-
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!
Man stabbed on Guildford to London train near Horsley
- Thread starter Starmill
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Well I challenge people on a regular basis; I do a job that specifically involves supervising teenagers, some of whom have anger issues. I've never had any problems and I'll not stop challenging people if and when I think it is appropriate to do so.
There are two possibilities: either this post is hugely sarcastic, or it's completely and utterly absurdly wrong.
Bromley boy
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,611
There is a difference, though, between challenging teenagers you are working with, who are presumably a known quantity, and challenging complete strangers.
I agree with your sentiment, but there is now a large subset of the population who are arrogantly self centred and will happily smoke on trains, listen to music on loud speaker etc.
These people have no respect for authority and tend to be extremely thin skinned and aggressive. Any challenge to their behaviour will be perceived as “disrespectful” and is likely to be met with a rapid escalation to violence.
You are also very unlikely to get back up from anybody else in this situation.
I regularly see people smoking on platforms etc. Even when at work and in uniform I don’t challenge them because all that will happen is that I’ll be sworn at and quite possibly assaulted. My employer certainly won’t back me in this situation, so why should I take the risk?
Last edited:
Dren Ahmeti
Member
I’ve had to break up a pretty heated argument about standing on the wrong side of the escalators (commuters!) at Reading before.
Why? Because the layout of Reading means that the escalators go straight out onto Platform 7 and an ensuring punch-up could potentially spill towards the PTI (Passenger-Train Interface) and become a danger to themselves, train crew and pax alike.
I took this step with full knowledge of knowing that I was in a fairly crowded station, with BTP assistance if needed; I also knew that my legs (as in walking away, if needs be) would be the best option if it got too difficult to handle.
However, if I was a guard/passenger on a suburban service, I’d definitely take extra caution in interfering with a situation as needless as this, which sadly ended up with horrifyingly fatal consequences.
True but I do both...
(and the 'known quantity' can involve knowing that they have anger management issues and/or that their parents can be violent, and all sorts of things, ie. the sort of stuff that if you 'knew' you'd probably be put off approaching them!)
I challenge smokers, I was successful in doing so only last Saturday night at York station.
Bromley boy
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,611
Good for you for doing so. I certainly wouldn’t criticise anyone for intervening, quite the opposite. Doing so is commendable. I’m just not sure I could recommend it.
You probably encounter a higher class of scummer in York than the type I tend to come across
.Being in uniform can also make one more of a target. People smoking on platforms tend to do so quite brazenly and often look at you as you approach, clearly hoping that you will say something, in anticipation of a confrontation.
Last edited:
The ones at York station on a Saturday night are from anywhere but York, but I am not allowed to comment on the places they may come from as that upset someone beforeGood for you for doing so. I certainly wouldn’t criticise anyone for intervening, quite the opposite. Doing so is commendable. I’m just not sure I could recommend it.
You probably encounter a higher class of scummer in York than the type I tend to come across
Suffice to say, those of us who experience this regular phenomenon know which trains are the most likely to have 'challenging individuals on board
Good Guards will often upgrade passengers who are remaining on the train on the approach to York and/or encourage those passengers to sit in a particular coach. If I divulged what some of them have said, again it'd upset one or two people, so I'll keep quiet on that!
Bromley boy
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,611
The ones at York station on a Saturday night are from anywhere but York, but I am not allowed to comment on the places they may come from as that upset someone before
Suffice to say, those of us who experience this regular phenomenon know which trains are the most likely to have 'challenging individuals on board
I bet many of them are heading south
.And in a job where firstly, you are likely to have received training, given the nature of it, and secondly, have had to convince someone that you would be suitable for the job through an interview.
For those who are willing to challenge someone breaking rules/ causing a nuisance/harm, what do you do if they tell you, with the most impolite choice of words possible, to get lost?
That is what comes into my mind when I have thought about whether I would have the courage to call somone out, that as a bog standard member of the public I have no authority over them, so what is to stop them defying me with a few choice words?
That is what comes into my mind when I have thought about whether I would have the courage to call somone out, that as a bog standard member of the public I have no authority over them, so what is to stop them defying me with a few choice words?
bramling
Veteran Member
Good post.
Without some kind of framework to back one’s actions up, challenging others can end up being futile. Being well built may help in some situations, but (as Mr Pomeroy tragically found out) this doesn’t always work. Likewise doing something on impulse is also a bad idea.
Driving into a workplace car park this evening there was someone urinating just inside the turning off the main road. In the right mood I might have been very tempted to have a right go (indeed I have done in past occasions), but given some of the unsavoury characters who grace the area it’s not really a good idea, especially as there would have been no escape route had the person ended up backing me into a corner, okay I might have been able to lock myself inside the car but even then I could have wound up with my new car damaged which would have hacked me off more in the long run.
There’s times when it’s best to mind one’s own business and let the relevant people (eg appropriately trained staff or the law enforcement agencies) sort things out. From a railway point of view I’ve seen some pretty nasty kick-offs between people when someone’s tried to tick someone off for doing something they shouldn’t. It really isn’t a good idea, especially if there’s no immediate place of safety should things turn nasty.
It might be the case that one might get away with it in some parts of the country, however certainly in the London area there really are some *bad people* where things quite possibly will not end well. Eventually one will encounter such a person - the problem with essentially relying on luck is that it eventually runs out.
I had a chat with a SWR Guard some months ago, he said the current problem with aggressive passengers wasn't so much with late night drunks but with arrogant & aggressive drug dealers (I guess he was making assumptions or how would he know?), he name checked Virginia Water as a place where he had experienced aggression, Virginia Water is pretty much Millionaire Row but drug consumers come from from everywhere, he admitted that on late trains Guards mostly didn't bother with ticket checks to avoid aggression.
Monty
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 2,352
This 'County lines' phenomenon has become a real problem, I see it regularly where young adults or seemingly children are travelling from Waterloo down to the coast (and return) on open tickets with zero luggage other than their little 'man bags' they often carry with them. Even though they have tickets their attitude is often very aggressive and more often or not they look like they are under the influence of one substance or another.
I know Scotland has gotten a bit of flak for its recent drug death figures, but it's a scourge that affects the whole UK and the police are just not equipped to deal with it, the BTP especially so. That's not to say the police don't try their best, but I feel ever since 9/11 the police have been far too focused on terrorism (which obviously is important as recent attacks have shown) and that drug dealers have been allowed to get away with a lot more than they should. I'm not pretending that locking up all the dealers will solve all of life's problems or even of saved poor Mr Pomeroy's life but it would reduce a lot of the violence seen on public transportation.
It is probably worth asking why it is such a scourge. What is so bad about life in the UK that a significant number of people feel the need to resort to chemical stimulation to the point they lose all sense of rationality?
Kingspanner
Member
I've been lurking for a while wondering whether to join this forum, but was compelled to do so by this thread. I wanted to post this link https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content...TENCING-REMARKS-for-circulation-12-7-2019.pdf
in which the judge outlines the facts of the case, and gives the reasons for the sentence passed.
Note the minimum sentence that will be served is 27 years 180 days.
in which the judge outlines the facts of the case, and gives the reasons for the sentence passed.
Note the minimum sentence that will be served is 27 years 180 days.
bramling
Veteran Member
Thanks for the link. Reading through it, I can’t help but come to the conclusion that 28 years is quite low - especially considering just what a history Pencille has. In all honesty I can see no justification at all for him ever being released, in my view he should die in prison alongside the likes of Ian Huntley and the Lee Rigby killers.
And that very well may happen! Remember that it's minimum sentence, once he gets to the end of that time it will be reviewed and a view taken as to whether it's suitable to release him. If the view is that it isn't then there he will stay. Even if he is released he will be on license permanently so if he puts a toe out of line or if there's any further concern he can be recalled to prison immediately. There is every chance he will die in prison.
Indeed the Judge made it quite clear in their remarks:
Not released after 28 years only considered for release after 28 years.
Kingspanner
Member
And as Pencille is now 36 he can look forward to emerging blinking into the light at the age of 64, considerably enfeebled, into a very different world. Cue the opportunity for forum members to muse upon the things they have done over the last 28 years, or hope to do in the next 28.
Penal policy should be based on principles and have lawful authority. Thus, at the risk of bringing facts to this argument, section 142 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 states that any court dealing with an offender in respect of his offence must have regard to the following purposes of sentencing
a) the punishment of offenders
b) the reduction of crime (including its reduction by deterrence)
c) the reform and rehabilitation of offenders
d) the protection of the public
e) the making of reparation by offenders to those affected by their offences
It seems to me that a) and d) are being well served in Pencille's case. c) and e) are possibly moot. Whether Pencille might have been deterred by any possible sentence needs to be considered in the light of the Judge's description of his state of mind and motivations.
Penal policy should be based on principles and have lawful authority. Thus, at the risk of bringing facts to this argument, section 142 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 states that any court dealing with an offender in respect of his offence must have regard to the following purposes of sentencing
a) the punishment of offenders
b) the reduction of crime (including its reduction by deterrence)
c) the reform and rehabilitation of offenders
d) the protection of the public
e) the making of reparation by offenders to those affected by their offences
It seems to me that a) and d) are being well served in Pencille's case. c) and e) are possibly moot. Whether Pencille might have been deterred by any possible sentence needs to be considered in the light of the Judge's description of his state of mind and motivations.
I've noted an unusual amount of activity from BTP on this issue. I had 3 x police turn up to meet a suspect individual at one station and I've also had plain clothes CID officers make themselves known to me wanting me to ascertain individual's destination when I've been out checking tickets.
nlogax
Established Member
This was also the reason Walton and Woking stations were full to the rafters with BTP, Surrey and Military police during a couple of evenings back in May. It's getting a lot of attention at the moment.
bramling
Veteran Member
I'm afraid no matter how sympathetically I try to look at it, I cannot even begin to persuade myself that Pencille deserves any kind of second chance, indeed it seems he'd already had numerous brushes with the law so it seems the pile of leniency had already worked low. Mr Pomeroy should have been able to see the light of day at age 64 - he won't get that chance thanks to Pencille.
As for musing on things we might have done, hands up anyone on here who has or plans to carry a knife with them, start a completely unnecessary conflict with a stranger, and then stab them in a savage frenzy?
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Good to hear - the BTP have had some good results on operations involving trains in Essex one gathers. In my Thameslink travelling over many years , never seen anything worse than a bit of weed , one Xmas journey had a bloke putting little bags into the Christmas cards he was writing out. Looked pretty middle class and sober to me.
Nothing new in all this - we had smack dealers on 313's on the east bit of the North London line in the mid 1990's , used to hide their product under the loose seat covers of the time and deal along the line. Spotted by an observant member of the public , evidence gathered (the few CCTV sets we had and plain clothes) and they were nicked.
Bromley boy
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,611
If Pencille had committed the same crime in the 1950s he would have been facing death by hanging within a few weeks of conviction.
We should remember that the mandatory life sentence for murder was introduced to replace the death penalty. The fact that life clearly no longer actually means life, other than in a few rare cases, makes a complete mockery of this.
Last edited:
Bromley boy
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,611
I couldn’t agree more.
Drug prohibition is a big part of the problem. Puts it in the hands of organised crime who actively recruit drug addicts and cause murder over territory and supply.
I think we can draw this sad incident to an end at this point as we now have the outcome of the trial.
I'm aware that we're starting a discussion on sentencing and also potentially the death penalty. Both of which have been discussed extensively previously. The death penalty most recently here for instance.
If anyone is desperate to air their views then they wish to do so in a suitable thread in General Discussion but I would caution that we've had extensive discussion on this already.
I'm aware that we're starting a discussion on sentencing and also potentially the death penalty. Both of which have been discussed extensively previously. The death penalty most recently here for instance.
If anyone is desperate to air their views then they wish to do so in a suitable thread in General Discussion but I would caution that we've had extensive discussion on this already.
- Status