Cost will always come into it, be that right or wrong.
Attempted manslaughter is a contradiction, because manslaughter by definition is an accidental death caused by the irresponsible actions of another. (Compare suicide and misadventure for self-inflicted deaths).
Problem is I am not up-to-date on British law. In USA we have murder, 1,2,3 so graded if you like.
I read in an article some years ago that the the prototype HST, APT-E & Concorde Airliners had the the same type of specially developed glass (Triplex branded) fitted in their windscreens. From memory it was something like being able to withstand an impact with an object such as a bird, stone etc. at up to 250 mph. nontheless that must have been a rather awful thing to experience though @irish_rail ! My thoughts also for the Northern driver.
We don't really have the concept of felonies here anymore
And things worse than bricks...In the 1970s (or early 80s), I was on a train between New Cross & London Bridge when what was probably an air-rifle bullet hit a window about 2-3 feet away from me.
www.railadvent.co.uk
Quite possibly, though after the driver picked up the handset and then left the cab I'd have thought it were obvious all was not as it may have seemed. Still, it was only 10 minutes for the next train at least!
Attempted Murder is difficult to convict for as you need to prove they intended to kill. It's easier to prove intent for murder, where you only need to show they intended serious harm. There's no concept of attempted manslaughter - if it can be shown you intended to kill, then it's attempted murder, and if you can't show that it's likely to be either GBH or some health and safety charge.
There is however a specific railway offence criminalising precisely these actions. It also carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. What sentence you would actually receive is perhaps up for question, as I'm not sure this crime is one judges see regularly, but it is the most specific offence on our statute books for this criminal act.
Section 33 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 "Casting stone, &c. upon a railway carriage, with intent to endanger the safety of any person therein."
Offences against the Person Act 1861
An Act to consolidate and amend the Statute Law of England and Ireland relating to Offences against the Person.www.legislation.gov.uk
Whilst this may at first seem the obvious thing to do, the problem with this response - particularly on older stock such as Merseyrail's where there is no brake override - is that the train then comes to a grinding halt and potentially becomes a static target for the brainless morons with the missiles. Provided nobody is in immediate danger on board, it's better to allow the train to get well clear of the area first, although I appreciate that this may not be most people's first consideration!
There is clearly insufficient legal deterrent currently, as discussed above it's difficult to pass a sentence which adequately reflects the massive potential consequences of this sort of utter idiocy, even if there's an injury resulting.These incidents are far too common. This incident, also involving Northern, happened last October.
Reward offered after Northern train is damaged by bricks in Lancashire
During the past two weeks, three Northern trains have been damaged by bricks thrown from bridges, smashing the windscreen of two and the headlights of the other.
What is extraordinarily rare is being able to find the people who committed these acts.
As useful as these offences are, they are better used where no actual injury or damage is caused. If there is a substantive GBH or serious damage, courts seem to appreciate the gravity of those charges rather than more archaic "stonethrowing" type charges.
