Hillsborough: Robert Harbour, ace Orgreave investigator… oh sorry, it’s just Whittle again

by Martin Odoni

I do not wish to pursue a protracted vendetta against anyone, but I have recently learned that an old antagonist, Christopher Whittle, has now adopted a new pen-name, and due to his past deceitful behaviours, I feel people should be on their guard.

If you see any books published in the near future under the pseudonym Robert Harbour, especially any that relate to either the Hillsborough Disaster or the Battle Of Orgreave, it will be written by Whittle. He has shown a heightened interest in Orgreave in recent times, so be especially on alert for any claims by the aforementioned ‘Mr Harbour’ that he was personally present at Orgreave during the Miners’ Strike, or worse, that he was attacked by the police while there. (Just to make clear, I do recommend people sign his petition above, as he is absolutely correct that Orgreave was a travesty.)

I am not saying Whittle/Harbour will make such a claim, but, we must face the possibility – he has history. What he does claim is that his father was a mine-worker, perhaps to better associate his family history with that of the Miners movement. But is it true?

As is often the case with Whittle, you can say it is sort of accurate, -ish, but it scrapes the sides a bit as you slot the detail into place; according to page 4 of his first book, Whittle’s father Robert was a draughtsman for the National Board of Coal at the local colliery in Burnley in the 1950s. A draughtsman is essentially a designer of equipment that other workers use. So, Robert Whittle was employed in the mining industry, yes, but he did not do actual mining, and indeed probably did not go into mine-shafts all that often. It seems unlikely that he ever came home from work covered from head-to-toe in black dust, with a back aching from twelve hours hunched in subterranean near-darkness, and shoulders burning from relentless swinging of the pickaxe.

In short, ‘Harbour’ is stretching the truth, but only a tad, so we can give this one a pass. (Robert later became a teacher too, which is well outside the remit.)

In fairness to Whittle, he wrote a new book in 2022 about his post-Hillsborough experiences, At The End Of The Storm Is A Golden Sky. It is still not the smoothest, or most error-free read imaginable, and I know all things are relative, but it is definitely a marked improvement on his first book. And he does finally seem to have grown up a bit and acknowledged in the preface that With Hope In Your Heart: A Hillsborough Survivor’s Story, The Denial Of Justice & A Personal Battle With PTSD was something of a mess. That and that his own behaviour when reacting to negative feedback has created enemies for himself. Some healthy self-reflection does him credit.

I still find careless mistakes in the new book, mind. Just for example, on only the third page, Whittle still incorrectly claims that the South Yorkshire Coroner had ruled that all the Hillsborough victims were dead by 3:15pm on 15th April 1989. What Stefan Popper actually ruled was that their fates had been sealed by then i.e. he ruled that their injuries by that point were so severe that even any who had not already died from them by 3:15pm were certain to do so. (All evidence strongly indicates that Popper was still wrong about that, but inaccurate reporting of his conclusions is unnecessarily misleading.)

Whittle also wrongly asserts that it was ninety-six Hillsborough deaths at the time of the original Inquest in 1990-91. In fact, it was ninety-five, as the life support machine of the ninety-sixth victim, Tony Bland, would not be switched off until 1993.

Alas, Whittle is still prone to these sorts of counter-factual errors, and they are frequently pretty basic details that he is getting wrong. They really do not help his credibility when he tries to claim that he is an authority on Hillsborough.

But at least the work is a lot more coherent and readable now. So who knows? Maybe if a book by ‘Robert Harbour’ about the Battle Of Orgreave is printed in the near future, it will be readable enough to be worth the bother. Whether it will be accurate enough is a fainter hope.

_____

POSTSCRIPT MESSAGE TO CHRISTOPHER WHITTLE: –

Should you read this, Whittle, I want to emphasise that I mean what I say when I declare that I want no vendetta. This ridiculous feud was one YOU created years ago when you just could not tolerate me pointing out that you had made a claim about Margaret Thatcher that had never been corroborated, and still has not been all these years later. You have been abusive, deceitful, false-accusatory, high-handed, bullying, and sometimes even downright threatening (albeit in an inadvertently hilarious way) and so I certainly would have every right to pursue a grudge against you.

But I did not write this article out of spite; I only wrote it precisely because you have a history of telling irresponsible lies, and so I felt it for the best to warn others to be skeptical of what you might choose to write in future, and to take nothing you write at face-value.

I would just as readily bury the hatchet however. An acknowledgement of your past poor conduct and an apology for it is all it would take.

Seeing you have shown you are capable of the critical self-reflection required, how about you go have a think about it?