Man in court for setting fire to fellow worker

[Strathclyder]

"Industry accepted horseplay" - I'd love to know what the legal definition of this is - "I only permanently scarred him a bit"?

'He didn't end up looking like Half-Face from the Batman films, so all's good guv'.

In all seriousness, 'Industry-accepted horseplay' is a new one on me. Good lord, some folk will say anything as a defence if they think it'll mitigate the consequences of their actions, no matter how insane it sounds with context. I've never worked in the industry, but I'm pretty (as in 100%) sure this is NOT a thing.

 

[contrex]

"Industry accepted horseplay" - I'd love to know what the legal definition of this is - "I only permanently scarred him a bit"?

Do people still tell the story about the apprentices who thought it was funny to aim, from several feet away, the nozzle of an airline at the backside of a colleague halfway up a ladder, and let a puff go?

 

[fodphil]

Why are people with 5 previous convictions being employed on the railway?

Same reason why some one with 5 convictions can build an extension on your house

 

[Deepgreen]

The only conviction they specifically mention is an assault from 2009. So the convictions may well have been already spent when he joined the railway.

Not "spent" enough it seems...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 May 2026 ==

There are 3 reasons for imprisonment,

Punishment. Deterrent to others and to prevent the offender from repeating.

The second and third and irrelevent in this case and the person is probably punished enough, almost certainly will not work on the railway again.

Imprisonment would be a waste of money in this case

I would fervently hope the "almost" there is redundant!!

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Why are people with 5 previous convictions being employed on the railway?

They shouldn't be anywhere near the railway in my opinion, makes you wonder if the bloke lied on his CV to bag the job.

Not to mention the consideration of the overcrowded prison spaces.

Stick the clown on a free one way holiday to eastern Ukraine or to Tehran, it might just wake the moron up.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Was the defendant a Network Rail employee or a contractor? I imagine NR vet their employees at interview level whereas employing contractors at a workplace you can end up with anyone.
I remember a PW supervisor being sacked in the 80s for initiating a new lad by covering his man parts in Swarfega.

 

[Elecman]

Kill his Sentinal card registration and blacklist his NI number then he can never work on the railway again.

 

[styles]

Yes, everyone deserves a second chance providing that they are truly sorry for what they done and don't do it again, but they don't deserve a third, fourth or fifth chance (as he had five convictions)

The sentence is as astonishing as the story

If the previous convictions were spent, the railway wouldn't have even known about them.

The only previous conviction mentioned in the article was a common assault from 2009 which would have likely both been spent by the time he joined the railway (unless he's been working there a long time), and if he joined after 2000, it would've even be filtered off of Standard and Enhanced DBS checks under the filtering rules.

He now has a GBH conviction though, which will never be filtered off Standard and Enhanced DBS'. I imagine most trackside workers only require Basic DBS' so in a little over 5 years' time he could potentially end up rejoining, but I imagine that in 5 years' time a lot of employers will be running some magic AI software to do background checks and find this story.

Basically, I'd be surprised if he'll work on the railway after this, but there's a fair chance the railway had no idea about his past convictions when he joined because it sounds like they were minor and from a while back and therefore probably spent.

 

[contrex]

I remember a PW supervisor being sacked in the 80s for initiating a new lad by covering his man parts in Swarfega.

I heard of Lancashire women mill hands doing that to male newbies' 'two veg' with boot-polish in the 1930s and earlier.

 

[sprunt]

Just because the article quites the man saying there is "industry accepted horseplay", doesn't make it true. I'm sure he'd try and use anything as a mitigating circumstance to lessen the severity of what he's done.

I could say the railway had "industry accepted meetings in the local titty bar" and that doesn't make it true either. What it does do it make a great quote for a quality news outlet like, oh nevermind, its reach media. The absolute pinnacle of journalism.

I'm no fan of Reach, but there shouldn't be any criticism attached to them for simply reporting what happened in a court case.

 

[RailwayRookie]

I'm no fan of Reach, but there shouldn't be any criticism attached to them for simply reporting what happened in a court case.

There absolutely should be criticism of the media, its what helps prevents news becoming propaganda.

Where do you stand on this one? Simply reporting an incident that occurred over twenty years ago and posting it the DAY AFTER eurovision?

Image is headline of a reach media owned outlet stating: "Eurovisions Graham Norton left for dead after BBC star stabbed in horror attack"

Reach is inherently click-bait articles mostly designed to make people with the reading about of a nine year old feel informed.

 

[sprunt]

There absolutely should be criticism of the media, its what helps prevents news becoming propaganda.

Did I say there should be no criticism at all of the media? I recommend reading to the end of a sentence before replying to it.

 

[SargeNpton]

Just because the article quites the man saying there is "industry accepted horseplay", doesn't make it true. I'm sure he'd try and use anything as a mitigating circumstance to lessen the severity of what he's done.

I could say the railway had "industry accepted meetings in the local titty bar" and that doesn't make it true either. What it does do it make a great quote for a quality news outlet like, oh nevermind, its reach media. The absolute pinnacle of journalism.

Well, it has happened! In the early 1980s there was a pub near Marylebone that had strippers on a Friday lunchtime, at which several fairly senior managers from the HQ at 222 Marylebone Road could be seen.

 

[RailwayRookie]

Did I say there should be no criticism at all of the media? I recommend reading to the end of a sentence before replying to it.

Sorry let me be more concise:

There absolutely should be criticism of the way reach reported this court case by leaning in to a comment made by the accused and then doing zero actual journalism to prove, disprove or even comment on the fact there is no evidence of this other than the word of said accused.

I still await your opinion on the article in that reply, since i asked where you stand on it.

Perhaps if you had read to the end before you replied aye?

 

[sprunt]

Sorry let me be more concise:

There absolutely should be criticism of the way reach reported this court case by leaning in to a comment made by the accused and then doing zero actual journalism to prove, disprove or even comment on the fact there is no evidence of this other than the word of said accused.

I still await your opinion on the article in that reply, since i asked where you stand on it.

Perhaps if you had read to the end before you replied aye?

They didn't "lean into it". They reported it, accurately, as a thing that was said during the trial, just as they did the comments of the prosecuting counsel, the victim and the judge. These are all things that one would expect to find in a report of a court case. There is nothing in the quoted extract in the OP that implies that Reach agree with the suggestion that it is industry accepted horseplay. It's not part of the function of a court reporter to carry out investigative journalism into any claims made in court.

And I did read to the end of your post, but I didn't reply to it given that it was completely irrelevant to my post, which specified that it was in this particular case that no criticism was due to Reach, and even said

I'm no fan of Reach

which may have given you a clue on where I stand on that kind of thing.

 

[zwk500]

If anything the judges comments are more concerning, as she does appear to take the assertion as true:

Judge Catherine Richards told Blackett it was "astonishing" that he had done something so dangerous, and said it was "not just horseplay" regardless of what the defendant and his colleagues may have thought. She said it was only by luck that the outcome of the incident had been even more serious, for both the complainant and the defendant.

 

[Sheridan]

I do suspect there’s the tiniest grain of truth in the ‘industry-accepted horseplay’ comment. I don’t for one second believe that it is ‘industry-accepted’, but I can well believe that young or youngish men equipped with fireproof suits have experimented with them.

Just to be clear, that’s not me saying for one second that I condone it, that the industry would condone it if they were aware, or that it’s in any way acceptable.

 

[sprunt]

If anything the judges comments are more concerning, as she does appear to take the assertion as true:

I more interpreted that as essentially saying that even if it is true it doesn't in any way excuse what happened, so it's not (for the purposes of sentencing) worth worrying about whether it's true or not.

If it is true (and I don't believe for a second that it is) then the victim should be suing his employer.

 

[AlterEgo]

If anything the judges comments are more concerning, as she does appear to take the assertion as true:

The victim is supposed to have consented to the prank as per the evidence reported in the trial (though legally you can't consent to GBH).

 

[snookertam]

I think a good barometer of whether the reporting is realistic is the response of those of us who work in the industry, and as one of those people, I can see how this could have happened under the guise of an acceptable prank.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 May 2026 ==

I do suspect there’s the tiniest grain of truth in the ‘industry-accepted horseplay’ comment. I don’t for one second believe that it is ‘industry-accepted’, but I can well believe that young or youngish men equipped with fireproof suits have experimented with them.

Just to be clear, that’s not me saying for one second that I condone it, that the industry would condone it if they were aware, or that it’s in any way acceptable.

It’s implicitly rather than explicitly accepted. Railway management willingly turn a blind eye to all kinds of behaviour, partly for a quiet life so that they don’t rock any boats.

 

[35B]

If anything the judges comments are more concerning, as she does appear to take the assertion as true:

She then went on to accept the defence claim that the incident was motivated by recklessness rather than malice. As for "industry accepted", I note that the defendant was jobless by the time of trial, which rather suggests that he discovered that it was not industry accepted and rapidly received a P45

 

[Rab Smith]

"Industry accepted horseplay" is such an open ended term to use. Where does it stop and where does unacceptable behaviour start? Along the same lines as the "banter" term. That is another fine line between having a laugh and being downright offensive and bullying towards someone. Companies are quite rightly cracking down on these type of behaviours and employees are increasingly being caught up in the disciplinary process.
People need to stop and think before acting the clown.

 

[357]

"Industry accepted horseplay" is such an open ended term to use. Where does it stop and where does unacceptable behaviour start? Along the same lines as the "banter" term. That is another fine line between having a laugh and being downright offensive and bullying towards someone. Companies are quite rightly cracking down on these type of behaviours and employees are increasingly being caught up in the disciplinary process.
People need to stop and think before acting the clown.

I'll repeat what myself and many other staff have said in this thread. This is not industry accepted horseplay in any way.

I've been involved in some hilarious pranks over the years - like the time I complained about how heavy my bag was before discovering my colleague had put a fishplate in there - I'd been carrying it around all day!

I've never been set fire to or set anyone on fire though ...

 

[Rab Smith]

I'll repeat what myself and many other staff have said in this thread. This is not industry accepted horseplay in any way.

I've been involved in some hilarious pranks over the years - like the time I complained about how heavy my bag was before discovering my colleague had put a fishplate in there - I'd been carrying it around all day!

I've never been set fire to or set anyone on fire though ...

Your prank was really my point here. Setting fire to someone is not banter in any way, it is GBH and unlawful but your fishplate in bag story would generally be seen as humorous until you injured yourself lifting it or it damaged your bag. That's when horseplay becomes unacceptable.
I would have found that hilarious but some people might not.

 

[357]

I would have found that hilarious but some people might not.

Yes, I do see your point. There's an element of how well you know someone at play too.

 

[styles]

It would only be industry accepted horseplay if your name is Johnny Knoxville and you worked for MTV.

 

[mpthomson]

They shouldn't be anywhere near the railway in my opinion, makes you wonder if the bloke lied on his CV to bag the job.


Stick the clown on a free one way holiday to eastern Ukraine or to Tehran, it might just wake the moron up.

They'll have been spent convictions so he won't have needed to declare them unless for a job requiring standard or enhanced DBS.

 

[duffield]

I do suspect there’s the tiniest grain of truth in the ‘industry-accepted horseplay’ comment. I don’t for one second believe that it is ‘industry-accepted’, but I can well believe that young or youngish men equipped with fireproof suits have experimented with them.

Just to be clear, that’s not me saying for one second that I condone it, that the industry would condone it if they were aware, or that it’s in any way acceptable.

I have a definite recollection of having read stories a number of years ago (not specifically in the rail industry) of people doing exactly this as a "prank". Totally stupid and reckless of course, but not entirely unknown.