CALL FOR DISMISSAL The fate of West Indies cricketer Andr Russell could be decided in the next two to three weeks following final submissions from Russell’s and JADCO’s representative in the allrounder’s whereabouts hearing at the Jamaica Conference Centre yesterday. The three-member panel consisting of chairman Hugh Faulkner, Dr Majorie Vassell and Dixieth Palmer heard lengthy final arguments, especially from JADCO lawyer Lackston Robinson, whose presentation lasted nearly four hours. The submission from Russell’s representative, Patrick Foster, lasted more than two hours. In his submission, Foster called for the case to be dismissed. If he is found to be negligent, then he recommended that the cricketer not receive more than a 12-month ban. “The onus is on the complainant to prove the filing failures to the panel. When giving more than one filing failure in a quarter, you need to be clear. It was a recipe for confusion,” he argued. He added: “Because Russell was unfamiliar with the (filing) process, he cannot be considered to be negligent.” Robinson pointed out that JADCO went over and beyond in trying to assist Russell to file his whereabouts information but claimed that the athlete was just “grossly negligent” and insisted that a one-year sanction was not permissible. “The role of the athlete is to comply with the rules. It is his responsibility to comply with JADCO and international standards, so it was for him to avail himself. It is his duty,” Robinson argued. He also noted that JADCO was within its rights to record a second filing failure against the cricketer in the July to September quarter and insisted that Russell received more than adequate notification and more than one extension on his deadline but made no effort to provide the information required by the anti-doping organisation. Russell faces a ban of up to two years if he is found guilty of the allegations.
The Hillsborough memorial at Anfield Hillsborough families emerge from the Unlawful Killing verdict and outside court sing You’ll Never Walk Alone. pic.twitter.com/pGLvhb4xuU— David Conn (@david_conn) April 26, 2016 1 The 96 Liverpool fans who died in the Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the inquest’s jury has concluded.The jurors were told they could only reach that determination if they were sure of four “essential” matters concerning the deaths at the 1989 FA Cup semi-final.It was also ruled that fan behaviour did not contribute to the Sheffield tragedy.Jurors had to be convinced that overall match commander Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield owed a duty of care to those who died in the disaster, and that he was in breach of that duty of care.Thirdly, they would need to be satisfied that his breach of duty caused the deaths and, fourthly, that it amounted to “gross negligence”.They concluded it was unlawful killing by a 7-2 majority.The conclusion was greeted with sobbing and cheers at the hearing in Warrington.The jury also ruled that fan behaviour did not cause or contribute to the tragedy.The Hillsborough disaster unfolded during Liverpool’s cup tie against Nottingham Forest on April 15 as thousands of fans were crushed at Sheffield Wednesday’s ground.Mr Duckenfield gave the order at 2.52pm to open exit Gate C in Leppings Lane, allowing around 2,000 fans to flood into the already packed central pens behind the goal.The jury also found that both the police and the ambulance service caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster by an error or omission after the crush in the west terrace had begun to develop.After the key conclusions were delivered, someone in court shouted “God bless the jury”. The jurors were given a round of applause as they left the courtroom.Lawyers acting for relatives of the victims said the jury’s conclusions had completely vindicated the bereaved families’ tireless 27-year fight for justice. Justice finally. #JFT96— Jamie Carragher (@Carra23) April 26, 2016 AT LAST!!!!!!! https://t.co/vSdxX4dtVI— John Aldridge (@Realaldo474) April 26, 2016 The jury of six women and three men gave their decisions on an emotionally charged day for relatives of the 96, many of whom were at court for the conclusion of the longest jury proceedings in British legal history.Last Wednesday the jury indicated to the court in Warrington that unanimous decisions had been reached on every question apart from question six – unlawful killing.They were given a majority direction yesterday and quickly indicated they had reached a majority decision on the outstanding question.The fresh inquests began on March 31, 2014, in a specially built courtroom in Warrington.The 1991 accidental deaths verdicts from the original inquests were quashed following the 2012 Hillsborough Independent Panel report after a long campaign by the families of the dead.Dozens of relatives of the victims have attended each of the more than 300 days the court has sat at Bridgewater Place on the Cheshire town’s Birchwood Park business park.At the start of the inquests, the coroner said none of the victims should be blamed for their deaths.Emotional tributes to each of the 96 were then delivered by family members in the form of personal portraits.As families left the building they were met with applause from crowds who had gathered outside the court in support.Many had arrived wearing Liverpool Football Club scarfs and holding posters and banners of loves one.Labour MP Andy Burnham, who has supported the families’ campaign, said: “This has been the greatest miscarriage of justice of our times.“But, finally, it is over.”The victims’ families hugged each other and broke down in tears after emerging from the court.One man shouted “Justice” while two men held up a red scarf that also read “Justice”.Features of the design, construction and layout of the stadium considered to be dangerous or defective caused or contributed to the disaster, the jury decided.Jurors also found the safety certification and oversight of the stadium also caused or contributed to the tragedy.They reached the same conclusion in relation to Sheffield Wednesday’s management and/or preparation for the semi-final tie and the dangerous situation that developed at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the west stand.However, the jury concluded that the club’s conduct on match day may only have caused or contributed to the same situation.The club’s then consultant engineers, Eastwood & Partners, should also have done more to detect and advise on any unsafe or unsatisfactory features the stadium which caused or contributed to the disaster.