Merseyrail Guard on Trial

[John55]

Of course it is of significance to the verdict! I would guess most of what the RAIB report discusses relates directly to the evidence heard in court. Until we read the RAIB report we don't know anything. Just rumours and speculation, therefore we cannot comment on the jury's decision. The RAIB report is the closest we are going to get to reading/seeing the evidence available to the jury.

There's nothing wrong with debating something

No problem with debate but I was pointing out it is the jury which decides on criminal matters not the RAIB or the members of this forum.

If you were really keen to have all the evidence at your fingertips you could have sat in the court for the 8 days and you could have heard it all including the material the RAIB may not include.

 

[YorkshireBear]

That's what it looks like to me.

I have only just noticed that, if he can see that. you do have to question whether he should have given RoW, surely you can never presume anything?

 

[Clip]

Of course it is of significance to the verdict! I would guess most of what the RAIB report discusses relates directly to the evidence heard in court. Until we read the RAIB report we don't know anything. Just rumours and speculation, therefore we cannot comment on the jury's decision. The RAIB report is the closest we are going to get to reading/seeing the evidence available to the jury.

There's nothing wrong with debating something

We can comment on the Jury's decision as they have decided that the guard is guilty of the charges brought against him. They have heard all the evidence and that would have included information from the RAIB, which they concluded that the guard failed in his deriliction of duties.

Go and have a read of ANGs post early on in this thread again.

 

[507 001]

We can comment on the Jury's decision as they have decided that the guard is guilty of the charges brought against him. They have heard all the evidence and that would have included information from the RAIB, which they concluded that the guard failed in his deriliction of duties.

Go and have a read of ANGs post early on in this thread again.

I said we can't comment on whether the decision was correct or not.
Again, I say WE haven't seen or heard the evidence, just rumors and speculation

 

[Clip]

I said we can't comment on whether the decision was correct or not.
Again, I say WE haven't seen or heard the evidence, just rumors and speculation

To you they may be rumours and speculation from people off the internet but for others less so.

Face it, you really want the decision to be wrong dont you? Which is why you are waiting for the RAIB report to pour over whatever is in there and try and pick out any detail which you think could swing the decision the other way on appeal, even though you have been told twice now that what is in that report would have been used during the prosecution of the guard and would have counted as highly respected evidence.

IIRC the guard also changed his statement once he was presented with the CCTV showing him in action.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
No offence to bb21 here but this should also have been included from the story that he quoted from the BBC which he cut off about her having drugs in her

The footage showed Miss Varley mistakenly getting off the train just before 23:30 BST, before turning around and leaning against the side as she realised her friends were still on board.

She was then seen to stagger and fall down the gap as the train moved off, before stopping after travelling about 30ft (9m).
Mr Justice Holroyde said he would pass sentence on Thursday morning.

He remanded McGee in custody saying it was a "very serious offence" and said he faces a sentence of imprisonment.

 

[tony_mac]

I can't envisage that a normal person would just lean against anything, regardless of how dangerous it was. I imagine for most people, if they were so extremely ill that they had no perception of anything going on around them, would just drop to the floor.

I assume that you have never passed-out unexpectedly.
You may not lose all perception immediately, but it may fade very quickly over a few seconds - and sticking your hand out to try and steady yourself is exactly what you do. There is nothing bizarre or sinister about it!


If some good comes of this, I hope that train guards can be even more wary of complacency, and I particularly hope that young people (and their parents) can better see the dangers of going out and getting blind drunk - there are far, far more unnecessary deaths caused by the latter.

 

[bb21]

No offence to bb21 here but this should also have been included from the story that he quoted from the BBC which he cut off about her having drugs in her

None taken.

However at the time I did quote the whole article as what was in my quotation was all there was.

 

[Clip]

None taken.

However at the time I did quote the whole article as what was in my quotation was all there was.

Ahh okey doke, I didnt actually read it first time round but its odd why they do that..

 

[ukrob]

Another one here who rarely agrees with ANG here - but he is spot on. And that does not mean the girls actions were acceptable behaviour.

 

[yorkie]

Another one here who rarely agrees with ANG here - but he is spot on. And that does not mean the girls actions were acceptable behaviour.

Indeed he is, in addition I have a lot of respect for the views expressed by another guard, Ferret too. And yes, some balance is needed, this incident was not caused solely by one party.

 

[AlexS]

I must say it does raise concerns with the McNulty recommendation to reduce train dispatcher provision particularly when you consider the amount of rolling stock that has no provision for the train crew to have any idea of what is happening outside it, for example 22x, 390, 15x and the like. Some companies allow the guard to key out and leave the door panel immediately after giving rightaway, regardless of if there is a dispatcher so there is nobody watching the train out of the station at all, and this is considered to be perfectly appropriate and normal. I can't say it leaves me feeling particularly comfortable sometimes. If something similar happened with a 220 and it was self dispatched, potentially no one would know anything was amiss at all and there would be no question of even shouting a warning once the local door is closed.

I think all the railway trade unions need to make more of this than perhaps they are.

 

[HH]

1. No, I haven't to the best of my knowledge. I'm curious to know how you've nearly killed someone though?

2. Is this a joke? Unless it was some kind of mental illness, I can't envisage that a normal person would just lean against anything, regardless of how dangerous it was. I imagine for most people, if they were so extremely ill that they had no perception of anything going on around them, would just drop to the floor.

3. Speak for yourself. If getting drunk or ill really gets you into that kind of state, you should be very, very careful about how you live your life.

1. I didn't say I have nearly killed someone.

2. Other posters have already disabused you of your foolish notions on this.

3. I haven't been drunk in a long while. We were talking about this young lady who clearly did not know what she was doing, and the fact that people who are ill can behave in a similar fashion, which has been backed up by other posters.

 

[bb21]

Keep it civil please guys and leave out personal remarks.

Debates get heated in these topics and we can understand that. Please make sure that you debate the topic and only the topic in question.

 

[RichmondCommu]

he way she has her bra on show on one picture shows the sort of the thing that male guards are up against when confronted with these female groups.

I'm sorry but what you've said is despicable. Why should that be a problem for male guards?

 

[GadgetMan]

Although the full story hasn't been published yet (which may alter my views on this particular incident), the situation the young girl was in up until she fell between the the train and platform is all too common when intoxicated passengers are involved.

This is especially true on Friday and Saturday nights when you have a large number of very dunk people getting on/off trains.

Some get great pleasure out of pushing their mates out of the doors just as they are closing, which then means the doors need to be re-released to let that person back on and consequently interrupting and delaying dispatch. This can happen at numerous stations on the same train or even numerous times at the same station and it usually only stops when I physically take the time to walk down to the doors the group is at and give them a ticking off which includes a warning that they will all be removed and refused travel if it happens again.

Others play a similar game where they will voluntarily get off the train when the doors are released, walk a few meters away from the train and then suddenly dash back on before the doors shut while getting cheered on by others, and they take it in turns to do it at stations until they get a ticking off or reach their destination.

The above are more a nuisance/cause of delays than a serious risk of fatality, although an injury is possible from them falling while the train is stationary.



Then you have the traditional dropping pants and waving backside in the air on the platform for the amusement of passengers/mates on the train. This same class of passengers will also do other silly things like have their nose or lips pushed against the outside of the train window as its about to depart and no matter how many times you blow your whistle or shout stand back they remain there.

These are the passengers who are of great concern to all frontline staff, they put their own safety/life at risk as well as our careers.


As a Guard, we have to make a decision to try and keep the railway moving or cause massive delays both to our own trains and any services sharing the line behind us. I have given 2 on the buzzer while a drunk(s) are in contact with the train just as the girl is in that picture. I then also make sure I have my head out the cab window and the idiots in full view at all time with one hand on the brake lever. So when I see that picture, I can't help but feel that had this girl been travelling in a different part of the country, I could have been the Guard on trial.

Should I be giving 2 on the buzzer with drunks touching the train? NO. The fact that I don't hear of extensive delays caused by other Guards in similar positions tells me I can't be alone in giving the RA with drunks touching the train.

The only alternative is to have a stand off with the idiots on the platform while waiting for BTP. This could result in them walking away, or they as is usually the case then start to abuse the member of staff who dared to challenge their behaviour.

Alot of people won't accept this as a reason, but if all Railway staff did exactly as we were supposed to then the railway would experience far more delays than it currently does.


Here's a incident I experienced a week ago.


I was working the last train on a particular line from origin to destination on a Friday night, a distance of around 65 miles. We have roughly 20 minutes between leaving the origin station and the first booked call.

I attempted to make my way through the 3 carriage train which at any other time of day will take me around 15 minutes with twice as many passengers on.

However on weekend nights in my experience a full ticket check takes 3 times longer due to the number of passengers who are too drunk to efficiently locate their ticket or go down the route of being abusive to get out of paying.

I soon came across a group of 5 drunk males aged in their mid 20s. They gave me the usual run around of pretending to sleep, then claiming to have lost their ticket, having no money on them ........etc. Unknown to them there was a off duty Civil Police officer sat behind them. After a nod from me, she had a word with them and convinced them that paying was their best option.

I relieved them of a small amount of cash each and started walking away when 2 of them decided to start shouting all sorts of abusive and threatening language including one of them getting up and moving towards me with one his mates holding him back.

As we were fast approaching the first stop and the one where these lads were getting off I continued to walk away for my own safety, however this meant going towards the front as opposed to the back to avoid walking past the group.

On this particular traction type, I can release the doors from any of the 3 carriages, however that is when I feel most vulnerable while stood on the platform as you just find yourself waiting for the angered male(s) to approach you.

So I went into the leading cab and asked the driver to release the doors (his side) and then we both stepped on the platform, now 1.5 carriages away from where the lads should be alighting. They got off with 3 of them shouting, swearing and physically threatening somebody else in that same carriage. I then pressed the door close button while the 3 lads were still shouting and threatening this unknown victim and they were punching and kicking the side of the train.

Was I going to approach them and ask them to stand clear? No.
Both the driver and I got back on, and I asked him to keep his an eye on the lads while we pulled away to ensure one of them didn't end up on the track.


Now when you read some of the comments on this thread that say that railway staff have a duty of care and are FULLY responsible for the passengers' safety, it makes you wonder whether I'd be held responsible had one of those lads been killed while we pulled out of the station.

The truth of the matter is, whilst we do have a duty of care towards the safety of passengers, the passengers themselves should also bear some of that responsibility towards their own safe being.


For anyone still reading and who isn't yet bored, the lads that were shouting and threatening on the platform were in fact directing it towards the off duty officer, so much so that she actually missed her stop because unfortunately she wanted the same station as the lads got off at and she felt threatened enough to miss her stop knowing there are no more trains back. Our control arranged for her to be taxi'd home from the next stop as I felt responsible for getting her involved. These are the sorts of incidents/people we have to deal with whenever large amounts of alcohol have been consumed.

 

[the sniper]

I assume that you have never passed-out unexpectedly.
You may not lose all perception immediately, but it may fade very quickly over a few seconds - and sticking your hand out to try and steady yourself is exactly what you do. There is nothing bizarre or sinister about it!

I've never known someone pass out, yet remain standing while leaning against something with their arms stretched out to support them, let alone then also appear to a bystander to be concious yet possible drunk rather than ill.

 

[RichmondCommu]

This is somewhat disingenuous. Regardless of her alcohol intake the train should have not departed while she was leaning against it. The words "safety critical" in a job description aren't there for decoration. They mean something.

At best the guard made a mistake in a safety critical aspect of his job, for which they might be several reasons, including inadequate training. At worst he might have given the off deliberately, for some of the reasons already expressed in this thread (and really people you ought to think about where such reasons can lead to).

It matters not that she was drunk, under-age, flashed her bra, or might have puked over people or even abused passengers and staff. She was owed a duty of care, and those of you not acknowledging that are doing nobody any favours.

Exactly! Too many posters on this thread seem to have been caught up in their emotions and have forgotten that this young woman died because the guard didn't do his job properly. While there are no winners here, there should be no doubt that the guard failed to protect the victim of this tragedy.

 

[the sniper]

Exactly! Too many posters on this thread seem to have been caught up in their emotions and have forgotten that this young woman died because the guard didn't do his job properly. While there are no winners here, there should be no doubt that the guard failed to protect the victim of this tragedy.

The vast majority of people on this thread, including most of us who are Guards, accept that the Guard was at fault. Some people though have dared to suggest that she, being heavily intoxicated and having Class B drugs in her system, might have had something to do with it too...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I assume that you have never passed-out unexpectedly. You may not lose all perception immediately, but it may fade very quickly over a few seconds - and sticking your hand out to try and steady yourself is exactly what you do. There is nothing bizarre or sinister about it!

I can certainly give a very personal example of such a matter. In July of this year, I was leaving a hospital ward at the end of visiting time at North Manchester General Hospital in an area that still has wide Victorian staircases. I had only just begun to descend, when I was affected by the first effects of a stroke and the last thing that I could remember was trying to grasp the old-fashioned wooden carved handrail. It appears that I was not successful before losing consciousness and I was told that I had fallen face forwards on the handrail and struck my face with some force.

Thank goodness that this occurred within the confines of a hospital and I was given immediate medical attention and spent some time then as an in-patient on their Stroke Ward.

 

[bb21]

I typed this up as a response to a forum member so thought I might as well put it here.

The victim is not mentally disabled. She had the mental capacity to decide for herself and chose to put herself in a vulnerable position. It is no doubt a contributing factor to her tragic end. In addition, it is illegal for someone underage to drink alcohol without parental supervision. The same applies to people using illegal substances. She did do something wrong because what she did was illegal. It would be naive to say that she should not bear any responsibility for the accident, albeit arguably not the main responsibility.

The same applies to those people who supplied her with alcohol and drugs, which may or may not include her friends.

The guard is directly responsible for what happened. I think most of us agree on this.

All this verdict tells us is that the guard is at fault for the victim's death. What this verdict does not establish is all other contributing factors to this accident. This is irrelevant to this particular criminal proceeding because no one else is being charged and tried in this case.

As for the victim's family, while they may not be directly responsible for her death, the girl's behaviour during the evening prior to her death brings out questions regarding her upbringing. This however does not necessarily mean that they are bad parents.

I hope investigations into this tragic accident do not stop here. They need to bring all those responsible for the poor girl's death to justice in order that we as a society learn from it. If we hear no more about this case, I will be in no doubt that the guard was being used as a scapegoat for all those other people who are responsible for this girl's tragic end.

 

[Ferret]

An excellent post bb21. I don't think I've ever read a case report where a dealer was prosecuted for manslaughter though, and I doubt I ever will, unless somebody on here can direct me to one.

This is a very sobering case, and I wonder how many Guards are asking themselves 'could this have been me?' at this very moment. I expect many of us will be reading a harrowing RAIB report in due course, and making sure we learn the lessons from it.

 

[blacknight]

Prosecutors say the picture shows Georgia Varley, 16, from Wallasey, clearly leaning on the carriage as guard Christopher McGee signalled it was safe for the train to move.

Can't see any extenuating circumstances for failure to perform a duty owed, which leads to a death. Perfectly clear view along platform etc.

Thats only one emotive still frame of coverage from I presume station CCTV of the incident. Do we know at this point the RA as actually been given to the driver?
Rule book states before giving ready to start to driver
1 Doors are closed
2 No person is trapped in doors
3 Is it safe to sart train
1 & 2 are clear Yes or No answers whereas 3 is a judgement call by person in charge.
If you saw person banging on window would you expect that person to stand clear once train starts to move.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Merseyrail management should also be hanging there heads in shame.

Can't wait to see the fall out this has for the rail industry.

Common sense. Lost somewhere in the last century RIP.

Fully agree with that statement very supportive of Merseyrail to release above picture to press- go on Granada reports & still is credited to Merseyrail. In light of this case will we see a return to platforms being staffed to help prevent incidents like this in the future? What about incidents involving DOO trains been several only difference being by sheer luck have not ended in a fatality so no prosecution as been started by CPS.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And that Merseyrail manager (Liam Willis) should be hanging his head in shame.

Totally agree I wonder how many briefs there were regards importance of right time departure issued by company?

 

[Scotrail84]

Have not read the whole thread but I wonder what would have happened if this had been a doo service and the same thing happened?

 

[SWTCommuter]

An excellent post bb21. I don't think I've ever read a case report where a dealer was prosecuted for manslaughter though, and I doubt I ever will, unless somebody on here can direct me to one.

In a recent case involving the supply of drugs it has been held that an individual can be guilty of gross negligence manslaughter.

What were the details of this case?
In this case the victim was a known drug addict. The defendant in the case was her half sister. The defendant obtained drugs from a drug dealer on behalf of the victim and then supplied the drugs to the victim.

Subsequently the victim suffered an overdose and eventually died. The defendant in this case was held to have committed gross negligence manslaughter.

Was an appeal heard in this case?
The Court of Appeal heard the appeal in this case and held that the defendant owed a duty of care to the victim to seek help for her. The duty in this case was to counteract the situation which the defendant had themselves created by supplying the drugs. The appeal in this case was thus dismissed.

What can we draw from these cases?
Following these cases we can see that in the situation whereby a person dies taking drugs the supplier of those drugs cannot be guilty of unlawful act manslaughter. However, they can be guilty of gross negligence manslaughter if they fail to counteract the situation which they have created.

The complete article can be found here:
http://www.inbrief.co.uk/types-of-claim/drug-dealers-liability.htm

 

[blacknight]

Have not read the whole thread but I wonder what would have happened if this had been a doo service and the same thing happened?

Issue a statement along the lines of "DOO operations are safe then give a percentage of incidents against high number of passenger journeys made & the likelyhood of a repeat incident is low"

 

[Scotrail84]

Issue a statement along the lines of "DOO operations are safe then give a percentage of incidents against high number of passenger journeys made & the likelyhood of a repeat incident is low"

A lot of incidents involving doo go unreported, obviously not incidents like the one in question but there are certainly times when things are swept under the carpet.

 

[reb0118]

A lot of incidents involving doo go unreported, obviously not incidents like the one in question but there are certainly times when things are swept under the carpet.

Too true, mate!

 

[Phil6219]

BBC reporting he's been jailed for 5 years

BBC Article

Phil

 

[Wolfie]

You clearly don't understand duty of care. Just to save anyone else the trouble of typing it in their browser of choice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care

Even this article doesn't convey the key aspects: essentially the guard owed a duty of care to the girl. The girl was doing nothing that endangered other people's lives, so she didn't fail her duty of care. She wasn't driving a car, or anything else likely to endanger other people. She was endangering her own life. This happens from time to time, and we expect those in a position of trust to look after us.

Only those who have never, ever been drunk could even begin to criticise the poor cow.

EDIT: I often don't agree with our Northern Guard, but here he and I are in absolute agreement. When it comes to safety there are no second chances; you do it safely or you don't. That it works out OK in 99.99% of cases is not sufficient cause to do it wrong.

I have little doubt that you are legally correct. Morally however is a different matter. While I do not wish to endanger others how is it acceptable that one drunken, drugged up individual behaving like an idiot can inconvenience hundreds or thousands (eg if an incident was to occur at a London terminal in rush-hour) effectively almost indefinitely?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I bemoan what is wrong with society today. When all is said and done, the person responsible for your life is you. Harsh reality isn't it, and one that we seem reluctant to confront, as a society? Imagine you could talk to that dead girl and ask her if she'd known that she might be killed if she took drugs and got extremely drunk, and then you ask her what she'd have done differently. I bet she'd say she'd not have acted as she did that night. That tells us all we need to know.

Spot on. What happened to the concept of taking personal responsibility for the consequences of your own actions?

 

[Matt Taylor]

Merseyrail management should also be hanging there heads in shame. Can't wait to see the fall out this has for the rail industry.

Merseyrail's legal team did what any company would do, let the employee hang to ensure that there is no potential for a big compensation payout or corporate manslaughter charge. Carnival Cruises did the very same thing in January to the captain of the Costa Concordia after it ran aground.

I find myself in full agreement with ANG and in particular Ferret, when reading the thread through from start to finish it is clear which posters are the drivers/guards and which ones are shooting from the gallery by the level of emotion in the replies. This suggests to me that the psychosymetric tests and vetting process for guards is working well. Nobody wants a hothead in charge of their train, you want someone with a cool head under pressure.

I find the mother's comments arrogant, disrespectful and presumably borne out of grief. but the court case was never about how much Georgia had drunk or taken, she wasn't on trial, neither were here friends, her parents or any other people who have some culpability in this sad matter. The person on trial was the guard and he has been found guilty. While the less level headed members of the forum may wish to continue to whether she was 'asking for it' by the way she was dressed, whether McGee has been made a scapegoat, whether her parents have any sense of moral responsibility etc etc there will be quite a few forum members who will be out there today dispatching lots of trains from lots of stations.

The only good that can come from this whole awful accident is that the industry implements the necessary changes to ensure it does not happen again. Otherwise next time it could be me, ANG, Ferret or any other of the guards on the forum that is in the dock.