncture track may well be explained by the fact that a hypodermic needle has got a cutting edge on it. It isnot just a cylinder that pokes in. It has got a cutting blade and therefore slips in and slips out and may leave a very fine track.

- 3 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

There was no other significant natural disease in the body that contributed to the death. I did, however, note that the brain was slightly swollen and weighed slightly more than one would expect normally and I put this down to the fact there had been some time for anoxemic - lack of oxygen - to cause the brain to swell.

You found no natural cause for this young lady's death?- A. No, no natural disease.

Your findings together with the history leave you with the conclusion that it had to be traumatic asphyxia? - A. Yes.

You have already mentioned the needle puncture marks in the arms. You, of course, cannot say who made those, but they would be entirely consistent with resuscitative efforts in a hospital? - A. Yes. I assume that is what they were due to.

You certainly did not ascribe any improper significance to them? - A. No, no.

You mentioned there was a little bit of blood oozing from the right side - or blood stained fluid I thinkyou said - from the right side of the mouth. Is thatusual or unusual with people who die? - A. I don't think that is of any great significance. Again, the amount of congestion that can occur in this sort of death, or in many kinds of death where there is an asphyxial component, then there can be congestion of the very soft tissues at the back of the nose and blood can run out of those.

So it is not a significant finding? - A. No, no.

Would you attribute it to post mortem rather than antemortem events? Obviously it was ante mortem in the sense that that is what precipitated it, but could it occur after a person has died? - A. Oh, yes.

I think we have already dealt with the hemothorax.One of the other suggestions you made was that it might be some tearing of the spinal branches of the aorta? - A. Yes.

Can you just explain that a little bit, because it is difficult to understand that? - A. The aorta is the main pipe coming out of the heart and it runs down close to the backbone and there are branches coming out along the line of each rib around and the area that the pleura was torn was a vertical line from where these branches to each rib are coming out. I thought that

B

what had happened was the tear in going across that area had torn through some of these vessels.

5. They are fairly fine vessels, are they not? - A. Yes, fairly delicate. I think one of the key points here is that because the deceased was relatively young she has got a very flexible rib cage and in somebody of middle age you might have expected to see fractures, but with somebody with this sort of pliable rib cage, it does not surprise me that we get soft tissue damage and no rib fracture.

D

E

H

Q.

Q.

You mention an bruising.

injury of the pancreas? - A. Yes, some

That is a relatively deep organ, isn't it? Have you any suggestion how that could have occurred? - A. Well, it would suggest there might be some compression of the stomach against the spine. There was no actual tearing of the organ or avulsion of it, given again in this circumstance with this amount of congestion going on, tissues are going to bruise easily, but if this lesion occurred during the terminal phase, shall we say, after the crush had started, then it could have occurred with quite minimal trauma, excepting that the pancreas, as you say, is well buried and therefore it would have to be something that would press significantly into the abdomen.

Q. You would need a considerable amount of pressure but if there is congestion the bruising would show up rather quicker than if you had merely delivered a blow to the abdomen? You would not expect to bruise the pancreas by a blow to the abdomen in normal circumstances, would you? Or would you, I don't know? - A. In normal circumstances it would take quite a severe blow to the front of the abdomen to get bruising of the pancreas.

Q. As I understood you, what you are saying is that in the situation which pertains when you have a traumatic asphyxial death, the pancreas is more likely to bruise than not if pressure is applied? - A. Yes. The other thing I am thinking of is that possibly this could have been caused by somebody doing low cardiac massage near the end of the sternum, in which case it is possible to cause some bruising, given again that the organs would bruise easily in this circumstances. That is why I am not trying to attach too much significance to it.

Q. In itself that was not a life threatening bruise on the pancreas, as far as you can tell? - A. If it had been it would have developed into pancreatitis or something more significant. There was not time for anything to

- 5 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

develop, but I doubt it. I doubt if in itself it did mean much.

I want to turn to the question of defibrillation for one moment. If you could just describe for me, if you are able - I know you are not a clinician but you mightremember - am I right in thinking that to defibrillatesomebody you usually put moistened pads on the body? - A. Yes. One puts electro jelly or uses special conducting material to prevent burning.

If defibrillation is done correctly, does it leave burn marks or any other signs on the body, as far as you know? - A. I am not saying that one would say it had been done incompetently if there were some small burn marks. I think that would be a bit unkind.

Were there any in this particular case? - A. I have notcommented on any which should mean there weren't any.

What I am driving at - I think you have perhaps taken my question the wrong way round - what I was trying to get at was this: the mere fact you don't see any marksfrom defibrillation does not mean either that it was not done, or if it was done it shows that it was done competently, whatever else one might say about burn marks in other circumstances? - A. Yes, I take your point. No marks does not mean it wasn't done.

Because this is an electrical stimulation, or an attempt at electrical stimulation to the heart, it is one of the things which you cannot find at autopsy? - A. No.

The electrical conduction system of the heart does not lend itself to post mortem? I mean, you can dissect it out but you cannot tell whether it is conducting or not by just looking at the specimen? - A. Well, you certainly cannot tell if a DC shock has been given to it in the last ten minutes of life. There is no technique that I know of that can show that.

THE CORONER: Mr. Fraser?

MR. FRASER: Thank you, sir. No questions fromthe family.

THE CORONER: I have left one question outbecause I do not think Dr. Denmark can answer that in any meaningful way. Do you want me to put it to him?

MR. FRASER: I think, sir, for the record,perhaps a short explanation.

B

THE CORONER: The point is, Dr. Denmark, and ifyou feel you cannot answer it then you must say so, is: do you think, looking at this particular case and comparing it with your experience generally, that Victoria suffered above average in this sort of traumatic asphyxia situation, or not? - A. Do you mean by that that I can gauge the length of time that she was conscious?

Yes, that is right. - A. I don't think I can. I was very interested to listen. I know it was the previous case, but I think the videos probably tell us more about the length of time when people went unconscious than I could.

D

E

You heard Dr. Slater say that in his view loss of consciousness in traumatic asphyxial cases was seconds rather than minutes. Would you go along with that? - A. I would go along with that up to the point that one has to differentiate then between crOsh asphyxia that is going to kill you and crush asphyxia when you are just being crushed, which is very unpleasant but from which one can make a complete recovery. I think once one is starting to get petechia, which is an indication of asphyxia...

In a serious way. - A. ...that that is what I am talking about when I am talking about crush. I think we are talking about seconds then. Whether we are talking about fifty seconds or ten seconds, I don't really think I can say.

THE CORONER: Yes. Mr. Fraser?

MR. FRASER: Thank you, sir.

THE CORONER: Yes, I just wanted to check whetherI had correctly remembered the intracardiac adrenalin, and I had. I just wanted to be quite satisfied in my own mind that the hemothorax in your view had nothing whatever to do with that and also, of course, there wasno pericardial effusion, was there? - A. No.

Certainly no blood stained one? - A. No.

THE CORONER: Thank you. Any questions of Dr.Denmark? (No)

Mr. Hicks, would it help you to talk to Dr.Denmark afterwards? (Yes) He has already indicated that he is quite happy to do so.

H- 7 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

DETECTIVE SERGEANT BRIAN JOHN McCOMBIE Called

By THE CORONER:

THE WITNESS: Brian John McCombie, DetectiveSergeant in the West Midlands Police.

Yes, Officer. - A. Sir, the initial outline of facts for Victoria are very much as for Sarah but for your benefit I will repeat them.

I think we had better repeat them. Forgive us, but it is the only way to get them properly into the transcript and also so the Jury can hear them for each individual case. Yes. - A. Sir, on Saturday, 15th April, 1989, Mr. Hicks, his wife Jennifer and their two daughters, Victoria Jane Hicks and Sarah, travelled by car from their home in Pinner in Middlesex to Sheffield in order to watch the semi final at Hillsborough.

Mr. Hicks was in possession of one seat ticket for the North Stand and three standing tickets for the Leppings Lane terracing.

It was mutually agreed that Mrs. Hicks should have the seat and that Mr. Hicks, Vicky and Sarah would go on to the terracing.

Upon their arrival in Sheffield at about 1245 and following a picnic lunch, the family walked to the Leppings Lane end of the ground where Mrs. Hicks separated and went to her seat.

At approximately 1355 Mr. Hicks and his daughters entered the stadium via Leppings Lane turnstiles.Sarah and Vicky were seen to go through the tunnel leading into the Leppings Lane terracing area. Mr. Hicks went to a nearby refreshment kiosk before taking up a viewing position in the terraced area near to the Police Control Box. I understand from Mr. Hicks that from this position he was able to keep an eye on Sarah and Vicky whilst giving them the independence they enjoyed.

Mr. Shaun Michael Fortune was a spectator in enclosure 3 of the Leppings Lane terraces and at about 1445 hours he was standing near to the two sisters. He noted that Victoria was crying and appeared in some distress. According to Mr. Jeffrey Rex, who was also in enclosure 3, by 1455 the crush in the pen was so severe he was unable to move at all. He says now he saw the two sisters and could see that Sarah was holding up Victoria who appeared unconscious.

Mr. Leslie Tudor was standing in enclosure 3 and saw Vicky and Sarah some two feet in front of him. He says that after the two teams came out on the pitch there was pressure from the crowd behind which caused him to be pushed forward and he then realised that the two sisters were now positioned some three or four people behind him.

Mr. Tudor describes how the crushing continued in enclosure 3 and how he became trapped from behind by a pile of bodies before eventually being released and taken to hospital for treatment.

Following the severe crushing in the West Stand terraces, Police Constable Peter McGuinness was assisting casualties. At about 1521, with assistance from other officers, he pulled a girl who he now knows to be Victoria, from a pile of bodies in the pen. He carried her to the side fencing where she was passed to Mr. Paul Turner, a spectator who laid her on the pitch.

In the meantime Mr. Hicks had become concerned for the welfare of his daughters and had started to make his way down the terraces in order to find them. Whilst doing this he saw the limp form of Victoria being passed from the pen and on to the pitch. Upon his arrival on the pitch Mr. Hicks came upon his two daughters lying on the touchline to the right of the Leppings Lane goal.

It would appear they had been laid together purely by chance.

Resuscitation attempts were made on Victoria by a number of persons, including Police Constable Marshall, Fireman Peter Mulcrone, Fireman David Sweetman, Dr. Alexander Hutson and Police Constable McGuinness.

During this time Mr. Hicks fought desperately to revive Vicky and had the added torment of helping and making sure that the best was done for Sarah.

At approximately 1537 Victoria was placed into an ambulance which had arrived on the pitch. Attempts were still being made to revive Sarah at this time.The ambulance was then driven to the Northern General Hospital by Ambulance Officer Alan Vevers. During the journey to the hospital Police Constable McGuinness and Marshall, together with Mr. Hicks and Ambulance Officer Anthony Edwards, continued their efforts to resuscitate Vicky.

Upon arrival at the Northern General Hospital Vicky received emergency treatment from Dr. John Calder who

B

D

E

Q-

Q-

H

was assisted by Staff Nurse Donna Parkin, but after some fifteen minutes Dr. Calder made the decision to stop treatment.

PC McGuinness informed Mr. Hicks of this decision.

At about 4.00 pm that afternoon Dr. Janet Doore also examined Vicky at the Northern General Hospital and certified life extinct.

Shortly after eight o'clock that evening, WPC Cruttenden attended at the Northern General Hospital and took charge of Victoria. She then escorted the body to the gymnasium at the Hillsborough Stadium where a temporary mortuary had been set up.

At 9.35 that evening Mr. Hicks identified the body of his daughter to WPC Cruttenden. This officer later escorted the body to the Medico Legal Centre where the identification was confirmed to PC Wiegold.

On Sunday, 16th April, Dr. Lloyd Denmark carried out an autopsy and submitted a report giving the cause of death.

Can I iust deal with Simon Weigold - this is a crossing of "Ts and dotting of "Is"? I think I have already alluded to what happened, but we have obtained a supplemental statement to confirm that in fact in certain cases he did not do the identifications and his original statement was prepared on the basis that all the pathologists were there together? - A. That is correct, sir. He had actually been on duty for about twenty-four hours by the time he went home and he did the identification to Inspector Timms.

Then, of course, the people who came later he had not done it? - A. Yes, sir.

One of the people who was with Victoria on the field was in fact another doctor, Dr. Hutson? - A. That is correct, sir.

I think, Mr. Fraser and Mr. Hicks, I am going to read a bit out of Dr. Hutson's account, not because I want to upset you but it might help you a little bit, possibly. This is Michael Alexander Hutson. He says:

"Unfortunately, I believe that all the bodies I attempted to resuscitate were dead beyond resuscitation. I felt it appropriate to attempt resuscitation on every casualty who merited it. Nevertheless, I recall that one man urged myself and other attendants to continue to attempt to

- 10 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

B

D

E

H

resuscitate his two daughters who both appeared to be dead."

I am reading that because you did quite the right thing, of course. I would have done exactly the same. That was Dr. Hutson's opinion at the time, and he did the right thing as well.

Any questions?

Cross-Examined by MR. FRASER:

Q. From all the various statements you have seen and read, is it possible that anybody within those statements has actually put a time upon the stage at which resuscitation was attempted on Victoria for the first time? - A. I can go to the first statement when she was passed from the pen by PC McGuinness.

THE CORONER: Inspector Layton, have you got anytimes on any of the photographic evidence in this case?

INSPECTOR LAYTON: Not a specific time, sir, butI think we can give some indications.

Q. THE CORONER: Who was the first person who...She was passed out to...? - A. PC McGuinness, sir.

MR. FRASER: I think perhaps the point, sir, isthat in paragraph 8 of the summary, PC McGuinness is noted to be assisting casualties:

"At 1521, with assistance from other officers, pulled the girl who he now knows to be Victoria...

That is obviously a known time. I just wondered if it was possible from his statement to identify how soon after he actually saw her some attempts were able to be made to...

THE CORONER: in the statements:

I cannot recollect seeing anything

Q. Officer, do you remember anything? - A. No, sir. was clearly a time on the photograph where PC McGuinness identifies himself.

There

THE CORONER: with that.

Well, Inspector Layton will deal

sir.THE WITNESS: That may be the way to answer it,

- 11 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

THE CORONER: It would be nice to have theanswer but I don't think we are going to find it.

MR. FRASER: It was to try and fit it into theframework of events, that was all, sir. Thank you, officer.

THE CORONER: Any questions? (No)

DETECTIVE INSPECTOR MICHAEL LAYTON Called

By THE CORONER:

THE WITNESS: Michael Layton, DetectiveInspector, West Midlands Police.

Yes, Inspector. - A. Sir, would you like me to deal with that point first?

No, we will deal with it in later. - A. Sir, an examination has been made of the visual evidence in respect of Victoria and she has been identified as being in the enclosure referred to as number 3. That is show, sir, on a BBC video tape, referenced MAP.l, timed at 1438.44.10. In fact that is the same reference we have previously given in respect of Sarah. As I have said, they were together.

On a video tape, again a BBC tape, referenced MAP.7, 1521.55.18, PC McGuinness is shown assisting to remove Victoria from a terracing of enclosure 3 and the officer has confirmed that identification. He has produced a plan which has been given the referencenumber PJM.l and that shows the location of Victoria onthe terraces.

Paul Winston Turner has viewed a photograph, which is reference PR.5/17 and that identifies himself assisting to carry Victoria from the gate of enclosure 2. That photograph is timed at 1528.

On a further photograph, referenced NGN.2/35 the same scene is in fact shown.

On a photograph referenced NGN.1/55, Dr. Hutson is shown in the process of rendering heart massage to Victoria on the pitch.

Again, sir, Mr. and Mrs. Hicks have been of assistancein viewing visual evidence and I have confirmed identifications made.

NGN.2/35, does that show her being carried... Oh, that is right, it does. The photographic evidence you

B

D

E

have referred to, PC McGuinness is seen removing her from the terracing of pen 3 at 1521? - A. That is right, sir.

Q. Then Paul Turner who was the receiver, so to speak, at... - A. 1528, sir.

Q. That is a difference of seven minutes, approximately? - A. That is right, sir.

Q. I think PC McGuinness is from the terracing of pen 3, but Paul Turner is at the gate of pen 2. Does that imply she was passed over the fence? - A. It does, sir, which is the case in other instances.

Q. The question is what happened in those seven minutes.We have no evidence for that, have we? - A. No, sir.As I have said before, I am satisfied that the BBC time is accurate. The PR.5 photograph, as I mentioned on the opening day, could possibly be one minute at variance either way. As to the intervening time period I cannot give you an explanation.

Q. There is no doubt that the respective officers say that he passed her to this... Actually, what Mr.McGuinness says is:

"After some time I assisted officers to pull a second girl on to the pitch in front of the stand. As Officers dealt with her I ran to the police..."

He does not actually say he passed her to Mr. Turner, does he? - A. No, I believe that is right, sir. I think it is perhaps worth bearing in mind that at that particular time on the video it is certainly apparent that there are a large number of people in enclosure 3 and my perception of it is that it would have taken some time to actually achieve what actually took place.

Q. That is right. I am not complaining about it, I am just trying to sort it out in my mind. Can you just turn to page 61 for a moment? - A. Yes, sir.

Q. This is one of Mr. Turner's statements and he refers to a video map there, MAP.l, timed at 1527, in which he is talking about Victoria? - A. That is right.

Q. Is that a correct identification, as far as you know? - A. Could you just bear with me a moment?

Q. Yes, of course. - A. Yes, sir, I am quite satisfied that that is correct.

H- 13 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

That would give us an accurate... - A. Two fixed times, yes.

The first one is Mr. McGuinness who... - A. Yes. It is virtually... It almost shows the same scene as the photograph PR.5/17 shows, which perhaps does illustrate that perhaps that photograph is a minute fast.

I don't think we will be able to take it much further, will we? - A. I don't think so, sir.

Yes. Have we got any plans or anything? - A. Sir, did you want me to just clarify the situation regarding Mr. Fraser's...?

Yes. - A. As you have just mentioned, the video reference MAP.l, 1527.07.11, shows Paul Turner in the process of carrying Victoria just from the gateway towards the pitch. There is another photograph which we have referred to as NGN.1/55, and although that photograph is not timed, from the number of people shown in both the video print and the photograph, I am reasonably sure it would have been taken very shortly afterwards. A lot of the same people are in the same shot.

What does that tell us? Remind me what the photograph is? - A. NGN.1/55, that shows Dr. Hutson in the process if administering heart massage.

Sir, although I cannot give a specific time, I am reasonably satisfied it would have been not very long af terwards.

That was a newspaper photograph? - A. That is right, sir. Sir, can I refer you to a plan which has been given the reference NWJL.108?

That will be C.81. - A. Also a further plan, sir, MWJL.109.

That will be C.82. - A. Would you wish to refer to any other plan, sir?

I don't think we need to, no. - A. Sir, if we can deal with the video identification first in respect of MWJL.108, it is, as I have already said, the same location that Sarah was shown in, which in fact is over here in enclosure number 3.

Also on that plan is a photograph which we have already referred to which is one that Mr. Hicks in this case is more than happy that it does in fact show Victoria.

That is in this location here. In this case he isquite sure that it is Victoria.

In fact positionally it is very similar to one of the yellow spots in the other one? - A. That is right.

In the case of Sarah. - A. That is right. It is the same photograph, but there is just a slight degree of difference in the certainty.

It is a slightly better picture. - A. Sir, in respect of MWJL.109, there are a number of identifications on the pitch on this plan. If I refer to PR.5/17, that shows a location here, sir, on the pitch in front of gate... Well, as it were, at gate 3.

Gate 2. - A. I beg your pardon, sir, at gate 2. Then there are other references to the photograph NGN.1/55, which I have just referred to which just shows a position here on the pitch. There are two other references to videos, sir.

But they are all substantially in the same area? - A. Yes.

You have indicated these as potentially live at that point? - A. There is nothing to be drawn from that, sir. It is purely the fact that Victoria went to hospital and as such we choose to treat it as...

That is right. In fact, if anything the implication might be the other way in the light of Dr. Hutson? - A. That is right, sir. We had to make a decision as to how to do it and we choose to do that.

THE CORONER: Any questions?

MR. FRASER: No, thank you, sir.

MRS. NORCLIFFE: Sir, I wonder whether you mightre^consider giving a "C" number to the plan PJM.l?This is the officer locating in enclosure 3?

THE WITNESS: Sir, it is a plan submitted byPC McGuinness.

THE CORONER: If it would make you happier I haveno objection to given that plan a "C" number. The position is virtually identical to the position shown on MAP.l, but if you feel happier we will give it a "C" number. It will be C.83:

B

Could you just demonstrate it? - A. As you have said, sir, it is virtually identical. This is PC McGuinness's plan and it shows a position here.

It does show the position on the video. Just take your marker off and then re-position it. - A. It is, to all intents and purposes, sir, identical.

MRS. NORCLIFFE: I am grateful, sir.

THE CORONER: Not at all. Mr. Fraser, anythingelse?

D

E

MR. FRASER: No, sir.

THE CORONER: Just before you address me, Mr.Fraser, would you allow me to say something?

You may have noticed, Mr. Hicks, that the death certifications are at the Northern General Hospital and in fact the opening statements were read on that basis. I have already explained to the Jury that although evidentially, and now we have heard it it seems almost certain that Victoria was actually dead at the stadium and I think from a practical point of view that is the way one should look at it, when we come to saying whether a person is dead or not, in most cases we take it when some doctor actually sits down and says, "I certify this person is dead , because it brings a finality to it. That is why those opening statements are worded in that way.

Yes, Mr. Fraser?

MR. FRASER: Sir, there are two matters whicharise. They are not directly related to evidence which you have heard but they are matters which have concerned the family and if I may canvass them briefly before you.

The first relates to the taking of blood samples from all the deceased. That is something which has caused concern across the board I think it would be fair to say to the bereaved families. Can you give the families an assurance, sir, that was a decision which was made by you and not under the subject of any influence from any force other than your own decision and from your own experience?

THE CORONER: Yes. I don't want to answer anyquestions but I can actually reassure you that it was entirely my decision. I certainly wasn't pressurised into doing it. There is no question about that.

H- 16 -

J. L. Harpham Ltd

MR. FRASER: Sir, the other matter which arisesalso has been canvassed before and that is the question of the families being allowed to see their loved ones immediately following death. I know that you have previously expressed a view about that. There was obviously some confusion, to put it mildly, on the night of the disaster and the families obviously are concerned that in future, if such a dreadful tragedy happens again, they can perhaps be afforded the opportunity to spend some time with their loved ones in a quiet place.

Having said that, sir, I heard what you said in relation to my previous comment.

THE CORONER: All I can say is I just hope that Inever, ever, have to face another tragedy of this nature, but I don't think I can really help add any more to what I have said before.

MR. FRASER: Sir, I will remain briefly on myfeet, if I may. This particular family has been the subject of a tremendous amount of press attention since they lost their daughters. They have never before publicly had an opportunity to thank the people who helped them on the day and who have helped them in the intervening twelve months. They want me to do that publicly through you, sir. They specifically want me to thank, without naming any individual because it would be unfair to do so, those people who tried so valiantly to save their daughters' lives, even though with the benefit of hindsight it is now known that those efforts were in vain on the day.

Mr. Hicks went to the Northern General Hospital.He saw Mr. Wardrope there. He says there was- a distressing scene but it was quite clear to him that everything that could be done was being done and that everything was in a state of complete control at the hospital and he is grateful for all the efforts that were made.

Finally, sir, and it would again be wrong to identify individual officers of West Midlands Police, but he feels obliged to name specifically Sergeant McCombie and Sergeant Appleton for the way they have reacted towards this family in the past twelve months. They have been very professional in their approach, very helpful. They have spent hours with them in an attempt to allay their fears and they are most grateful for that. To some extent that contrasts with events which happened prior to the involvement with those officers, but they specifically want those officers thanked through you, sir.

THE CORONER: Well, I accept the thanks whichhave been offered, particularly in respect of the West Midlands Police Officers. I don't think I want to make any comment with regard to the parenthesis with which you surrounded it. I think that would be inappropriate and I think that as far as I am concerned I have not heard that particular remark. At least, I have heard it, but that is all I am going to say.

Mr. and Mrs. Hicks, to a certain extent Mr. Fraser has made one of the points I wanted to make as I was about to close this inquest, but I will nevertheless do it again.

You have been in a sense - you have been very unfortunate altogether, but on top of all your other misfortunes you have had the added one that your grieving has been more or less public, because it has been two daughters, they were girls, there has been an awful lot of publicity, as you know better than I do.So you have had that extra added burden of having, in a sense, to live out your grief in public and I feel for you in that.

I think it is also true to say it must have been an exceedingly - well, it must have been dreadful for you on the day but I can imagine the time when the ambulance came and you didn't know what to do, which way to turn, that I expect you have thought over many times, did you do the right thing. Well, it is only my opinion, but in my opinion you did do the right thing at the time because I don't know whether you knew that the man there was a doctor, but it is neither here nor there, you could see there were people who appeared to know what they were doing. You cannot be in two places at once so I am sure you did the right thing and you did not let Victoria down, which must be the thing which has is so painful when one thinks about it.

Insofar as I can make a comment on that, that is my feeling.

Finally, please accept our great sorrow at your terrible loss and, of course, to you, Mrs. Hicks as well.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to close for the afternoon. Remember, don't discuss the cases and please be with us again tomorrow morning.

(The inquest on VICTORIA JANE HICKS was adjourned to a date to be fixed")

- 18 -