BBC - Signalman guilty over crossing death

[marlane]

"His momentary error, his failure to follow procedures and checks, as he had been trained to do, has rightly resulted in his conviction."
And this cannot go unpunished.

This statement bothers me more than anything. How could he have had time to follow procedure when he had a split second to change his mistake. If he had been trained to deal with an irate person on the phone and the exact circumstance then maybe this would not have happened.
I am personally going to write to the judge to say what I think in defense of my brother, and I appreciate all the support for him. If anyone else would like to do the same here is the address. Sentencing is April 10th 2013 maybe putting case of Adrian Maund on the outside of the envelope would stop it being thrown in the trash/waste bin
Judge Melbourne Inman QC
c/o Birmingham Crown Court
1 Newton Street
Birmingham B4 7NA

Marlane Brenner USA

 

[DarloRich]

"His momentary error, his failure to follow procedures and checks, as he had been trained to do, has rightly resulted in his conviction."
And this cannot go unpunished.

This statement bothers me more than anything. How could he have had time to follow procedure when he had a split second to change his mistake. If he had been trained to deal with an irate person on the phone and the exact circumstance then maybe this would not have happened.
I am personally going to write to the judge to say what I think in defense of my brother, and I appreciate all the support for him. If anyone else would like to do the same here is the address. Sentencing is April 10th 2013 maybe putting case of Adrian Maund on the outside of the envelope would stop it being thrown in the trash/waste bin
Judge Melbourne Inman QC
c/o Birmingham Crown Court
1 Newton Street
Birmingham B4 7NA

Marlane Brenner USA

I don’t wish to seem harsh or rude or condescending but writing to the judge would serve no purpose whatsoever. I doubt he would be at liberty to read any of the letters.

I feel truly sorry for everyone involved. It is a horrible situation but someone died needlessly and there needs to be some form of punishment for those found guilty.

Because of the way the legislation is drafted it will always hit the individual harder. It is my opinion that NR will be fined, heavily, for breaches of health and safety rules as that is about all that can be done. I don’t think there has been a case of corporate manslaughter proved for a long time in this country. The poor signal man may well go to jail.

 

[Tomnick]

I'm not entirely sure myself which 'checks and procedures' weren't carried out. All that you're looking for is that the train has passed complete with tail lamp - which he had, sadly in error, satisfied himself was the case. There'd be no reason really to check the illuminated diagram - why would you, if you were sure (in response to hearing it pass the farmer on the other end of the phone?) that the train had passed?

I'll leave it to others who know more about the inner workings of the courts to discuss whether writing letters will achieve anything - the Court has reached its verdict though, and an appeal through the proper channels is the only way to challenge that. Hopefully the sentencing will take account of the mitigating circumstances, the lack of protection afforded by the equipment and the fact that it was all caused by a single error in the briefest lapse.

 

[bnm]

How could he have had time to follow procedure when he had a split second to change his mistake.

Procedure was to not make the mistake in the first place. Procedure would have been to ensure the train had passed before raising the barrier. Approach locking would have prevented the mistaken raising of the barrier and that is why Network Rail are jointly culpable. However, approach locking was not a legal requirement, so Network Rail can only be partly to blame.

Sadly a momentary lapse can be an offence. I'm fairly sure that the jury in this case have fully weighed up all the arguments for and against before giving their guilty verdict. I'm also fairly sure that the judge will take into account all the factors, both aggravating and mitigating, when he comes to pass sentence.

I'll not make comment on whether I think custody is appropriate or not, that is for the judge to decide, having heard all the evidence and submissions. The judge will be guided by law and sentencing guidelines only. It may make you feel better to write to him in support of your brother, but that won't have any effect on his decision.

Please don't take my words as criticism of you or your brother. This is a horrible situation for all involved to be in. Along with the family of Jane Harding; your brother, yourself and your wider family have my sympathies.

 

[marlane]

I feel better in sending a letter to the judge even if he never sees it.
That is Ok those that have differing opinions to my own.

 

[DarloRich]

I feel better in sending a letter to the judge even if he never sees it.
That is Ok those that have differing opinions to my own.

I can understand entirely why you want to write to the judge. I am sure we would all feel the same if our family members were in difficulties.

 

[yorkie]

... and the duty upon the Judge to protect the public and punish an offender....

The public would not be "protected" by imprisoning him. If he's likely to make the mistake again, then it is adequate protection to merely ensure he is not in that job again, I'd have thought. Of course, our legal system will not consider common sense as there's no framework for that, so he may well be punished worse than people who commit acts of violence. :roll:

I have no doubt ...

The only thing I have no doubt of is that our legal system is, frankly, ridiculous. But, sadly, we're stuck with it and all the unfairness that goes with it (violent crime is considered far more acceptable than making mistakes in positions of trust). Admittedly it's better than nothing, and better than many other countries, but I'm still angry about the unfairness of our legal system!

 

[bnm]

The public would not be "protected" by imprisoning him.

Maybe not by imprisoning him. But the 'protection' isn't just about the individual convicted in this case. The law is blind, but justice must be done, and seen to be done. A momentary lapse of concentration with such serious consequences will attract an appropriately commensurate sentence. If that person has some responsibility toward the safety of members of the public, that will also be reflected in the sentence. And as I said earlier, so will the mitigating circumstances, one of which was the 'momentary' nature of the lapse.

It doesn't help to confuse the issue by making comparisons with other types of crime and the sentences those crimes attract. 'Violent' crimes are not tried under Health & Safety legislation.

 

[Tomnick]

Other signallers will be starkly reminded what the consequences of a momentary lapse can lead to.

Do you think we're not already aware of the potential consequences of our actions or omissions? An environment where everyone's continually on edge, mentally gripping the brass rail every time they pull off for a train, benefits no-one and ultimately leads to more mistakes being made.

 

[bnm]

You are right Tomnick. My apologies. I'll withdraw my comment about being 'starkly reminded'.

 

[Tomnick]

No offence taken or anything like that, and certainly no need to withdraw your comments on my account! I'm all for a good discussion .

 

[bnm]

No offence taken or anything like that, and certainly no need to withdraw your comments on my account! I'm all for a good discussion .

You raised a very valid point about a state where signallers are 'continually on edge' likely being counter-productive. I hadn't considered that when I chose to use the words, 'starkly reminded.'

 

[Daniel]

You raised a very valid point about a state where signallers are 'continually on edge' likely being counter-productive. I hadn't considered that when I chose to use the words, 'starkly reminded.'

I do sometimes make split-second decisions at work, for the next 20 mins or so, wait for the phone to ring, expecting to be told the wrong decision had been made. On occasions I am given a choice - to make a decision in the overall best interest of the service, or one which involves me keeping my head down and not getting booked. With decisions being made resulting in nerves such as those during a normal peak service, I can see how everyone is always one very small step away from loosing everything.

 

[Morden Via CHX]

"The driver of train 1V75 immediately applied full service braking when signal
ML42 reverted to danger. He explained that he did not initially perceive this
as an emergency situation, and thought that the signaller wanted to bring him
to stop because of an obstruction further down the line."

Shouldn't the driver have put the brake straight into emergency?

 

[BestWestern]

Shouldn't the driver have put the brake straight into emergency?

You could argue that a signal reverting to danger doesn't warrant a Driver making a decision about what may or not be happening, rather that they should simply stop as quickly as possible. Having said that, the job of a Driver is to receive and process information, and there are many instances where they must make a judgement on how to proceed; it is inevitable that there will times when hindsight suggests a different action might have been preferable. However, it is unlikely to have made any difference here.

 

[Dieseldriver]

On the stock I drive there is no difference in braking force whatsoever between a full service brake application and an emergency one. In the scenario of a signal going back on me, in certain situations I would probably act in the same way.

 

[A-driver]

I wouldn't always view a signal going back as warranting an emergency brake application-I would want to try and stop before passing the signal so it really depends on speed and distance. If I was doing 30mph and a signal right on the horizon went back I wouldn't use emergency as I'd stop too far away to read the signal number and just need to draw up to the peg! The thing with an emergency application is that you can't release the brakes until at a stand. At least in full service you can ease up to stop where needed.

 

[Morden Via CHX]

Knew there would be a good reason, cheers boys