Hillsborough bystanders witnessed terrible things – and were cheated out of the compensation they deserve

Send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

The disaster occurred before the 1989 FA Cup semi-final match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest (Getty)

While one major injustice over Hillsborough appears close to being rectified, another remains as a stain on the British Establishment. Whilst nothing can compare to the horrors experienced by the 96 and their friends and families, I am sure that every one of the 54,000 people who were actually at the Sheffield ground that day suffered, like me, trauma and extreme mental anguish as a result of what they witnessed, which continues to some degree to this day.

This was not a car-crash event, seen for a fleeting moment and causing a sharp intake of breath. The spectators all around the ground could not flee the scene and were required by the police to stay where they were, ringside at the unfolding tragedy, as the dead and dying were carried frantically across the ground and laid out, in the case of the Nottingham Forest fans, in a long line of corpses in front of them.

No one was allowed to leave, nor did it seem possible to look way. For an hour-and-a-half we stood or sat there, observing the most chilling and awful episode in football history, with image after horrific image burning into our memories.

But when Her Majesty's justices were called upon to agree on who was financially responsible for the tragedy (including the FA, for holding the game at a ground were a similar tragedy had only narrowly been averted the year before; the Sheffield Wednesday club for being in serious breach of safety regulations; and West Yorkshire Police for their incompetent planning and crowd control ), they cleverly ruled that, while admitting such events could cause serious mental trauma to the thousands who observed it first-hand and close up, only those whose relatives were among the dying could claim financial compensation. What nonsense.

I firmly believe that this ruling protected not merely the institutions who were guilty of negligence, but more importantly the insurance companies and Lloyd's names who would have had to fund the (perhaps) billions of pounds of compensation payments that would surely have resulted from the class action that should have followed.

It may seem crass and unthinking to talk about 'compensation' at a time of such tragedy, but history will surely judge that there was not just an establishment cover-up over who was to blame for Hillsborough, but a financial stitch-up which ensured that those who should have met the cost of that culpability kept their fortunes intact.

Name and address withheld

Refusal to let in Syrian children demonstrates moral depths of Government

The Government defeat of the Immigration Bill amendment that would have let 3,000 unaccompanied Syrian minors into the UK demonstrates the moral depths to which the Conservative Government has plunged.

We simply cannot turn our back on these vulnerable children, and history will judge the Conservatives on that basis. The argument that taking in these children could act as a “pull factor” for others truly beggars belief and is tantamount to saying that we must abandon these children to their fate, lest if we do anything, others may follow in their footsteps. We cannot take that position.

Fittingly it was Lord Alf Dubs who tabled the amendment, himself a beneficiary of the Kindertransport, the government-backed programme that accepted 10,000 child refugees from Germany in the run-up to the Second World War. We can only be grateful it was not the current Conservative Party in charge then.

Alex Orr
Edinburgh

The risk for the NHS is the junior doctor contract, not this strike

Jeremy Hunt claims that the junior doctors' strike is putting patients' lives at risk. But because of the support of the consultants, that risk is extremely small. There would be a much greater risk to patients in the long term if this flawed contract were imposed. Mr Hunt can't be expected to understand that because he is a politician, and therefore thinks no further than the next election.

Susan Alexander
South Gloucestershire

Jeremy Hunt vehemently criticises doctors because their strike puts people’s lives at risk. If Mr Hunt is sincere, perhaps he would also vehemently oppose his government's reduction in benefits and social care provision for the poor and disabled. That reduction clearly puts people’s lives at risk – as does the government’s acceptance of high pollution levels in cities, reluctance to challenge the ethos that taxes are bad – and its horror at ideas that there could be more to corporate life than maximising profit and directors’ remuneration.

Peter Cave
London, W1

Jeremy Hunt, who boasted about going “nuclear” on the junior doctors, now accuses them of wanting war. How have they demonstrated this? By asking Hunt to trial the new contract before implementing a national roll out. Yes, very warlike.

Mr Hunt has refused to engage in any meaningful dialogue with the BMA over the imposition of a new contract on the junior doctors, choosing to focus on winning the PR battle instead and even hiring a spin doctor at £2,500 a week – funded by the taxpayer of course.

The reality is the NHS is being starved of funds. It has been promised an extra £8bn by 2020, whilst at the same time having to make £24bn in “efficiency savings”. A child of two could do the maths. Now to make good on an unfunded seven-day NHS election promise, Hunt is imposing a contract on the Junior Doctors that would see them work much longer hours whilst taking a pay cut as a thank you.

Julie Partridge
London

Jeremy Hunt says "no union has the right to stop a government trying to act on a manifesto promise." But what about when it is a union that more than half the population support versus a government that less than half the population voted for, and the "manifesto promise" is one that has repeatedly been shown to be completely unsafe and unworkable, in its current guise?

I fear Jeremy Hunt has no real plans at all for the NHS ; his goal is simply to "win", whatever the cost to patients and the NHS.

Dr Jonathan Barnes
Anaesthetics trainee, University College Hospital
London