pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

Can't see another topic for this, but think it's well worth talking about.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/no...death-teenager

In my humble opinion, yes people make mistakes and yes he didn't aim to cause her any harm and certainly didn't move in anyway to kill her, BUT his sole job is for the safety of the passengers and the train and whilst looking straight at her whilst she was physically touching the train he signaled for the driver to move on.

5 years though ?

nik52wrx

Yes he does deserve it. As for sentence he'll probably only serve half anyway.
End of the day he could have prevented her death on that platform irrespective of what state she was in.

Nik

The Dogs B******s

I'm sitting on the fence on this one.

LEO-RS

Would you be sitting on the fence if it was your daughter?

LEO-RS

Yes, without a doubt he should have been jailed. Had he done his job properly she would still be here today. The girl was drunk and clearly in need of some assistance. He flagged the train away and what happened next was not to be known but still, he failed her.

He's not a bad person, he just made the wrong decision. It's her friends that should hang their heads in shame, they let her get off at the wrong stop and allowed her to behave in such a manner.

gpssti4

iTrader: (6)

He was responsible for her safety.

He was negligent in his duty and she died.

Yes, he should have gone to prison, for how long depends on who you talk to: her parents would want much longer and someone unconnected, probably less. Overall, I'd say it's a fair sentence - he'll be out in less than three.

The Dogs B******s

My daughter wouldn't do what she did.

Miniman

iTrader: (2)

Will the rail unions mention this next time there is a change in policy? Usually they are so keen to point out that safety will suffer if guards are withdrawn.

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

No one has mentioned that maybe she too was perhaps the main one responsible?

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

I think jail was pretty harsh, but not as harsh as the consequences of him making the wrong call, imagine doing that job year in year out, platforms full of pissed up people, abuse, schedules, getting moaned at if the train is thirty seconds late.

It is quite anacheivement to be that twatted you manage to fall between a train and a platform, most drunk people have at least enough motor skills and inate sense to stay back from a moving 100 tonne vehicle, but then she was hammered and had drugs in her system.

I expect he was thinking that like every other person, the train starts to move, they move away from it, he will have sen people near it thousands of times and they move back, only this one didnt.

I think really, he shoulders some blame but she has most of it for getting so drunk and drugged up, trouble is the dead really can do no wrong, unless they are a paedo TV presenter, we cant tell them off so whoever is left behind gets the blame.

I really cant see how jailing a train guard helps, he isnt a danger to the public, it isnt like that scenario will come up again as I doubt he will ever be a train guard again, I expect he has suffered a lot for this, not sure him being in prison helps anyone.

The Dogs B******s

That all makes sense to me.

Wish

iTrader: (2)

No he didn't.....
Should the bar ownder also be held responsible ?

scoobeenut

This was no accident, the guard made a conscious decision to clear the driver to move off. Fair enough if he hadn’t seen her but he had and knew that he was taking a risk to get the train away.

It makes no difference that the girl was drunk, the reason for having a guard on a train is for the safety of all the passengers and to assist the driver in knowing when it is clear to move away.

jonc

I think it's a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't. If the guard was let off with "re-training" or demoted or even sacked, I think people would be screaming for a custodial sentence. We could blame 16 year old girl for being under the influence of alcohol and an illegal drug but at the end of the day the guard's paid job is to ensure the safety of passengers on the train and on the platform. It would not have taken much effort to either let the girl back on the train or walk up to her and assist with moving her away for her safety. In any instance, the train should not have been allowed to move if someone is in contact with the train. The girl clearly was in no fit state to realise the danger she was in and the guard failed in his duty and therefore was criminally negligent which resulted in the death of the girl.

pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

They are kids, it's not down to them to look after it, they probably thought it would be funny to trick her, they were drunk too ..

David Lock

Yes.

dl

njkmrs

I think it was harsh jailing him.This situation of drunks in this scenario plays out most weekends in most stations I would say.The trains would never move if the guards had to wait for drunks to move away before setting off.
Sorry for the girl and her family ,but equally the guard.He never would have imagined this happening when he set off for work that night.

pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

but is he not trained (pardon the pun) and paid to stop it happening.

Saxo Boy

Outstanding response and a very, very, very uncommon attitude in the UK today.

If I go out drinking tonight and get so out of control that I lean against a train and die that is my choice and my responsibility.

Instead of looking for someone to blame, perhaps the parents should look inwardly and wonder how the failed to teach their daughter about pacing her alcohol consumption, about drinking in moderation (while still having fun) and about laying off the drugs.

All that said, the platform guy is a bloody idiot for taking the risk. Assuming he could clearly see she was leaning against the train he should not have signaled for it to move.

As I see it, the issue is how do you proportion blame when two idiots collide. By way of an example, suppose you pull out into the fast lane and cause a guy doing 140mph to swerve, crash and die. Who's to blame? Clearly, the guy shouldn't have been overtaking a car doing half his speed? However, you should have assessed the closing speed and not pulled out. Hence, both are to blame.

speedking

Bring back Stationmasters. Then everyone complains when the fares go up.

I feel sorry for the guy, but he should have just kept the train parked up until the issue was resolved. Would a bus driver knock over a drunk to keep to his schedule?

ScoobyWon't

<flame suit>
The only positive you can possibly draw is that at least she can't breed.

Alan Jeffery

It's kind of 50/50 isn't it? She shouldn't have thought it was ok to lean on a train in a station and he shouldn't have signalled it to go knowing she was there leaning on it.
If I have to come down on either side, I'd say it was his call, being supposedly the only sentient being on the scene with the power to influence the outcome.
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.

By the way, Scooby Won't, the above comment is disgusting, and I'd prefer if you edited it out.

David Lock

Didn't you ever get pissed when you were a kid?

dl

Henrik

iTrader: (5)

+1

I know myself that I get a bit blase with following protocol after doing something 100s of times, and if I was the guard it's entirely conceivable that I might have made the same call having had to deal with drunks hundreds of times before. However, at the end of the day it would have been *my* responsibility to let the train leave, and if something happened due to my decision, it would have been *my* responsibility, no matter what had happened prior (i.e. how many drinks she had etc etc). It would have been entirely within my powers to stop it happening.

The guy knew she was drunk and out of control, leaning against a train that was about to move away. Of course it's his bleeding fault she fell down.

dpb

I think there are more pissed up kids than at any time in history?

Is it possible to/did he/would it have made any difference if he stopped the train after it started, if you see what I mean

Saxo Boy

Agree, I've always had a major bee in my bonnet about that case. At the end of the day, the guy burned the candle at both ends and drove tired. Who here hasn't done that?

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.

Working that logic into the Range Rover guy problem we have a situation where the individual concerned should walk free from court. Of course, in our blame society this is an appalling prospect? He must be punished! He must be kept away from society so he can do no harm! What a joke...I'm pretty sure knowing you were a key component part in a chain of events that lead to the deaths of dozens (hundreds?) of people is punishment enough.

CrisPDuk

+1

I think the girl's parents should shoulder a fair portion of the blame too

For a child of 16 to believe it is acceptable to get that drunk and that high, there must have been a serious lack of quality parenting in her formative years

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Too right, only 5 years though ffs be out in 2.5? Mad fookin world.

TX.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

If the train was already moving and she lent on it then yes however story says she was leaning on it whilst stationary

TX.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Consequences of your actions jacko, not enough of it goes on in 2012.

TX.