Relatives of the victims of the Hillsborough disaster wept at the new inquest as they listened to a roll call of the names of each of the 96 fans who were killed and also when they heard graphic accounts of the fatal crush at the FA Cup semi-final on April 15, 1989.
Details of how the emergency services struggled to deal with the unfolding chaos were presented to the jury, including the use of a makeshift process that saw Polaroid photos of the faces of the dead pinned to a notice board for relatives to identify.
Jurors at the specially fitted court, an office building on the outskirts of Warrington, Cheshire, were told they will need to consider a number of questions, including why the police officer in charge on the day, Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield, claimed fans had forced their way through a gate at Hillsborough Stadium, home of Sheffield Wednesday, minutes after he gave the order for it to be opened.
The court heard 82 people were declared dead in the stadium, 12 in hospital, one person died two days later and another, Tony Bland, in 1993.
A father and son and four pairs of siblings were among the dead, and the youngest victim was 10.
Describing how the tragedy unfolded, the coroner, Lord Justice Goldring, told the jury Mr Duckenfield had been promoted to his role on March 27, less than three weeks before the disaster.
He was given responsibility for the Liverpool-Nottingham Forest match over a more experienced officer, despite his speciality being criminal investigations rather than public order.
Harrowing details of how the crush escalated were laid out, with emergency services not immediately realising the scale of the catastrophe.
Outlining the events of the day, the coroner said: "Around the time of the kick-off, a terrible crush developed in two pens, within the standing terrace at the west end of the stadium - the Leppings Lane end. That's where the Liverpool fans were standing.
"The pressure in the pens built up. Many of those in the pens suffered terrible crushing injuries."
The inquest continues.
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