CPS prosecutes Merseyrail Guard

[Darren R]

The decision to prosecute does seem a little odd on the face of it. All I can find on-line about the incident (other than to the RMT website) are two articles in the Liverpool Echo: one on the day reporting the incident and one a couple of days later reporting that investigations had been started.

Hamilton Square accident: Elderly woman rescued after falling between train and platform

An elderly woman suffered a head injury after she fell between a train and the platform at Birkenhead’s Hamilton Square station.

Merseyrail services were disrupted while emergency crews attended to the passenger who fell as she tried to board a train at around 12.10pm.

Initial reports from the travel operator had suggested a person had been hit by a train causing Ellesmere Port and Chester lines to be blocked.

But a short time later the travel operator said that it was due to an “injured person on the line”.

The disruption was extended to include West Kirby and New Brighton lines as paramedics were called to the scene.

The woman was rescued from the tracks and treated at the platform before being taken to hospital for treatment after suffering a head wound in the fall.

A British Transport Police spokesman said: “Our officers were called to Hamilton Square station, Liverpool, at around 12.15pm on Wednesday, July 8, following reports of a person falling between a train and the platform.

“Paramedics from North West Ambulance Service also attended and a woman was safely removed from the tracks and taken to hospital with a cut to the head.”

Rail services running through Hamilton Square resumed at around 12.40pm, but Merseyrail warned that disruption was expected until at least 1.30pm as services returned to normal.

A Merseyrail spokesman said: “An elderly woman has fallen getting onto the train. She has been seen by paramedics. There’s still some disruption, all Wirral line services are currently slightly delayed as a knock-on effect.”

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/hamilton-square-accident-elderly-woman-9613992

Investigations launched into how elderly woman came to fall between train and platform at Hamilton Square station

British Transport Police and Office of Rail and Road both investigating circumstances of incident, as are Merseyrail.

Multiple investigations have been launched into how an elderly woman came to fall between a train and the platform at Hamilton Square station.

The 88-year-old is still being treated in hospital after suffering a cut to her head and other injuries in the incident at around 12.10pm on Wednesday.

It is understood the woman fell onto the tracks as she went to board a train on the station’s Liverpool-bound platform.

Merseyrail services were disrupted while paramedics were called in and the woman was rescued from the tracks and taken to hospital.

The travel operator has now confirmed it has launched a full investigation into the incident, as have several other agencies including British Transport Police and the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) – the independent safety and economic regulator for Britain’s railways.

A family member of the injured woman told the ECHO: “She’s still in hospital and was kept in again yesterday. We’ve been told now there is going to be a full investigation.

“Her friend who was with her was also taken ill in the ambulance as a result of the stress and she is also still in hospital.

“It’s very distressing for them both at the moment. We are all very upset, we just want to know why and how this happened.”

The ORR – which has enforcement powers and can force companies to make changes or bring prosecutions – confirmed its inspectors have been carrying out investigations following the incident.

British Transport Police said it had notified the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB), the UK’s independent railway accident investigation organisation.

A BTP spokesman said: “Our officers were called to Hamilton Square station, Liverpool, at around 12.15pm on Wednesday following reports of a person falling between a train and the platform.

“Paramedics from North West Ambulance Service also attended and a woman was safely removed from the tracks and taken to hospital with a cut to the head.

“We are now investigating to establish the full circumstances of this incident. The RAIB has been informed. The woman currently remains in a stable condition.”

The RAIB said it was aware of the incident and at this stage was making initial enquiries.

A Merseyrail spokesman said: “Following an accident involving an elderly lady at Hamilton Square station [on Wednesday] lunchtime, Merseyrail has launched a full investigation to determine precisely what happened. Until this investigation is completed and the facts fully established, we are unable to comment in more detail.”

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/investigations-launched-how-elderly-woman-9634221

There is nothing there to suggest anything untoward (I presume the investigations would be standard practice in the circumstances), and nor does there appear to be any more-recent follow-up stories, or an active RAIB investigation. It all seems a bit odd.

 

[jon0844]

Is the same person who let GoVia ask a season ticket holder (that forgot his ticket and tried to pay for a new one) to pay £250 now working for the CPS?

 

[A-driver]

There has been a lot of discussion on this on the Aslef Facebook group. If this prosecution is successful it will be the end of anything resembling punctuality on the railway until every single platform in the country is very well staffed. The rush hour service will be non existant as no driver or guard will move their train until the platform is completely empty. So when people can't fit on a busy train or want the one behind they will have to leave the platform completely before the train moves.

People on other threads have recently used phrases like 'jobs worth' and 'health & safety gone mad'. Well this sums up 100% why those phrases exist. Safety critical rail staff must do everything to the letter. No common sense, no chancing it. This guard did all that and is still facing prosecution. But at least he has the backing of his employer and their procedure to hide behind which can only help. Christopher McGee did not as he had used common sense over written procedure. A few years back there was a thread on here about a southeastern train which was terminated a few stops early as no guard could be found to run on the non DOO section of line. The forum was full of posters suggesting the driver use common sense and self dispatch to avoid cancelling the train. This kind of thing is the exact reason no driver would do anything like that.

A completely bizarre prosecution with some very, very serious implications for the railways.

 

[185]

BTP Liverpool investigated this, and passed their conclusions to the CPS.

I'm seeing a parallel with a certain other case with someone down the side of a set at James St.

- Platform heights were totally missed in that case, NR admit the stock used has an unacceptable platform interface void.

Perhaps BTP, in their attempts to provide an 'impartial' (from the tocs) presentation of the facts played devils advocate a little too well?

 

[Domh245]

BTP Liverpool investigated this, and passed their conclusions to the CPS.

I'm seeing a parallel with a certain other case with someone down the side of a set at James St.

- Platform heights were totally missed in that case, NR admit the stock used has an unacceptable platform interface void.

Perhaps BTP, in their attempts to provide an 'impartial' (from the tocs) presentation of the facts played devils advocate a little too well?

I may have misunderstood your post slightly (although the general point still stands) but surely in order for the CPS to be prosecuting the guard, and not Merseyrail Electrics or Network Rail, there would have had to have been some kind of illegal behaviour on the part of the guard.

 

[theironroad]

There has been a lot of discussion on this on the Aslef Facebook group. If this prosecution is successful it will be the end of anything resembling punctuality on the railway until every single platform in the country is very well staffed. The rush hour service will be non existant as no driver or guard will move their train until the platform is completely empty. So when people can't fit on a busy train or want the one behind they will have to leave the platform completely before the train moves.

People on other threads have recently used phrases like 'jobs worth' and 'health & safety gone mad'. Well this sums up 100% why those phrases exist. Safety critical rail staff must do everything to the letter. No common sense, no chancing it. This guard did all that and is still facing prosecution. But at least he has the backing of his employer and their procedure to hide behind which can only help. Christopher McGee did not as he had used common sense over written procedure. A few years back there was a thread on here about a southeastern train which was terminated a few stops early as no guard could be found to run on the non DOO section of line. The forum was full of posters suggesting the driver use common sense and self dispatch to avoid cancelling the train. This kind of thing is the exact reason no driver would do anything like that.

A completely bizarre prosecution with some very, very serious implications for the railways.

As nothing really happened to Punctuality and performance after mcgee, I'm not so sure that people will do anything. Talk is cheap.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it posted anywhere what *actually* happened? It seems bizarre that someone could fall down the side of a Merseyrail train if all they did was try to board it when the doors were closing. Merseyrail sets have very deep stepboards that extend fully across the gap at most stations.

 

[furlong]

I trust the BTP/CPS also considered prosecution under this Merseyrail byelaw:

10.5 In the case of automatic closing doors, no person shall enter or leave by the door when it is closing.

It exists for a good reason.

 

[CockneySparrow]

I suspect that there might well be more to this

Yes I think so as well, although the procedure was done correctly something on the lead up or aftermath has interested the CPS

 

[BestWestern]

I trust the BTP/CPS also considered prosecution under this Merseyrail byelaw:



It exists for a good reason.

Absolutely agreed. Indeed, if I were the Guard in question and I managed to avoid being hung drawn and quartered, I may very well consider a private prosecution.

If we are going to go around throwing the law at anybody and everybody, let's do it in equal measure, please.

 

[A-driver]

As nothing really happened to Punctuality and performance after mcgee, I'm not so sure that people will do anything. Talk is cheap.

That was a different case as there was a person in contact with the train when it moved. Plus there was a slight decline in punctuality, or more a raise in awareness of dispatch and not taking any chances whatsoever. Staff have been far more careful since and late night trains with drunks banging on doors and windows from the platform do now pick up fate more delay minutes.

This case is a guard following the set out procedure and doing everything 100% correctly yet still finding himself unprotected from prosecution. The delays this could lead to will be staff refusing to move a train or even close doors with people on the platform, and certainly between the yellow line and the train. This is because this prosecution implies that staff are somehow responsible for the sill actions of the public trying to board trains once the dispatch procedure has started. Go to any inner greater London station during the morning peak and you will see a major problem there which could potentially being the railway to a halt every morning.

 

[duncanp]

Although this is not rail related, there was an incident some years ago when someone tried to sue the referee of a rugby match for failing to keep proper control of the game after he was injured during a punch up in the game. I remember reading that if referees were held liable for every injury suffered during a match, then the game of rugby (and presumably football as well) would come to a halt as no-one would be willing to be a referee any more. One of the points made was that there is a public interest element to any prosecution, over and above the facts of an individual case.

Why this is relevant to the incident on Merseyrail is that, even if the guard was technically at fault in some way (although I don't think that he was looking at what has been reported) it is not in the public interest to find him guilty if, as a consequence, the railway were to grind to a halt during the rush hour as a result of over stringent application of safety procedures.

I hope that common sense prevails in this case.

 

[DarloRich]

I trust the BTP/CPS also considered prosecution under this Merseyrail byelaw=It exists for a good reason.

Absolutely agreed. Indeed, if I were the Guard in question and I managed to avoid being hung drawn and quartered, I may very well consider a private prosecution.

If we are going to go around throwing the law at anybody and everybody, let's do it in equal measure, please.

I understand entirely why you say that but, with respect, i doubt it stick in court. It would certainly fail the public interest test for the CPS.

As for a private prosecution: What would be the point? What would success look like? What would you meaningfully achieve?

Suing the CPS might be a better approach!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
What we need to understand is how this prosecution has come about, why, what it means for the wider industry and the impact this has.

OBVIOUSLY the overriding immediate concerns are for the liberty, life and career of the guard (who on the face of it seems to have followed his training and procedures correctly) and the impact upon the person who fell under the train

 

[gtr driver]

That was a different case as there was a person in contact with the train when it moved. Plus there was a slight decline in punctuality, or more a raise in awareness of dispatch and not taking any chances whatsoever. Staff have been far more careful since and late night trains with drunks banging on doors and windows from the platform do now pick up fate more delay minutes.

This case is a guard following the set out procedure and doing everything 100% correctly yet still finding himself unprotected from prosecution. The delays this could lead to will be staff refusing to move a train or even close doors with people on the platform, and certainly between the yellow line and the train. This is because this prosecution implies that staff are somehow responsible for the sill actions of the public trying to board trains once the dispatch procedure has started. Go to any inner greater London station during the morning peak and you will see a major problem there which could potentially being the railway to a halt every morning.

Well said as ever A Driver. Personally since McGee I've become far more cautious, adding at least a minute to some dwells to make sure there's a clear difference between "it seems clear" to "it's now undeniably totally clear" along the train. If someone decides to run for my train as the doors are closing and decides to stand there hanging on or pressing the door button, I wait until they've realised the doors are locked and give up before moving. I had some tiresome Halloween pranksters who weren't getting on but decided to hang on the side of the train waving their fake knives around to amuse people inside. All they did was cause a two minute delay late at night. It's up to you folks. If we're now responsible for events completely beyond our control then there won't be a wheel turning soon.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Well said as ever A Driver. Personally since McGee I've become far more cautious, adding at least a minute to some dwells to make sure there's a clear difference between "it seems clear" to "it's now undeniably totally clear" along the train. If someone decides to run for my train as the doors are closing and decides to stand there hanging on or pressing the door button, I wait until they've realised the doors are locked and give up before moving. I had some tiresome Halloween pranksters who weren't getting on but decided to hang on the side of the train waving their fake knives around to amuse people inside. All they did was cause a two minute delay late at night. It's up to you folks. If we're now responsible for events completely beyond our control then there won't be a wheel turning soon.

Doesn't it also potentially have implications for buses and coaches on the roads?

 

[A-driver]

Doesn't it also potentially have implications for buses and coaches on the roads?

The big difference is that when dispatching a bus the driver is normally next to the door and it's much easier for them to see what going on. At certain stations like Royston, st Neots and Huntingdon I alone have to monitor 24 different sets of doors in a CCTV screen. So I'm responsible for the actions of people 12 coaches (almost 250meters) away from me with no easy direct communication with the person.

I'm not saying you can't injure yourself between the road and bus but there also isn't the large gap like between the platform and train which you can fall down and be trapped and crushed to death. A bus driver checks the side of the bus like a car driver would for people and cyclists. On a train you are again checking up to 12 coaches which is impossible on one glance. It's potentially very easy to miss someone falling between the train and platform by coach 11 as you are momentarily checking coaches 3&4.

 

[HH]

It has implications everywhere. We should remember, however, that CPS only need to believe that there is a case to answer. Guilty is a long way off.

 

[notadriver]

The big difference is that when dispatching a bus the driver is normally next to the door and it's much easier for them to see what going on. At certain stations like Royston, st Neots and Huntingdon I alone have to monitor 24 different sets of doors in a CCTV screen. So I'm responsible for the actions of people 12 coaches (almost 250meters) away from me with no easy direct communication with the person.

I'm not saying you can't injure yourself between the road and bus but there also isn't the large gap like between the platform and train which you can fall down and be trapped and crushed to death. A bus driver checks the side of the bus like a car driver would for people and cyclists. On a train you are again checking up to 12 coaches which is impossible on one glance. It's potentially very easy to miss someone falling between the train and platform by coach 11 as you are momentarily checking coaches 3&4.

I've had lots of little incidents happen when driving buses and coaches often involving the road / pavement interface. Ranging from old ladies missing a step and falling down (that needed in ambulance) to shutting someone's head in the door who was standing near the entrance, not sure whether to board and suddenly attempted to dash on at the last second. Of course I didn't go to court for it!

I think things like this happen quite frequently on the railway but someone decided to tell the media. It won't go much further.

 

[TDK]

As nothing really happened to Punctuality and performance after mcgee, I'm not so sure that people will do anything. Talk is cheap.

Not if your union instructs you to carry out these duties to enable to guarantee that an individual will not be vulnerable to being prosecuted. Lets hope the unions do such to enable the safety of all passengers and protect the staff who are paying them to do so!.

 

[A-driver]

Not if your union instructs you to carry out these duties to enable to guarantee that an individual will not be vulnerable to being prosecuted. Lets hope the unions do such to enable the safety of all passengers and protect the staff who are paying them to do so!.

Let's not forget that after a kings Lynn driver was prosecuted with one charge being not having the radio fully set up (the area code was in which was a recognised method of operating by the TOCs and NR) Aslef instructed all members to not enter service with a partially registered radio and reduce speed to 20mph should signal be lost in service. This would have led to widespread disruption with trains up and down the country booked at speeds of 125mph running at 20! It was in reaction to the prosecution and to protect other members from being prosecuted. Yea the Lynn driver was in court for a serious incident but making one of the charges radio related to strengthen the prosecutions put all drivers using this recognised method of work in danger. It certainly focused the minds of the ORR in putting agreements in place of what could and could not be used against train crew and staff in future prosecutions.

Whatever the outcome of this intended prosecution, the point stands that no member of rail staff who is doing their job correctly and in line with company procedures and training should have prosecution held over their head. I don't know anything about This guard and his personal life but it may well be that he is about to spend this Xmas fearing it will be the last with his family for a few years.

 

[Mark_1987]

Things did happen after Chris McGee, everytime there was a drunken passenger aboard , the merseyrail guards refused to move the train until BTP removed the passenger. Still happens to this day, saw it with my own eyes at lime street a few weeks back. Whether this annoyed BTP and they have something against merseyrail guards is for speculation of course .....

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'd remind people about commenting too much on cases that are now sub judice.

The facts, as presented by the RMT, make the decision to prosecute sound very strange. So either the CPS prosecutor has made a mistake in this matter, which will be quickly fixed by the court, or there is more to it than initially met the eye.

 

[A-driver]

I'd remind people about commenting too much on cases that are now sub judice.

The facts, as presented by the RMT, make the decision to prosecute sound very strange. So either the CPS prosecutor has made a mistake in this matter, which will be quickly fixed by the court, or there is more to it than initially met the eye.

As nobody is discussing information not already in the public domain i don't see issue with discussing and speculating on what impact this is likely to have on the industry.

I also find it very difficult to see how there can possibly be more to this-I can't see what else could have happened, eapecially as both the union, RAIB and TOC have stated that the guard did everything correctly and to the regulations. In previous cases there has been a clear infringement (even if it could in someways be seen by some as justified) of procedures which isn't in anyway present here.

 

[asylumxl]

Things did happen after Chris McGee, everytime there was a drunken passenger aboard , the merseyrail guards refused to move the train until BTP removed the passenger. Still happens to this day, saw it with my own eyes at lime street a few weeks back. Whether this annoyed BTP and they have something against merseyrail guards is for speculation of course .....

And rightly so. The byelaws say such people should be removed if they pose a risk to their safety or others. The BTP have a duty to enforce the byelaws.

If the byelaws were enforced more consistently, then the whole McGee incident could have avoided. But that's a whole other topic...

 

[Bletchleyite]

And rightly so. The byelaws say such people should be removed if they pose a risk to their safety or others. The BTP have a duty to enforce the byelaws.

If the byelaws were enforced more consistently, then the whole McGee incident could have avoided. But that's a whole other topic...

It would have been avoided on the railway. The railway, however, is most probably the safest way for a drunk person to get home. Once removed, is there not more chance of them succumbing to hypothermia, or being run over by a car, or whatever?

Of course removing them improves the safety of *others* on the railway, and as such it may be justified, but it does not necessarily improve the safety of that individual, quite possibly far from it.

 

[A-driver]

It would have been avoided on the railway. The railway, however, is most probably the safest way for a drunk person to get home. Once removed, is there not more chance of them succumbing to hypothermia, or being run over by a car, or whatever?



Of course removing them improves the safety of *others* on the railway, and as such it may be justified, but it does not necessarily improve the safety of that individual, quite possibly far from it.

As selfish as it may sound, I would be happier knowing that I will get home from work without the police arresting me because of the actions of a drunk. We can all go out and have a good time and get drunk but need to accept responsibility for ourselves. If someone is so drunk that their actions could land me as a rail employee in court then I honestly couldn't care less how they get home or where they spend the night.

 

[Tetchytyke]

As nobody is discussing information not already in the public domain i don't see issue with discussing and speculating on what impact this is likely to have on the industry.

The impact on the industry yes, but just be careful about speculating why the CPS may have decided to prosecute.

Others have mentioned Christopher McGee; it should be pointed out that he was also cleared by an internal investigation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As selfish as it may sound, I would be happier knowing that I will get home from work without the police arresting me because of the actions of a drunk.

I'd agree with that, although in this case the passenger was 88 and there is no suggestion she was drunk.

As for the safety of the drunk, if the BTP remove them they don't get left in a ditch to die of hypothermia. They get a free overnight stay in a hostel and get a mug of tea in the morning

 

[geoffk]

Does the CPS have it in for Merseyrail, and what's the latest with Chris McGee - is he free now and will he get his job back?

Of course we need to change to law to ensure that those who act recklessly or foolishly do so at their own risk. Luckily I always had a job where I could use my common sense.

My only connection is that my great grandfather was a footplateman at Edge Hill.

 

[A-driver]

The impact on the industry yes, but just be careful about speculating why the CPS may have decided to prosecute.

Others have mentioned Christopher McGee; it should be pointed out that he was also cleared by an internal investigation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I'd agree with that, although in this case the passenger was 88 and there is no suggestion she was drunk.

As for the safety of the drunk, if the BTP remove them they don't get left in a ditch to die of hypothermia. They get a free overnight stay in a hostel and get a mug of tea in the morning

Again I'm not overly interested in what the police do with drunks they pick up as long as they are not putting my job and life at risk. On a simple level weather they are put up in a 5* luxury hotel overnight or put infront of a firing squad is a seperate argument. From a DOO drivers point of view I don't want to have to take responsibility for their actions. As long as I've done all that I'm supposed to prior to moving my train I don't see that I should risk prosecution.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Of course we need to change to law to ensure that those who act recklessly or foolishly do so at their own risk

We already have that: very few train crew are prosecuted for this sort of thing, even when passengers receive serious injuries. But it works both ways.

McGee should have been released after two and a half years, which will have been April this year.