Incident at Banbury

[DXMachina]

And gone where exactly? :roll:

A much better question!

I'd have used my phone to get a GPS location, identified the nearest road likely to be reachable without crossing water or other obvious hazards (I wouldnt want to cross pointwork or a crossover for fear of being struck by a train on a different route)

(places the railway crosses a road or runs near it would be promising, or any route across non-agricultural fields where a road was evident nearby) and probably struck out in a lateral direction off the railway at as near a point as was practical.

Then either walk to the next town (8 miles wouldnt bother me), or flag down a bus or taxi if one passed.

 

[455driver]

A much better question!

I'd have used my phone to get a GPS location, identified the nearest road likely to be reachable without crossing water or other obvious hazards (I wouldnt want to cross pointwork or a crossover for fear of being struck by a train on a different route)

(places the railway crosses a road or runs near it would be promising, or any route across non-agricultural fields where a road was evident nearby) and probably struck out in a lateral direction off the railway at as near a point as was practical.

Then either walk to the next town (8 miles wouldnt bother me), or flag down a bus or taxi if one passed.

All well and good, how are you going to get over/through/under the 10 foot high palisade fencing to get off the railway?

 

[Darandio]

All well and good, how are you going to get over/through/under the 10 foot high palisade fencing to get off the railway?

Presumably with help from one of the many passengers who have also followed. If one opens the doors, many more are going to follow with the potential of causing chaos.

 

[DXMachina]

All well and good, how are you going to get over/through/under the 10 foot high palisade fencing to get off the railway?

For the same reasons that walking 8 miles wouldnt concern me, nor would a little scramble. If I had real difficulty with it I'd head along to a bridge and go over the parapet.

I assume you have knowledge of the line in that area (I don't) but it would very much surprise me to find a line that didnt have one or two spots where someone less capable than me could get in or out. Certainly the two lines that go near my home are protected by barbed wire fences at waist height, no more.

 

[Llanigraham]

Risk you take. It's my opinion that by refusing any option of accepting a caution, the matter would be dropped before court. And if it wasn't - any moderately eloquent defendant could make the case that their actions were no more unreasonable than those of a railway company that expects to keep passengers effective hostages for several hours during what should have been a short trip.

Juries. Wonderful things...



That would be silly. What I'd expect is a less safety-obsessed and more practical approach. If we assume they dont intend traincrew to take the risk of physically restraining passengers for their own safety, those crew should be able to hypothesise about where a person might successfully get off the railway on foot, and how practical it would be to reach said location. Persoinally I'm the kind of person who always has suitable footwear, but again its an info thing

The current policy wouldnt let people make informed decisions as to how far they had to walk and over what terrain, so people might make poor choices

My whole point though was that by keeping everyone on the train and not providing options, the railway company makes it far more likely that people will take control of their own destiny in ways that are unhelpful. Such positions actually increase the risk to life, even when, as here, intended to reduce it.

The secondary point was theres no way it was acceptable to be stuck out there that long.

1/ Trespass on the railway is a Criminal event, no matter what the circumstances. You getting out of the train without authority and then walking along the track is doing just that.

2/ You have obviously never tried to walk over ballast or down the cess of a rail line. It is not as easy as you seem to think, as it is very rough and full of obstacles. Even for a fit person it is surprisingly difficult.

It does amaze me how some people on this forum make comments about the railway when they obviously have absolutely no idea, experience or comprehension of the subject!

 

[DXMachina]

1/ Trespass on the railway is a Criminal event, no matter what the circumstances. You getting out of the train without authority and then walking along the track is doing just that.

Did you see me doubting that? I don't. I still reckon I could talk a jury round or get the charges dropped though

2/ You have obviously never tried to walk over ballst or down the cess of a rail line. It is not as easy as you seem to think, as it is very rough and full of obstacles. Even for a fit person it is surprisingly difficult.

Well I walked 4 miles along the track of a (closed and disconnected from the network) railway last year if thats good enough to judge that actually, yes I could.

 

[The Planner]

Personally I would enjoy the irony of the train you have decamped from passing you whilst you are doing a Bear Grylls in the North Oxfordshire countryside.

 

[83G/84D]

Personally I would enjoy the irony of the train you have decamped from passing you whilst you are doing a Bear Grylls in the North Oxfordshire countryside.

So would I.

 

[455driver]

For the same reasons that walking 8 miles wouldnt concern me, nor would a little scramble. If I had real difficulty with it I'd head along to a bridge and go over the parapet.

So you would be quite happy to delay everyone else sat on the trains while you go for your 8 mile walk.
As for going over a bridge parapet, how far is the drop onto the road bearing in mind that, as they are a known easy access point, they are being protected with fencing as well!
Conversely you wouldn't mind sitting on a train for an extra hour or two while NR and the Police go looking for somebody else who has decided they are too important to wait would you?

I assume you have knowledge of the line in that area (I don't) but it would very much surprise me to find a line that didnt have one or two spots where someone less capable than me could get in or out. Certainly the two lines that go near my home are protected by barbed wire fences at waist height, no more.

Nope I dont know the lines that well, I have only travelled over them a few times but as palisade fencing is being rolled out around the Country it wont be long before it is installed if it hasnt already.

 

[DXMachina]

So would I.

Me too - I think I'd have the good grace to wave...

 

[Darandio]

Personally I would enjoy the irony of the train you have decamped from passing you whilst you are doing a Bear Grylls in the North Oxfordshire countryside.

Apart from the fact that they would probably have had the job completely stopped......

 

[HarleyDavidson]

I've had them decamp themselves before, just did a call to the controlling signaller, got a block & isolation and urgently requested the police to be at the location that I knew they were going to a short distance away.

The police were there within a couple of minutes to "meet & greet" the decampees an immediately nick them for trespass,rather strangely when they saw what was happening to the first few, they rapidly changed their minds & wanted back on.

Nah, off you go... All two dozen or so nicked.

 

[83G/84D]

Apart from the fact that they would probably have had the job completely stopped......

I think it was in the case the lines were reopened and trains were moving again.

 

[E16 Cyclist]

For the same reasons that walking 8 miles wouldnt concern me, nor would a little scramble. If I had real difficulty with it I'd head along to a bridge and go over the parapet.

I assume you have knowledge of the line in that area (I don't) but it would very much surprise me to find a line that didnt have one or two spots where someone less capable than me could get in or out. Certainly the two lines that go near my home are protected by barbed wire fences at waist height, no more.

I sign the line and there is literally nothing in that area apart from a viaduct, some MOD equipment and a tunnel and lots of green and a few foot crossings so evacuating in this manner really wasn't a viable option

 

[455driver]

I think it was in the case the lines were reopened and trains were moving again.

If the driver or guard of a train are aware that some wally has gone walkabout then they will have informed the signaller who would have no choice but to stop the job again. I have had it happen to me where I have been authorised to pass a faulty signal at danger and then immediately been sent a stop message because some berk had decided he was far too important to wait and he jumped off a train on an adjacent line causing everything to be stopped for another 40 minutes. If he had waited another 2 minutes his train would have been authorised to move!

 

[83G/84D]

If the driver or guard of a train are aware that some wally has gone walkabout then they will have informed the signaller who would have no choice but to stop the job again. I have had it happen to me where I have been authorised to pass a faulty signal at danger and then immediately been sent a stop message because some berk had decided he was far too important to wait and he jumped off a train on an adjacent line causing everything to be stopped for another 40 minutes. If he had waited another 2 minutes his train would have been authorised to move!

If said wally is seen to walk off but their whereabouts are unknown maybe a caution would be more appropriate than a complete stop. Of course if they left the railway altogether then "normal working".

There are often trespassers on the railway so stopping the job every time is impractical. A caution will often suffice if they are deemed not a danger to themselves or others so in the case of an impatient wally vacating a stranded train a caution would be more likely when movement resumes.

 

[Robertj21a]

This is all very well, emphasising the dangers, trespass etc - but everyone is very short on action. All I read is that everyone just has to wait.

There's only so much time that people will wait before they feel it necessary to safeguard their own health/sanity by taking action themselves.

Just how long should anybody wait for help to be provided - 1 hour, 2 hours, 15 hours ?. There have been similar incidents before where help was sadly lacking.

 

[455driver]

If said wally is seen to walk off but their whereabouts are unknown maybe a caution would be more appropriate than a complete stop. Of course if they left the railway altogether then "normal working".

There are often trespassers on the railway so stopping the job every time is impractical. A caution will often suffice if they are deemed not a danger to themselves or others so in the case of an impatient wally vacating a stranded train a caution would be more likely when movement resumes.

Would you be prepared to caution the drivers knowing if said wally gets hit the Judge (when you are up on a manslaughter charge) will ask you why you allowed trains to move knowing there was somebody on the tracks!

What would your answer be and would it be enough to convince the Judge that you had the wallys safety in mind when you allowed the trains to move?

 

[DXMachina]

I sign the line and there is literally nothing in that area apart from a viaduct, some MOD equipment and a tunnel and lots of green and a few foot crossings so evacuating in this manner really wasn't a viable option

Foot crossings - jackpot.
Thanks for the insights

PS: Daily Mail? nooo - they believe in deference to authority

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Obviously common sense reasoning is lacking on some people - "the ME syndrome" + the entire railway / police structures are always wrong. Daily Mail reader perchance ...?

 

[Searle]

But why do it in a way to disrupt loads of other peoples lives? That is what I was calling stupid.

You still shouldn't call someone who is obviously clinically depressed, stupid. If you've been, or tried caring for someone like it, then you'd understand. If not, stop making stupid and insensitive posts.

 

[OneTrackMind]

What an interesting thread this has turned into.

So, let's start from the beginning?

Man climbs to the top of a semiphore signal at the end of Platform 1 facing North, which is a standard trespass incident; run no trains through the platforms until he is down, detained by BTP, area searched and he is off the station.

Added complication in that the man is mentally ill, has a knife, has already self harmed himself and is covered in blood. What's the main concern? The people trying to get him down and the passengers (innocent joe public). So, station is evacuated, fine. Specialist negotiators brought in as per procedure, nothing else happens, man gets tazered and falls to platform with neck injuries.

Trains are held on both up and down lines, again fine as standard. Bearing in mind Chiltern Control is round the back of Banbury Station and can see everything going on by CCTV etc.

The train held in question for 4 hours were on about here, refreshments were given out by the onboard crew but these run out. It was just north of Banbury - however no where near a safe spot, could probably walked to the station yes, but it would of been past the knife welding man.
Turning it round to Leamington, then putting passengers on buses would of taken quite long as it would of run at a reduced speed.

Between Banbury and Leam, isn't near any main roads with taxis and buses running along side it so your argument is invalid and the terrain is quite horrendous for a train packed full of commuters to get out into without landing in fields full of all sorts of surprises.

Yes quite an inconvenient length of time, but sat on a clubman where I'm safe from being run down or stabbed is a sensible choice I'd like to think.

I'm confident Banbury is being resignalled in the near future to rid the Semiphores so climbing up them won't be an option...

 

[trentside]

You still shouldn't call someone who is obviously clinically depressed, stupid. If you've been, or tried caring for someone like it, then you'd understand. If not, stop making stupid and insensitive posts.

Well said, Searle.

Clearly an individual in need of a lot of help - and hopefully he will now receive it. I'm just glad that although he self harmed that this is not another thread about a fatality, we should be grateful for that regardless of the disruption it caused.

 

[chris89]

You still shouldn't call someone who is obviously clinically depressed, stupid. If you've been, or tried caring for someone like it, then you'd understand. If not, stop making stupid and insensitive posts.

Well said, Searle.

Clearly an individual in need of a lot of help - and hopefully he will now receive it. I'm just glad that although he self harmed that this is not another thread about a fatality, we should be grateful for that regardless of the disruption it caused.

I myself agree with both of these points.

 

[Tomnick]

Would you be prepared to caution the drivers knowing if said wally gets hit the Judge (when you are up on a manslaughter charge) will ask you why you allowed trains to move knowing there was somebody on the tracks!

What would your answer be and would it be enough to convince the Judge that you had the wallys safety in mind when you allowed the trains to move?

The Rule Book only requires a caution if it's considered that the trespassers is either a danger to traffic or is in danger himself, otherwise it's normal working. Why would I, or anyone else, be up on a manslaughter charge for following an approved (and no doubt heavily risk assessed) method of working?

 

[Bald Rick]

A much better question!

I'd have used my phone to get a GPS location, identified the nearest road likely to be reachable without crossing water or other obvious hazards (I wouldnt want to cross pointwork or a crossover for fear of being struck by a train on a different route)

(places the railway crosses a road or runs near it would be promising, or any route across non-agricultural fields where a road was evident nearby) and probably struck out in a lateral direction off the railway at as near a point as was practical.

Then either walk to the next town (8 miles wouldnt bother me), or flag down a bus or taxi if one passed.

Would you still have done this if:

a) it was p*ssing down
b) your destination was, say, Southampton (and if so, what happens next?)

 

[O L Leigh]

The Rule Book only requires a caution if it's considered that the trespassers is either a danger to traffic or is in danger himself, otherwise it's normal working. Why would I, or anyone else, be up on a manslaughter charge for following an approved (and no doubt heavily risk assessed) method of working?

I would imagine in this case that the BTP decided to take possession of the line until the situation had been resolved, much as they do with a fatality. This particular incident and others like it are not the same as a regular garden variety trespasser. He may not have been at risk of being struck by a train but he was clearly at risk. It's also a more controllable situation when there isn't a braying mob looking on.

As for those advocating a break-out, use the search function. This topic has been discussed many many times already and, frankly, done to death.

O L Leigh

 

[Tomnick]

I would imagine in this case that the BTP decided to take possession of the line until the situation had been resolved, much as they do with a fatality. This particular incident and others like it are not the same as a regular garden variety trespasser. He may not have been at risk of being struck by a train but he was clearly at risk. It's also a more controllable situation when there isn't a braying mob looking on.

I agree that the BTP would have asked for the job to be stopped around the chap up the signal post - no question there really (other than that they wouldn't take possession as such). The question of cautioning or running normally was, if I'm not mistaken, in response to impatient punters releasing themselves from trains and making their own way along the infrastructure - in that case, if the line was opened to traffic again, I'd treat them as I'd treat any other trespasser, usually running trains under caution unless any other information or instructions were provided.

 

[didcot]

Living in Banbury and hearing yesterday every bit of nonsense from it was a woman throwing herself through a window at the station to someone sat on top of Banbury North signal box I would like to make the following comments

Attatched is a photo of where the 0727 Manchester - Bournemouth was held for about four and three quarter hours yesterday (the signal which the class 66 has just passed) The bridge from where the photo was taken is approx 200 yards from the signal and was the only way into the town pedestrians could use after the police closed Bridge St to stop people gawping at what was going on . Its not exactly in the middle of nowhere - not getting into the rights and wrongs of people being held on the trains it made me wonder how long is it acceptable to hold people on a train - nearly 5 hours or if it had gone on another 5 hours would they still be on the train - who makes the decision?

Of course if this had happened years ago with slam door stock I dare say some of them would soon have got off even if they were told not to

 

[Llanigraham]

I would imagine in this case that the BTP decided to take possession of the line until the situation had been resolved, much as they do with a fatality. This particular incident and others like it are not the same as a regular garden variety trespasser. He may not have been at risk of being struck by a train but he was clearly at risk. It's also a more controllable situation when there isn't a braying mob looking on.

As for those advocating a break-out, use the search function. This topic has been discussed many many times already and, frankly, done to death.

O L Leigh

To be pedantic, it isn't the BTP who take a Possession, as none of the ones I know are trained or capable of doing so. They may ask the signaller to "stop the job" for safety purposes. Not the same thing.