Hillsborough match commander David Duckenfield is to get legal aid to fight possible prosecution on charges of gross negligence manslaughter.
News of the development came on Monday at a hearing at Preston Crown Court, sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
A judge ordered that the former chief superintendent qualifies for legal representation for High Court proceedings, next year.
At a previous hearing on November 24, Mr Justice William Davis heard from a lawyer acting for Duckenfield free of charge there was no funding to oppose a Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) application for a stay on prosecution to be lifted.
In making a “representation order”, the judge said the High Court application involved factual and legal issues of complexity and “significant public importance”.
A stay on further prosecution was awarded to Duckenfield in 2000 after a private prosecution was brought by the families of those who lost relatives during the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest at Sheffield Wednesday’s ground in April 1989.
Duckenfield, now 73, faces 95 counts of gross negligence manslaughter, but cannot be formally charged pending the outcome of the High Court proceedings.
The CPS application was originally due to be heard in January, but will now be in late February.
Barrister John Dye, who has been acting for Duckenfield pro-bono, told the judge the application involved “serious, complex and novel legal arguments in relation to the lifting of the stay”.
The funding applied for was for the retired officer to oppose the CPS bid to lift the stay, and for financial assistance “if necessary” for the costs of his “defence on the charges”.
Six people in total face charges relating to the Hillsborough disaster, with future trials scheduled to be held at Preston Crown Court.
All have indicated they will plead not guilty.
Ninety six Liverpool fans were crushed to death in pens at the Leppings Lane end of Hillsborough Stadium on April 15 1989 as their FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest began.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article