• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Woman sexually assaulted on Highland Chieftain

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nevillehill

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2014
Messages
140
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/crime/woman-sexually-assaulted-broad-daylight-6285725

POLICE are investigating after a woman was sexually assaulted on an afternoon train.

A man approached the 24-year-old victim twice and touched her in a sexually inappropriate manner on the London King's Cross to Inverness service.

The woman, who was left shaken and upset by the incident, had boarded the train at Newcastle at about 2.50pm on August 16 and sat in coach G. It is thought the man responsible got off the train at Perth .

why did no one help her, this train is usually full.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ThePannier

Member
Joined
31 Oct 2014
Messages
147
Location
County Durham
Shame nobody helped her. Can't quite understand this ''bystander effect'', would have thought with more people around, there would have been more chance of somebody assisting. But each to their own.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Shame nobody helped her. Can't quite understand this ''bystander effect'', would have thought with more people around, there would have been more chance of somebody assisting. But each to their own.

The woman wasn't raped but was touched in an inappropriate manner:

Daily Record said:
A man approached the 24-year-old victim twice and touched her in a sexually inappropriate manner on the London King's Cross to Inverness service.

The man responsible for the assault is described as being aged about 40, approximately 6ft in height with a shaved head.

He had tattoos on both arms and was wearing blue jeans and a black and white polo shirt with a pocket and a logo.

He was under the influence of alcohol and is believed to have been in the company of another man.

Question is how many people would approach the large rough looking man over his behaviour if they think there is someone else who might intervene if they didn't know the woman in question?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,770
Location
Scotland
Shame nobody helped her. Can't quite understand this ''bystander effect'', would have thought with more people around, there would have been more chance of somebody assisting. But each to their own.
The article (and Police Scotland call for witnesses) say that she was 'inappropriately sexually touched' on two occasions so it's possible that people didn't realise what was happening. Especially so if, through shock or fear, she didn't cry out.
 

ThePannier

Member
Joined
31 Oct 2014
Messages
147
Location
County Durham
The article (and Police Scotland call for witnesses) say that she was 'inappropriately sexually touched' on two occasions so it's possible that people didn't realise what was happening. Especially so if, through shock or fear, she didn't cry out.

Good point, I didn't consider the fact that others around the carriage may not have seen it taking place. Nevertheless it's unfortunate it happened.
 

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
Bystander effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

Less people on the train would mean there would more chance of someone going out of their way to help them.

Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki (which is absolute drivel BTW) but not to help the person in distress.

What a spineless society we have become!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,770
Location
Scotland
Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki but not to help the person in distress.

What a spineless society we have become!
I'm pretty sure the person writing the Wikipedia article wasn't watching a crime occur at the same time. :roll:

It has nothing to do with litigation, and it isn't a new phenomenon - it's basic human nature: If you're the only person there the thought is "I need to do something", if there's a crowd the thought is "Somebody needs to do something." Once one person acts, others will follow.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki but not to help the person in distress.

It was after a murder of Kitty Genovese in New York in 1964: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese that psychologists started analysing why 37 could have done something to prevent the murder but didn't. (Too late to prevent the murder at that point as it had happened.) By making people aware of Bystander Effect you're actually are helping to prevent future incidents because the people who know about it are the ones most likely to break the trend and not be a bystander.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
Fine, but there's no way people can know what a collective group of people are feeling when a crime is occurring. It's an extremely naive and prosaic way of trying to explain away people's reasons for being immobile.
 

Nevillehill

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2014
Messages
140
It was after a murder of Kitty Genovese in New York in 1964: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese that psychologists started analysing why 37 could have done something to prevent the murder but didn't. (Too late to prevent the murder at that point as it had happened.) By making people aware of Bystander Effect you're actually are helping to prevent future incidents because the people who know about it are the ones most likely to break the trend and not be a bystander.


That's new york, this is the uk.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,842
Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki (which is absolute drivel BTW) but not to help the person in distress.

What a spineless society we have become!

Oh for goodness sake don't be so melodramatic!

Presumably you weren't there so how can you say what people should have done?

Somebody could have gone wading in only to subsequently discover they were husband and wife having a row.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,647
Location
Another planet...
Fine, but there's no way people can know what a collective group of people are feeling when a crime is occurring. It's an extremely naive and prosaic way of trying to explain away people's reasons for being immobile.

I wouldn't say the explanation is naive, more that the phenomenon is borne out of naivety.
 

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
!

Presumably you weren't there so how can you say what people should have done?

.

Neither was the author who wrote the article,yet he is quite happy to oversimplify situations and label.them with some ridiculous misnomer.
 

NSEFAN

Established Member
Joined
17 Jun 2007
Messages
3,504
Location
Southampton
Badger89 said:
Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki (which is absolute drivel BTW) but not to help the person in distress.

What a spineless society we have become!

Badger89 said:
Fine, but there's no way people can know what a collective group of people are feeling when a crime is occurring. It's an extremely naive and prosaic way of trying to explain away people's reasons for being immobile.
Fear of litigation may have something to do with it but I don't think it's the root cause. People in this country live much more solitary lives compared to a few decades ago, especially in urban areas. In many ways urban life can be extremely lonely. Try talking to a stranger on the tube and see how far you get. If we don't make a habit of reaching out to others then it's no wonder fewer people will be prepared to lend a hand to another person in distress. That's no individual's fault, as nobody chooses the society they're brought up in. It's a side effect of the way in which we live which is vastly different to how our ancestors did as small tribes where everyone looked out for each other.

In this particular case, we don't actually know how overt the assault was and so it may well have been invisible to most bystanders. I hope however the person responsible is caught, I'm not sure if Mk3 carriages have had CCTV fitted, but Perth station will hopefully have footage of him so he can be traced.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki (which is absolute drivel BTW) but not to help the person in distress.

What a spineless society we have become!

The Wikipedia article you refer to references a substantial body of academic literature in reputable scientific journals (which is quite a novelty for wikipedia, I'll admit). This would have been based on extensive empirical research by well trained and established researchers, probably experts in their field. Their findings would have been subject to the highest standards of peer review and scrutiny to warrant publication in such journals.

I'd be interested to see what you have by way of empirical evidence gathered and analysed to the rigours of the scientific method to counter that body of research in order to make the claim that it is "absolute drivel"? Or even to prove the alternative causal motor for non-intervention you suggest (fear of litigation).
 
Last edited:

Llanigraham

On Moderation
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,103
Location
Powys
Someone has actually tried to qualify why people don't get involved. I'm shocked, I really am! Simple reason, it's called litigation and I am absolutely appalled that someone managed to find time to write the wiki (which is absolute drivel BTW) but not to help the person in distress.

What a spineless society we have become!

What on earth has litigation got to do with it?
 

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
The Wikipedia article you refer to references a substantial body of academic literature in reputable scientific journals (which is quite a novelty for wikipedia, I'll admit). This would have been based on extensive empirical research by well trained and established researchers, probably experts in their field. Their findings would have been subject to the highest standards of peer review and scrutiny to warrant publication in such journals.

All of which you believe? Academics always question, never reiterate, and this, based on the fact it has quoted numerous papers, is now coming from a third-hand source on a website renowned for it's lack of probity and transparency.
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
Clearly I've no idea what happened here but it reads similarly to an incident I witnessed on a train out of Waterloo, and ending at a major outer suburban station, around 20 years ago.

Firstly, you don't sit watching the behaviour and interaction of every passenger in a crowded carriage. I was reading and was vaguely aware of what sounded like an odd conversation several seats away from me, but you overhear a lot of odd things on trains.

As the train approached the next calling point, I was aware that the offender quickly left the seat and was ready to alight from the train as soon as the doors were released. As he did so, but not before, the victim, who was also travelling to the same station, became visibly and audibly upset and it was only then that I understood what had happened. I was also getting off so, with others, I asked her if I could help. I accompanied her to find the guard, who held the train until the police arrived - fortunately this was a station with a BTP office - and we went to view CCTV coverage. I don't recall a conversation about CCTV on the train itself, there probably wasn't in that era. We quickly found a clear image of the offender leaving the station. I provided a witness statement and left.

I wasn't given the opportunity to intervene earlier but if I had, I would've had to consider the possibility of the incident becoming violent rather than physical.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
All of which you believe? Academics always question, never reiterate, and this, based on the fact it has quoted numerous papers, is now coming from a third-hand source on a website renowned for it's lack of probity and transparency.

You can always buy the original books if you prefer.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
All of which you believe? Academics always question, never reiterate, and this, based on the fact it has quoted numerous papers, is now coming from a third-hand source on a website renowned for it's lack of probity and transparency.

My point was the content of the Wikipedia article is drawn from established academic study. Your assertions appear not to be.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You can always buy the original books if you prefer.

Indeed. The key work on this phenomenon is:

- Darley, J. M. & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377-383.

This should be accessible from your nearest academic library. Several studies (far too numerous to list here) have since proven Darley and Latané's findings and found applicability in a range of contemporary situations.
 
Last edited:

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
It doesn't explain why a collection of people are immobilised when it comes to being labelled as 'bystanders'. By what right do these academic works have to call these people 'bystanders' when they're viewing each situation from a wholly impersonal standpoint.

Having situations labelled is a superficial way of explaining away complex human reactions and interactions, and I simply do not believe in such an 'effect'.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
It doesn't explain why a collection of people are immobilised when it comes to being labelled as 'bystanders'. By what right do these academic works have to call these people 'bystanders' when they're viewing each situation from a wholly impersonal standpoint.

Having situations labelled is a superficial way of explaining away complex human reactions and interactions, and I simply do not believe in such an 'effect'.

I understand that you prefer the 'litigation' theory to explain such behaviour. I would very much like you to explain that in detail.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top