Did the train guard deserve jail ?
16 November 2012, 02:59 PM
#31
There's no doubt some blame can be placed on the train guard.
What annoys me in these sorts of cases, is how quite often it is judged that the defendant is the only one responsible, as if he and he alone was responsible and the victim would be alive today if it wasn't for his actions.
Equally, if she had taken personal responsibility for herself*, she would be alive today.
* No, I didn't do drugs or get wasted out of my mind at 16.
What annoys me in these sorts of cases, is how quite often it is judged that the defendant is the only one responsible, as if he and he alone was responsible and the victim would be alive today if it wasn't for his actions.
Equally, if she had taken personal responsibility for herself*, she would be alive today.
* No, I didn't do drugs or get wasted out of my mind at 16.
16 November 2012, 04:09 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
The guy I felt for was the one who crashed his Land Rover and trailer, which led to a train wreck when his combo ended up on a railway line. The deaths he was prosecuted and jailed for were caused by the train coming the other way hitting the derailed first one. You couldn't have engineered all that incident on purpose, so I thought it was a bit much him taking all the blame for something that had to be an accident by default. You could just as easily blamed the guy who designed the road bridge crossing barrier which had a Land Rover sized gap in it.
If he had been pissed up and caused the same thing, would you feel for him then, as I've read and seen plenty of things which suggest that the impairment caused by both lack of sleep and alcohol are somewhat similar, and given that he had 1.5 hours sleep and bugger all two nights before as well, I suspect he wasn't functioning too well?
Its even more tragic that his insurance company tried to blame the highways agency for not having long enough barriers on the bridge.
I was on the M62 that morning, the local radio was saying there had been a train crash at Selby and I passed a couple of police cars parked on the bridge. Clearly I had no idea of the devastation I had just driven over, but likewise I have never seen so many emergency vehicles coming in the opposite direction, and never have done since.
16 November 2012, 09:27 PM
#33
In this country we are obsessed with outcomes and less concerned with intention. Take the guy that threw the fire extinguisher off a building into a crowd. He got a few years, however, if it had hit and killed someone he'd have gotten much, much longer.
As far as I'm concerned the moment the extinguisher left his hand the outcome would be determined by pure luck alone. That being the case, no weighting should be given to the actual outcome. The assessment should rest of his intention and the probably outcome when he threw a 25kg metal object off a 4-story building into a big crowd. IMHO I think it is fair and reasonable to assume that more often than not it will hit and severely maim or kill someone; as such he should have been sentenced on the basis of that potential outcome.
As far as I'm concerned the moment the extinguisher left his hand the outcome would be determined by pure luck alone. That being the case, no weighting should be given to the actual outcome. The assessment should rest of his intention and the probably outcome when he threw a 25kg metal object off a 4-story building into a big crowd. IMHO I think it is fair and reasonable to assume that more often than not it will hit and severely maim or kill someone; as such he should have been sentenced on the basis of that potential outcome.
I have to say I struggle to understand the people on here blaming the girl. At the end of the day the guy's job is 100% about judging when the train is safe to move off. I'm sure his training says that if anyone is in contact with the train he is not to give the signal for it to move off. He didn't do his job and a young girl died - which is manslaughter, end of story.
16 November 2012, 09:41 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So every time you speed you should be prosecuted on the basis that you ran over a pedestrian and killed them? Makes a lot of sense.
I have to say I struggle to understand the people on here blaming the girl. At the end of the day the guy's job is 100% about judging when the train is safe to move off. I'm sure his training says that if anyone is in contact with the train he is not to give the signal for it to move off. He didn't do his job and a young girl died - which is manslaughter, end of story.
I have to say I struggle to understand the people on here blaming the girl. At the end of the day the guy's job is 100% about judging when the train is safe to move off. I'm sure his training says that if anyone is in contact with the train he is not to give the signal for it to move off. He didn't do his job and a young girl died - which is manslaughter, end of story.
Platform wasn't exactlu teaming with other passengers
dl
17 November 2012, 02:59 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a Train Guard and have a lot of sympathy for this bloke as it was only a matter of time before one us in the grade ended up in the dock over something similar, and it won't be the last either.
Every weekend in the evenings we are left to babysit dozens of intoxicated young and middle aged people alike. Unfortunately they get drunk to the point where they have no respect for anyone whether they be fellow passengers or members of staff in authority or anything including the trains' interior.
It is pretty normal to see these groups play games at stations like pushing each other out of the doors and onto the platform as the doors are closing. The dispatch procedure then has to be interrupted with the doors being released again to let them back on. This will happen at every station until they reach their destination.
You get others who get off the train at their station of choice and then rub their lips up against the exterior of the windows or push their noses against the glass making funny faces at people/mates still on the train as it's clearly very amusing
. Or they'll have had a fall out and will take their anger out on the platform by kicking and punching the train non-stop until it departs.
No matter how much you ask them to stop or step away they will not. As a large proportion of stations are unmanned in the evenings if not 24 hrs a day, the only person left to deal with these people is the Guard alone. And if you insist on them complying too much, you get sworn at and threatened with having your head kicked in as a thank you.
Look how groups of young drunk boys and girls behave with Police Officers in the documentaries on TV, if they have no respect for Police Officers then you can just imagine how much they respect us on board. And that's before you try and get some money out of them for the Fare.
We can call for the British Transport Police to come and assist, however they are only based at large stations and often in small numbers. It can take upwards of 40 minutes for them to reach you assuming they are not already dealing with another incident.
To give you an idea we usually have 2 officers based in Leicester in the evening. They cover an area going South towards Kettering, East towards the outskirts of Peterborough, West towards Nuneaton, North towards Loughborough and Long Eaton. BTP have recently cut back on cover so now Derby (who also only have 2 officers on duty) and Leicester have staggered shifts. So if Leicester is on morning shift then Derby will have Evening shift only and vice versa. So in addition to the massive area I've mentioned already, the Leicester officers now additionally cover the Derby patrol area which includes Burton On Trent, parts of the Railway line going towards Stoke on Trent, North towards Chesterfield. Most of the country is very under manned when it comes to BTP officers.
As you'll appreciate the officers go out in pairs for their own safety, so a call out anywhere in that massive area means they are deployed and not available. We can ask for Civil Police but they will only come out if the call is urgent usually involving physical assault or weapons that sort of thing, otherwise they are not interested as they are required to Police their own town centers.
Unlike delaying a bus, the cost of delaying a train can very quickly run into the £1000s and even £10,000s. As a rough estimate we get fined (the company not the Guard) around £60 for every minute we delay our train, we then have to pay a similar amount for every other train we delay as a knock on affect. So if there is a train sat behind you on the line (could be a freight train aswell as another passenger train), we pick their delay fine up. Then when you finally get moving and need a path across a Junction, you may cause another train on a different line to pick up a delay while it waits for you to cross the junction. The trains that we've now delayed will go onto lose their booked path and will get in the way of other services and so on. By the end of the day you will have trains attributing their delay to the first train even though they are in a completely different part of the country.
There are alot of bean counters employed on the railway who's soul jobs are to chase up every single delay minute and try and pass it onto another company.
We get chased up on the phone as soon as we pick up a 3 minute delay on any journey if there is no obvious cause.
I haven't finished yet. We then have the pressure of the other decent polite passengers just trying to get to their destination. As a Railway we are legally obliged to get them to their final destination as long as the passenger has allowed sufficient times for connecting trains. So if they then miss the last connection we have to either put them up in a Hotel or Taxi them to their destination. All these costs very quickly rack up.
I'd be quite happy to just hold a train at a station for an hour or so every night trying to reason with a drunk tw*t. However if we all started doing it the Railway would very quickly grind to a halt. Some companies now have software which automatically logs a delay to the Guards pay number, so over time the managers can see which members of staff are causing the highest amount of delays and pull them into the office for a telling off.
The Guard probably assumed the girl would step away if the train moved, which is what we're all forced into doing to try and keep the railway moving. And in 99.99% of cases they do move away, unfortunately on this night luck ran out. Yes he could have walked to her and tried to reason with her, but if you did that at every stop the delay soon adds up. And from experience, if they do step away when you ask them too, as soon as you turn around to return to the cab they usually step back towards the train and continue to endanger themselves.
So yes, safety is our number 1 priority, but then we also have to consider all of the above before making a decision to hold the service up.
However this case has brought about quite a bit of concern amongst us and I for one will no longer be giving the start signal with anyone in contact with my train. Delays will just have to be dealt with as and when they happen. I'd rather not risk a stretch inside because of somebody else's inability to look out for their own interests.
Here's part of the mother's statement outside court, clearly being drunk and on drugs at 16 is quite acceptable;
“We have listened as our daughter was portrayed as being a drunken liability when in all honesty she did no more than what many teenagers do of a weekend. She went out to celebrate her friend’s birthday.
“The only liability that night was a train guard who Georgia had the catastrophic misfortune to encounter for he had very little if any regard at all for our daughter and her safety
“Christopher McGee will complete his sentence and return to his family. Mine is now gone for ever.”
Every weekend in the evenings we are left to babysit dozens of intoxicated young and middle aged people alike. Unfortunately they get drunk to the point where they have no respect for anyone whether they be fellow passengers or members of staff in authority or anything including the trains' interior.
It is pretty normal to see these groups play games at stations like pushing each other out of the doors and onto the platform as the doors are closing. The dispatch procedure then has to be interrupted with the doors being released again to let them back on. This will happen at every station until they reach their destination.
You get others who get off the train at their station of choice and then rub their lips up against the exterior of the windows or push their noses against the glass making funny faces at people/mates still on the train as it's clearly very amusing
. Or they'll have had a fall out and will take their anger out on the platform by kicking and punching the train non-stop until it departs.No matter how much you ask them to stop or step away they will not. As a large proportion of stations are unmanned in the evenings if not 24 hrs a day, the only person left to deal with these people is the Guard alone. And if you insist on them complying too much, you get sworn at and threatened with having your head kicked in as a thank you.
Look how groups of young drunk boys and girls behave with Police Officers in the documentaries on TV, if they have no respect for Police Officers then you can just imagine how much they respect us on board. And that's before you try and get some money out of them for the Fare.
We can call for the British Transport Police to come and assist, however they are only based at large stations and often in small numbers. It can take upwards of 40 minutes for them to reach you assuming they are not already dealing with another incident.
To give you an idea we usually have 2 officers based in Leicester in the evening. They cover an area going South towards Kettering, East towards the outskirts of Peterborough, West towards Nuneaton, North towards Loughborough and Long Eaton. BTP have recently cut back on cover so now Derby (who also only have 2 officers on duty) and Leicester have staggered shifts. So if Leicester is on morning shift then Derby will have Evening shift only and vice versa. So in addition to the massive area I've mentioned already, the Leicester officers now additionally cover the Derby patrol area which includes Burton On Trent, parts of the Railway line going towards Stoke on Trent, North towards Chesterfield. Most of the country is very under manned when it comes to BTP officers.
As you'll appreciate the officers go out in pairs for their own safety, so a call out anywhere in that massive area means they are deployed and not available. We can ask for Civil Police but they will only come out if the call is urgent usually involving physical assault or weapons that sort of thing, otherwise they are not interested as they are required to Police their own town centers.
Unlike delaying a bus, the cost of delaying a train can very quickly run into the £1000s and even £10,000s. As a rough estimate we get fined (the company not the Guard) around £60 for every minute we delay our train, we then have to pay a similar amount for every other train we delay as a knock on affect. So if there is a train sat behind you on the line (could be a freight train aswell as another passenger train), we pick their delay fine up. Then when you finally get moving and need a path across a Junction, you may cause another train on a different line to pick up a delay while it waits for you to cross the junction. The trains that we've now delayed will go onto lose their booked path and will get in the way of other services and so on. By the end of the day you will have trains attributing their delay to the first train even though they are in a completely different part of the country.
There are alot of bean counters employed on the railway who's soul jobs are to chase up every single delay minute and try and pass it onto another company.
We get chased up on the phone as soon as we pick up a 3 minute delay on any journey if there is no obvious cause.
I haven't finished yet. We then have the pressure of the other decent polite passengers just trying to get to their destination. As a Railway we are legally obliged to get them to their final destination as long as the passenger has allowed sufficient times for connecting trains. So if they then miss the last connection we have to either put them up in a Hotel or Taxi them to their destination. All these costs very quickly rack up.
I'd be quite happy to just hold a train at a station for an hour or so every night trying to reason with a drunk tw*t. However if we all started doing it the Railway would very quickly grind to a halt. Some companies now have software which automatically logs a delay to the Guards pay number, so over time the managers can see which members of staff are causing the highest amount of delays and pull them into the office for a telling off.
The Guard probably assumed the girl would step away if the train moved, which is what we're all forced into doing to try and keep the railway moving. And in 99.99% of cases they do move away, unfortunately on this night luck ran out. Yes he could have walked to her and tried to reason with her, but if you did that at every stop the delay soon adds up. And from experience, if they do step away when you ask them too, as soon as you turn around to return to the cab they usually step back towards the train and continue to endanger themselves.
So yes, safety is our number 1 priority, but then we also have to consider all of the above before making a decision to hold the service up.
However this case has brought about quite a bit of concern amongst us and I for one will no longer be giving the start signal with anyone in contact with my train. Delays will just have to be dealt with as and when they happen. I'd rather not risk a stretch inside because of somebody else's inability to look out for their own interests.
Here's part of the mother's statement outside court, clearly being drunk and on drugs at 16 is quite acceptable;
“We have listened as our daughter was portrayed as being a drunken liability when in all honesty she did no more than what many teenagers do of a weekend. She went out to celebrate her friend’s birthday.
“The only liability that night was a train guard who Georgia had the catastrophic misfortune to encounter for he had very little if any regard at all for our daughter and her safety
“Christopher McGee will complete his sentence and return to his family. Mine is now gone for ever.”
Last edited by Bugatti; 17 November 2012 at 03:09 AM.
17 November 2012, 06:53 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very well written Bugatti.
I have never worked on the railways but my wife has and I'm well aware of the timetable requirements and the fines that are imposed due to delays.
Personally, I think the sentence itself is too harsh considering what real criminals do, though the issue here is an actual death.
However, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the legal age to drink 18? In which case the parents must accept part responsibility for a minor? i.e. an underage drinker.
Irrespective of the thought that "everybody" does it. The fact of the matter then is that the parents were condoning their child to break the law.
Having said that, it is still a needless waste of a young life and my condolences go out to her parents.
I have never worked on the railways but my wife has and I'm well aware of the timetable requirements and the fines that are imposed due to delays.
Personally, I think the sentence itself is too harsh considering what real criminals do, though the issue here is an actual death.
However, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the legal age to drink 18? In which case the parents must accept part responsibility for a minor? i.e. an underage drinker.
Irrespective of the thought that "everybody" does it. The fact of the matter then is that the parents were condoning their child to break the law.
Having said that, it is still a needless waste of a young life and my condolences go out to her parents.
17 November 2012, 11:37 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Enginetuner.co.uk Plymouth Dyno Dynamics RR Engine machining and building EcuTek SimTek mapping
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look how groups of young drunk boys and girls behave with Police Officers in the documentaries on TV, if they have no respect for Police Officers then you can just imagine how much they respect us on board. And that's before you try and get some money out of them for the Fare.
Being older, I recall a time when you wouldn't mouth off at a Policeman, as you'd be smacked around, then hauled off.
If you can call one a **** to his face, then be told by a judge that it's ok to do that, how the hell do you expect anyone else to cope?
People who mouth off need to know they can't get away with it, it's the only respect that means anything.
I'm not saying the unfortunate girl in question was behaving that way, but you can bet her "Mates" were.
17 November 2012, 11:37 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was an automated shuttle system, who would they have blamed? the computers? the camera's??
How can you predict what someone will do? would he have still got done if she had staggered away and then turned and run toward the train?
What about people who top themselves by going under trains?
Should we hold the guards resonsible for not stopping the trains? the drivers?
(And you would have thought by now they would have had some sort of camera so the train driver can see if the platform is safe before pulling off?)
IMHO It was an accident, tragic, but an accident.
Mart
How can you predict what someone will do? would he have still got done if she had staggered away and then turned and run toward the train?
What about people who top themselves by going under trains?
Should we hold the guards resonsible for not stopping the trains? the drivers?
(And you would have thought by now they would have had some sort of camera so the train driver can see if the platform is safe before pulling off?)
IMHO It was an accident, tragic, but an accident.
Mart
17 November 2012, 12:41 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since the girl was leaning against the train he had full responsibility to ensure that it was completely safe for the train to move off and it was not while she was doing that.
He should have made sure she was well clear before signalling the train to move. He therefore was not doing his job properly and deserves to be penalised for his gross error in signalling the driver to move off.
Les
He should have made sure she was well clear before signalling the train to move. He therefore was not doing his job properly and deserves to be penalised for his gross error in signalling the driver to move off.
Les
17 November 2012, 12:44 PM
#42
Bugatti, excellent post and confirms my thoughts, I dont envy you your job, me and jackson mate were on a train last year and saw the guard taking a lot of stick of a group of youths, they got on without paying and refused to pay, they looked reasonably respectable and well dressed but still thought it ok to abuse the guard and steal a journey. The guard was grateful for a bit of moral support and was telling us it is pretty typical, we had joined at an unmaned platform with no machine and had been trying to pay but he just let us off as we had backed him up.
I have been on a train and had gangs of lads drinking crates of beer, going to Leeds one evening for a course, effing and blinding, hanging off the luggage racks and loudly discussing sexual matters, very intimidating, like they were daring anyone to say something, bunch of utter ****heads, they left food mess and 24 empty cans rolling around the carriage, utter ****ign disgrace.
Why was a 16 year old kid out on her own getting bladdered and drugged up, it was getting on for midnight, she was out drinking illegally in public bars seemingly with the knowledge of her parents, there is a degree of culpability there and the guard seems to have copped for all the blame.
5 Years is pretty extreme, I can see why train guards now may get very defensive about things. There was some blame on his part but the sequence of events that led up to this wasnt his doing.
I have been on a train and had gangs of lads drinking crates of beer, going to Leeds one evening for a course, effing and blinding, hanging off the luggage racks and loudly discussing sexual matters, very intimidating, like they were daring anyone to say something, bunch of utter ****heads, they left food mess and 24 empty cans rolling around the carriage, utter ****ign disgrace.
Why was a 16 year old kid out on her own getting bladdered and drugged up, it was getting on for midnight, she was out drinking illegally in public bars seemingly with the knowledge of her parents, there is a degree of culpability there and the guard seems to have copped for all the blame.
5 Years is pretty extreme, I can see why train guards now may get very defensive about things. There was some blame on his part but the sequence of events that led up to this wasnt his doing.
17 November 2012, 12:45 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Coventry
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since the girl was leaning against the train he had full responsibility to ensure that it was completely safe for the train to move off and it was not while she was doing that.
He should have made sure she was well clear before signalling the train to move. He therefore was not doing his job properly and deserves to be penalised for his gross error in signalling the driver to move off.
Les
He should have made sure she was well clear before signalling the train to move. He therefore was not doing his job properly and deserves to be penalised for his gross error in signalling the driver to move off.
Les
17 November 2012, 01:00 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
I can see this case causing chaos on the rail networks now tbh, if I was a guard, there would now be no way I would be letting my train go if there were p!ssed up idiots anywhere near it
I think number of delay fines for TOCs are going to rocket, and I sincerely hope they do. They might start doing something about looking after their staff then
17 November 2012, 01:35 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Mr Bugatti for your well written commentary.
Of course the nub of all this is that society in many areas has just about broken down so guys like you are left to pick up the pieces. You put a foot wrong and you're in pokey and society is off laughing.
One question. Did that guard have authority to grab hold of the girl and drag her away? Or is that not allowed in case she claims she was assaulted?
dl
Of course the nub of all this is that society in many areas has just about broken down so guys like you are left to pick up the pieces. You put a foot wrong and you're in pokey and society is off laughing.
One question. Did that guard have authority to grab hold of the girl and drag her away? Or is that not allowed in case she claims she was assaulted?
dl
17 November 2012, 02:07 PM
#47
Yes, without any shadow of of doubt.
The main part of his job is to let the driver of the train know when its safe to pull away, the guard may as well have had the brake and power levers in his hands as its on his call that the train moves away.
Regardless if the teenager was drunk, that isn't the issue here. The issue is that he let a train pull away when it wasn't safe to do so, his actions caused a young girl to lose her life.
How can anyone tell the driver its safe to pull away when a young girl, in a drunken state is leaning against the train. The majority of us got drunk when we were teeneagers, i'm sure ive staggered across roads when it wasn't to do so along with aother things that you don't know what your doing when your hammered. His job was to protect the public and to let that train pull away only when it was safe to do so, he failed to do that and his actions resulted in a young girl losing her life.
It beggars belief in my opinion.
The main part of his job is to let the driver of the train know when its safe to pull away, the guard may as well have had the brake and power levers in his hands as its on his call that the train moves away.
Regardless if the teenager was drunk, that isn't the issue here. The issue is that he let a train pull away when it wasn't safe to do so, his actions caused a young girl to lose her life.
How can anyone tell the driver its safe to pull away when a young girl, in a drunken state is leaning against the train. The majority of us got drunk when we were teeneagers, i'm sure ive staggered across roads when it wasn't to do so along with aother things that you don't know what your doing when your hammered. His job was to protect the public and to let that train pull away only when it was safe to do so, he failed to do that and his actions resulted in a young girl losing her life.
It beggars belief in my opinion.
Last edited by Rob_Impreza99; 17 November 2012 at 02:13 PM.
17 November 2012, 02:32 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Coventry
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah it does sound like a testing job, but whether the girl was drunk, drugged or whatever, the guard had one simple question to answer:
Is it safe to allow the train to leave?
and the answer was clearly no!
I'm not taking anything away from the job they do, dealing with all the drunk ***'s must be a pain, but losing patience with someone and putting them at that level of risk is just negligence.
Is it safe to allow the train to leave?
and the answer was clearly no!
I'm not taking anything away from the job they do, dealing with all the drunk ***'s must be a pain, but losing patience with someone and putting them at that level of risk is just negligence.
17 November 2012, 05:14 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Muppetising life
Posts: 15,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally wrong to jail the guard. If you chose to drink more and more and more until you are totally wasted you have to accept you are in the wrong.
If every drunken idiot who touches a train means that train cannot move, then nobody is going to be able to get anywhere because of idiots who get drunk.
Time for people to accept responsibility for their own actions. I drink, and if I do something daft then thats my fault, not somebody else's
If every drunken idiot who touches a train means that train cannot move, then nobody is going to be able to get anywhere because of idiots who get drunk.
Time for people to accept responsibility for their own actions. I drink, and if I do something daft then thats my fault, not somebody else's
17 November 2012, 05:30 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Coventry
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally wrong to jail the guard. If you chose to drink more and more and more until you are totally wasted you have to accept you are in the wrong.
If every drunken idiot who touches a train means that train cannot move, then nobody is going to be able to get anywhere because of idiots who get drunk.
Time for people to accept responsibility for their own actions. I drink, and if I do something daft then thats my fault, not somebody else's
If every drunken idiot who touches a train means that train cannot move, then nobody is going to be able to get anywhere because of idiots who get drunk.
Time for people to accept responsibility for their own actions. I drink, and if I do something daft then thats my fault, not somebody else's
17 November 2012, 06:06 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what's your answer then, run them all over?
When that happens the train doesn't go anywhere anyway.
Maybe the answer is platform security personnel and if rail fares increase so be it.
Nk
[QUOTE=Luminous;10872146]
If every drunken idiot who touches a train means that train cannot move, then nobody is going to be able to get anywhere because ofT idiots who get drunk.
When that happens the train doesn't go anywhere anyway.
Maybe the answer is platform security personnel and if rail fares increase so be it.
Nk
[QUOTE=Luminous;10872146]
If every drunken idiot who touches a train means that train cannot move, then nobody is going to be able to get anywhere because ofT idiots who get drunk.
17 November 2012, 06:27 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Enginetuner.co.uk Plymouth Dyno Dynamics RR Engine machining and building EcuTek SimTek mapping
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On reflection, what comes out of this story and so many others is the fact of unforseen consequences.
Nobody thought her life was at risk at the critical moment. If they had, they would have acted differently, and that includes everybody who had anything to do with it. The Girl. The Guard. Her mates who were pissing about. Whoever it was who sold her booze and drugs, or just handed them over for free. Etc.
I've been in situations where what is in control on the face of it suddenly becomes out of control, then everybody is a passenger. Most have been near misses, one most certainly wasn't.
The crucial part of it, in hindsight, which is what happens in a courtroom, should be the part played by those involved, and the possibility that they could do it again if they tried.
How do you define an accident?
I'd say if a situation arises that's virtually impossible to recreate, that's an accident, as in the case of the Land Rover driver.
If somebody's leaning on a train, and the man lets the train go when they can see what's going on, that's not an accident, but I'd hate to define what it was.
Nobody thought her life was at risk at the critical moment. If they had, they would have acted differently, and that includes everybody who had anything to do with it. The Girl. The Guard. Her mates who were pissing about. Whoever it was who sold her booze and drugs, or just handed them over for free. Etc.
I've been in situations where what is in control on the face of it suddenly becomes out of control, then everybody is a passenger. Most have been near misses, one most certainly wasn't.
The crucial part of it, in hindsight, which is what happens in a courtroom, should be the part played by those involved, and the possibility that they could do it again if they tried.
How do you define an accident?
I'd say if a situation arises that's virtually impossible to recreate, that's an accident, as in the case of the Land Rover driver.
If somebody's leaning on a train, and the man lets the train go when they can see what's going on, that's not an accident, but I'd hate to define what it was.
17 November 2012, 06:37 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With hindsight I'm sure he'd wished he'd let her back on the train with her friends, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it.
Lets hope lessons can't be learnt from all of this.
Nik
Lets hope lessons can't be learnt from all of this.
Nik
On reflection, what comes out of this story and so many others is the fact of unforseen consequences.
Nobody thought her life was at risk at the critical moment. If they had, they would have acted differently, and that includes everybody who had anything to do with it. The Girl. The Guard. Her mates who were pissing about. Whoever it was who sold her booze and drugs, or just handed them over for free. Etc.
I've been in situations where what is in control on the face of it suddenly becomes out of control, then everybody is a passenger. Most have been near misses, one most certainly wasn't.
The crucial part of it, in hindsight, which is what happens in a courtroom, should be the part played by those involved, and the possibility that they could do it again if they tried.
How do you define an accident?
I'd say if a situation arises that's virtually impossible to recreate, that's an accident, as in the case of the Land Rover driver.
If somebody's leaning on a train, and the man lets the train go when they can see what's going on, that's not an accident, but I'd hate to define what it was.
Nobody thought her life was at risk at the critical moment. If they had, they would have acted differently, and that includes everybody who had anything to do with it. The Girl. The Guard. Her mates who were pissing about. Whoever it was who sold her booze and drugs, or just handed them over for free. Etc.
I've been in situations where what is in control on the face of it suddenly becomes out of control, then everybody is a passenger. Most have been near misses, one most certainly wasn't.
The crucial part of it, in hindsight, which is what happens in a courtroom, should be the part played by those involved, and the possibility that they could do it again if they tried.
How do you define an accident?
I'd say if a situation arises that's virtually impossible to recreate, that's an accident, as in the case of the Land Rover driver.
If somebody's leaning on a train, and the man lets the train go when they can see what's going on, that's not an accident, but I'd hate to define what it was.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post