Train Guard Found Guilty Over Girl's Death

[pipmk]

Clearly he failed to do his job properly but you can't simply remove drink and drugs from the equation. Had she not taken drugs and drunk herself senseless then the whole chain of events that led to this tragedy wouldn't have begun.




Nor, it appears, did her mother.

It could equally well been a small child as a teenager leaning against the train. Would your view then be the same? The clue is in the mans title.

 

[Scott_F]

It could equally well been a small child as a teenager leaning against the train. Would your view then be the same? The clue is in the mans title.

You don't get too many drunk, drugged and incapable toddlers so that's a rather pointless question.

 

[Harrythedog]

But where is all this blame culture going to end. Can you blame a Taxi driver for taking her to the pub, the barman for serving her a drink, the brewery for making the beer etc.
As my Granny used to say "play with fire and you'll get burned", people have got to take responsibility for their actions and not put the entire blame onto others.

As others have said it is a tragic waste of a life and the guard didn't do his job properly but how many drunk people were on the train, surely he can't be responsible for all their actions.

 

[grober]

While this is a case with particularly tragic consequences as has been said and it would certainly appear the guard failed in his duty to make sure the young lady in question was well clear of the train before flagging it off ----this is the tip of the iceberg of scenes played out every weekend in city centres in the UK. Namely, of young people drinking themselves into states of total oblivion. Many manage to kill themselves without the aid of a train from alcoholic narcotic poisoning, choking on their own vomit, head injury sustained through falling down stairs/ off balconies/onto pavements or being hit by passing cars. In Scotland you can add dying of exposure in winter to that list. The licenced trade and licencing authorities are primary culprits in this as perhaps also are supermarkets/off licences. I know all youngsters naturally like a bit of fun but surely its not beyond society to regulate this a bit better to protect youngsters from their own stupidity ? Take the recent case where a young woman had to have her entire stomach removed after imbibing a cocktail containing liquid nitrogen. Girl loses stomach after drinking cocktail containing liquid nitrogen - Telegraph

FFS ! someone should have been done for GBH for that one!

 

[w124nut]

The scene is set for the guard. There is a person using the train for support rightly or wrongly. He gave the appropriate signal for the train to move. The person lost balance and the rest is history.

The action of the guard led to the girl's demise.

If driving towards a pedestrian crossing with a person staggering across it, would you have regard for that person or just continue to drive at the same rate? The action of the guard would leave one to believe that also, he would not have duty of care in this instance.

 

[w124nut]

The scene is set for the guard. There is a person using the train for support rightly or wrongly. He gave the appropriate signal for the train to move. The person lost balance and the rest is history.

The action of the guard led to the girl's demise.

If driving towards a pedestrian crossing with a person staggering across it, would you have regard for that person or just continue to drive at the same rate? The action of the guard would leave one to believe that also, he would not have duty of care in this instance.

 

[pipmk]

You don't get too many drunk, drugged and incapable toddlers so that's a rather pointless question.

Not really, you do get a lot of children who might well be leaning against the train looking down to see the wheels. Have you never heard of childlike curiosity? The mans job was to GUARD the passengers, he took the money and failed to do the job.

"Oh sorry sir,I failed to do your wheel nuts up and that is why the car crashed and killed your family"" No, that's ok, we all make mistakes". I think not.

The penalty for being a silly girl who gets drunk is not death. The penalty for causing a need less death through not doing that which you are paid and trained for is rightly severe.

 

[jaymanek]

Legally, of course its the Guards fault for allowing the train to move off.

Logically its common sense that its the girls own fault for getting so drunk that she had no idea what she was doing and lent against a train about to depart.
She may aswell have jumped from a tower block, whats the difference? Apart from the fact that this guard wouldnt have had to pay for her stupidity.

Yes it was the guards job to ensure safety, but maybe he really did see her pull back for a second.. These CCTV systems are usually pretty poor and the frames jump... id like to see the CCTV.

 

[Scott_F]

Not really, you do get a lot of children who might well be leaning against the train looking down to see the wheels. Have you never heard of childlike curiosity? The mans job was to GUARD the passengers, he took the money and failed to do the job.

"Oh sorry sir,I failed to do your wheel nuts up and that is why the car crashed and killed your family"" No, that's ok, we all make mistakes". I think not.

The penalty for being a silly girl who gets drunk is not death. The penalty for causing a need less death through not doing that which you are paid and trained for is rightly severe.

Well a child leaning against a train is a completely different scenario isn't it ? I'm commenting on the realities of what actually happened.

And in this case the penalty for being a silly drunk girl was unfortunately death. Just as it can be for driving whilst drunk, running red lights or even a momentary loss of concentration behind the wheel. Foolish actions can sometimes have tragic consequences.

 

[Frugal]

It would certainly be interesting to see what sort of defence was argued by the guard's team.

 

[Bellow]

Two (seperate) issues here.
Firstly the negligence of the guard - beyond dispute.
Secondly, should a 16 be served alcohol, and be taking mephedrone?

That she was leaning against the train - sober or drunk - was enough to make the guards action (signalling the train to leave) wrong. She (or anyone else) could just as easily have been leaning against the train (for any amount of reasons) without having been drinking.

 

[pipmk]

But where is all this blame culture going to end. Can you blame a Taxi driver for taking her to the pub, the barman for serving her a drink, the brewery for making the beer etc.
As my Granny used to say "play with fire and you'll get burned", people have got to take responsibility for their actions and not put the entire blame onto others.

As others have said it is a tragic waste of a life and the guard didn't do his job properly but how many drunk people were on the train, surely he can't be responsible for all their actions.

Well yes with the barman,it is an offence to supply drink to someone who is drunk,let alone her age. The "blame culture" has been with us a long time, mainly because often others are to blame.

 

[Palfrem]

I wonder how guards manage if there is a crowded platform and they cannot see the train properly?

Or someone is leaning out of a window waving at a friend

 

[pipmk]

It would certainly be interesting to see what sort of defence was argued by the guard's team.

What ever it was 12 citizens rejected it. The penalty for leaning against a train or doing anything else where someone is trained and paid to ensure no injury is caused should not be death. He didn't fail to see her,like a life guard in a crowded swimming pool,she wasn't driving a car as some one has oddly made analogous,she didn't wander into a busy road, she leaned against a stationary object, he saw her, he knew her peril because of his training and he failed to act.

 

[Harrythedog]

Well yes with the barman,it is an offence to supply drink to someone who is drunk,let alone her age. The "blame culture" has been with us a long time, mainly because often others are to blame.

What if she had a fake ID (which a lot of young 'uns have) would he still be to blame. Why not blame the Police for not arresting her for being drunk, which is an offence. The list goes on and on but eventually people have top take responsibility for their own actions.


A lot of the problems with kids and drink is that they aren't prepared or allowed to get an aquired taste for alchohol. I suppose we all screwed our faces up when we were young at the first swig of beer but you eventually learn to like it however these days they manufacture sweet pop laced with alchohol so the kids drink as much as they like. Ban the alchopops, take them to a pub and give them a few bottles of Brown ale with a few whisky chasers and that'll put them off drink for a while

 

[BigSilverEstate]

But where is all this blame culture going to end. Can you blame a Taxi driver for taking her to the pub, the barman for serving her a drink, the brewery for making the beer etc.
As my Granny used to say "play with fire and you'll get burned", people have got to take responsibility for their actions and not put the entire blame onto others.

As others have said it is a tragic waste of a life and the guard didn't do his job properly but how many drunk people were on the train, surely he can't be responsible for all their actions.

OK I'm driving along, it's dark and rainy. I see a man, obviously drunk, passed out in the road in front of me. I think about stopping but decide to just run him over as his behaviour is so dangerous he has only himself to blame. Reasonable much?

The fact the victim put herself at risk and acted irresponsibly makes no difference to whether the guard acted wrongfully - she wasn't the one on trial. The nanny state, blame culture, etc have nothing to do with it.

There are plenty of things the guard might have argued in defence or mitigation. The fact that the court found him guilty suggests he really did do the wrong thing.

 

[Mr E]

I wonder how guards manage if there is a crowded platform and they cannot see the train properly?

Or someone is leaning out of a window waving at a friend

They often have the benefit of cameras that provide a view down each carriage that they can refer to, plus usually there are also station staff that signal to the guard that their section is clear (well, this has happened the last few times I've used the station).

The need for a clear view is also a primary reason for not letting people onto the platform at busy times.

In this particular scenario there seems to be no issue - the Guard did not release the train safely (which is his job) and the girl died. Had she fallen from the train, drunk and/or stoned, cracked her head and died, the guard would not be at fault. His responsibility is the safe operation of the train, and that's where he failed, with unfortunate tragic consequences.

 

[Harrythedog]

OK I'm driving along, it's dark and rainy. I see a man, obviously drunk, passed out in the road in front of me. I think about stopping but decide to just run him over as his behaviour is so dangerous he has only himself to blame. Reasonable much?

The fact the victim put herself at risk and acted irresponsibly makes no difference to whether the guard acted wrongfully - she wasn't the one on trial. The nanny state, blame culture, etc have nothing to do with it.

There are plenty of things the guard might have argued in defence or mitigation. The fact that the court found him guilty suggests he really did do the wrong thing.

I think you've missed my point. I stated the guard didn't do his job but the girl cannot be entirely blameless for getting into such a state, it use to be known as taking responsibility for yourself a fact her mother has failed to accept.

 

[Bellow]

The list goes on and on but eventually people have top take responsibility for their own actions.

Pity the guard contested then. The responsibility for the safe release of the train was his and his alone.

This could just as easily have been an elderly person suffering a heart attack or seizure and the outcome would have been the same. Except that person would not be under scrutiny.

 

[Harrythedog]

Pity the guard contested then. The responsibility for the safe release of the train was his and his alone.

This could just as easily have been an elderly person suffering a heart attack or seizure and the outcome would have been the same. Except that person would not be under scrutiny.

There's a bit of a difference between being stoned out your box and being elderly?