• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Merseyrail Guard on Trial (Report now out)

Status
Not open for further replies.

ANorthernGuard

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2010
Messages
2,662
If you look at still taken from CCTV is girl actually leaning against train?she is seen standing upright not slumped against train. How many times do you see people waving through window to the person on the train? Then step back as train departs which guard in this case believed would happen.

If that was all they saw then he would never have been found guilty, Evidence was gathered from numerous sources (CCTV/OTMR etc etc) and put in front of the jury, I know there is a protective culture on the railways which usually is something to be proud of (and I know I usually am) but in this case sorry guys and gals a Jury found him GUILTY, yes (IMHO) the sentence was too severe but he was guilty nontheless, its something that all Traincrew could previously be found guilty of, we become lax we relax and maybe sometimes we do take our eyes off the ball, Now since the verdict we all have to look at ourselves and re evaluate what we believe to be safe, for me I would NEVER have given 2 in that circumstance, the guard did and only he knows why he did, he was negligent but he never even thought about the consequences none of us would..until now.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Jim_

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2012
Messages
11
If you look at still taken from CCTV is girl actually leaning against train?she is seen standing upright not slumped against train. How many times do you see people waving through window to the person on the train? Then step back as train departs which guard in this case believed would happen.
It's difficult to tell from a still, but obviously the train was bearing some of her weight when it moved as that caused her to lose her balance and fall to her death. I don't know what information from the court case has been made public other than the judge's sentencing remarks, but the judge makes it clear that the girl was leaning against the train when the guard gave the ready to start and that he was aware of her position. Presumably the jury found him guilty on that basis.

I think it's harsh that he got 5 years for what was a momentary lapse of judgement and the incident is a tragedy for everyone concerned.

In answer to one of the earlier questions about stopping the train if someone was trying to pull open a door while it was moving, yes absolutely I would and have done so. Control might moan about the delay but they aren't the ones in court if it all goes tits.
 
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
989
Location
Blackpool south Shore
It's difficult to tell from a still, but obviously the train was bearing some of her weight when it moved as that caused her to lose her balance and fall to her death. I don't know what information from the court case has been made public other than the judge's sentencing remarks, but the judge makes it clear that the girl was leaning against the train when the guard gave the ready to start and that he was aware of her position. Presumably the jury found him guilty on that basis.

I think it's harsh that he got 5 years for what was a momentary lapse of judgement and the incident is a tragedy for everyone concerned.

In answer to one of the earlier questions about stopping the train if someone was trying to pull open a door while it was moving, yes absolutely I would and have done so. Control might moan about the delay but they aren't the ones in court if it all goes tits.

A very sad accident for all involved.
The camera had a different angle to the guard.
The RAIB report gives a full report on what happened, and why he may not have initially seen the girl.
Several factors could have caused her to fall.
Another could have been disorientated by seeing the movement of the train, giving the sensation the platform was moving.
Or just being intoxicated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5ijGfDMiIs
 
Last edited:

Kt

Member
Joined
26 Sep 2011
Messages
36
I say good luck to him! People have gotten less than 5 years for a lot less!
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,195
It is sad that a young girl's life has been taken, but I maintain that even without having witnessed the scene, her death has not been caused purely by the guard's action.

Alcohol is dangerous. Good luck to Chris.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,329
I did read in the Metro (yes I know) about a single mum, giving a work colleague a lift home on his first day at work, driving at up to 45mph in a 30 mph limit losing control and hitting a Ford Ranger head on, killing her passenger was only given a 6 months sentence, suspended for 2 (I think) years!

Her direct actions caused his death, his only "part" in his death was accepting a lift and getting in the car but yet Chris was found culpable of the death of a drunk and drugged teenager and gets 5 years? Absolute disgrace and just shows British "justice" to be a complete {deleted}!
 

Temple Meads

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2010
Messages
2,283
Location
Devon
I did read in the Metro (yes I know) about a single mum, giving a work colleague a lift home on his first day at work, driving at up to 45mph in a 30 mph limit losing control and hitting a Ford Ranger head on, killing her passenger was only given a 6 months sentence, suspended for 2 (I think) years!

Her direct actions caused his death, his only "part" in his death was accepting a lift and getting in the car but yet Chris was found culpable of the death of a drunk and drugged teenager and gets 5 years? Absolute disgrace and just shows British "justice" to be a complete {deleted}!

The case of the motorist you've highlighted is a gross under sentence, but it doesn't make Chris McGee's sentence excessive IMHO. It's the case of the motorist that's "wrong"..
 

ATW Alex 101

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2010
Messages
2,087
Location
Ellesmere port
TBF Chris McGee isnt to blame purely for the death of Georgia Varley due to a number of factors, including the fact she was told to move and intoxicated at the same time
 

Wyvern

Established Member
Joined
27 Oct 2009
Messages
1,573
Without researching the case, she was probably not charged with manslaughter but causing death by dangerous driving, which the charge CPS usually brings.

A better comparison my be with people who have caused death during a fight.
 

D1009

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2012
Messages
3,166
Location
Stoke Gifford
Without researching the case, she was probably not charged with manslaughter but causing death by dangerous driving, which the charge CPS usually brings.

A better comparison my be with people who have caused death during a fight.
Neither case is in any way comparable. Someone performing a safety critical role on the railway has been found guilty of irregular actions which have led to someone's death. End of. Having said that I hope the appeal is successful.
 

Ferret

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2009
Messages
4,131
It is sad that a young girl's life has been taken, but I maintain that even without having witnessed the scene, her death has not been caused purely by the guard's action.

Alcohol is dangerous. Good luck to Chris.

I felt at the time that it was a case of right verdict, wrong sentence. I think a custodial sentence was the only option, but 5 years was a little excessive. I think an appeal was inevitable, and the trial Judge must have realised this when he passed the sentence!

 

jon91

Member
Joined
18 Oct 2010
Messages
307
Location
Blackburn
Here is paragraph 13 from the RAIB report:
"13 From his position at the rear of the train the guard can only communicate with the
driver by using the control panel to send and receive codes. The train’s design
ensures that the guard cannot send codes until the passenger doors are closed,
the bodyside lights have gone out (see figure 4) and the blue interlock light is
lit (see figure 3). Platform video camera footage shows that the young person
placed her hands on the train before the doors had fully closed because the
bodyside lights had not gone out. Therefore, the guard must have sent the ‘ready
to start’ code after the young person had placed her hands on the train.
The
driver repeated the ‘ready to start’ code, released the train’s brakes and prepared
to set off."

So guard gives two AFTER the young woman had started leaning on the train - he gave the ready to start when it wasn't safe for him to do so thereby causing the train to move and the victim to lose balance, causing her to fall into the gap and sustain fatal injuries. I fail to see the cause of the uncertainty in the verdict.

Sentencing on the other hand...
 
Last edited:

sarahj

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2012
Messages
1,897
Location
Brighton
I know what happened at Angmering, and know the guard involved, but wont go further except it was a different situation to what happened on merseyrail.

About a week after the court case I was working a 377 from Brighton to West Worthing. Brighton had been playing at home and the train was full of people who were 'tired and emotional' and since the game had ended at 8.45 and it was now 00.04 were even more so. As a result I worked it from the back cab. This gets me away from the 'fun' and allows me to see the train away from the platform via the drop down window. We arrived at the delight of Lancing and a few got off. Once everyone was clear, I closed the doors then reboarded the train and closed the cab doors. I gave the two bells to the driver, and just after I have got the reply, one passenger who was walking down the platform, suddenley decided to lean over and 'kiss' the train just as it started to move. I gave the one bell and the train stopped ( we must have moved around 7 meters).
I asked the person to stand clear and in return got a mouth full of abuse. A friend of his came and pulled him back from the edge, and once clear, I gave two bells and off we went. As we left I saw them shouting abuse at a train on the other platform.
One thing that got me here, appart from being sworn at for stopping a train ripping of your face. was that it was only cause' I was working from the rear cab that I saw his actions and stopped the train. I'f id been in the pass area the last I would have seen him was when I closed the doors and gave the ready to start bell and he was behind the yellow line. I woulld have been unable to see his actions after the train started to move.
This was brought home again the other night working the 23.05 from Brighton to Victoria. An 8 car and working from the panel in the train. At Wivelsfield a family got off and were walking up the platform, behind the yellow line. Among them was a very young girl, aged 2-3. I closed the doors, shut my local door, then gave the ready to start. I got back the reply and the train started to move. I then heard a scream from the platform as the toddler had made a dash for it, running down the platform. My heart was in my mouth and was just about to press the bell when I saw a adult grab the child. It was only seconds, but knocked me back a bit. We were moving as well, so even a emergency stop would have taken a while.
All in all a bit bizzare after the Liverpool events and puts things in perspective.

As a side note I was commenting on how the RMT have been rather silent on the matter, and then someone pointed out that guard was an ASLEF member, so perhaps thats the reason. Southern have also said nothing about it either.

And on another matter, someone pointed out that railway bylaws state that it is offence to be drunk and railway property :roll:
 

Mainliner

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2010
Messages
367
Location
Northumberland
BBC reporting McGee lost appeal to have sentence reduced:

"A railway guard jailed for five years for causing the death of a teenage girl in Liverpool has lost his appeal to have his sentence reduced.

Georgia Varley died when she fell between the carriage and platform at James Street station in October 2011.

Christopher McGee, 46, of Wallasey, Wirral, was found guilty of manslaughter by gross negligence at Liverpool Crown Court.

The Court of Appeal in London refused his bid to have his sentenced reduced."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-22802290

ETA: More detail in this report:

"But in a 90-minute hearing at the London court, Lord Justice Pitchford threw out McGee's appeal.

The judge said McGee had taken the "inexplicable" decision to give the driver the signal to move off, knowing there was a "gross risk of death or serious injury" to a drunken teenager.

McGee's barrister, Peter Birkett QC, argued that the five-year term was out of step with previous sentencing decisions in gross negligence manslaughter cases and did not reflect his personal mitigation.

He had been a train guard for 20 years, had an unblemished record and had himself suffered from the incident due to post traumatic stress disorder and a first prison sentence for a man of good character.

"This is an appellant who was not previously of what might be described as the criminal milieu and so any imprisonment is particularly hard to bear," the QC told the three appeal judges.

But giving judgment, Lord Justice Pitchford said the appeal was not even arguable.

"What distinguishes this case is the appellant's inexplicable decision, knowing of the gross risk of death or serious injury to this drunk young women, to signal to the driver that it was safe to proceed," he said.

"It seems to us that this was gross negligence of a very high order in the performance of his responsibility, both to the public and to this individual over which the appellant had complete personal control.

"Standing back, we do not underestimate the severity of the sentence imposed, but we are quite satisfied that the trial judge, who was in the best position to make the assessment of seriousness, took account of all relevant factors.

"He reflected them in a sentence within the appropriate range and, for that reason, we are unable to conclude that the sentence he imposed was arguably manifestly excessive and, for that reason, we must reject the application."

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/merseyrail-guard-christopher-mcgee-fails-4066878
 
Last edited:

Monty

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2012
Messages
2,373
I'm not suprised his appeal to reduce his sentence has been thrown out, rightly or wrongly I feel the courts have decided to make an example out of Christopher McGee. However I still maintain the belief the man was negligent and a girl died because of it (I won't go on about all the other factors, but we all know there were many that attributed to the young lady's demise but the buck has to stop somewhere).
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Well if the appeal is now over then the unions can start making noise about this at last. Our union have already started making noises about dispatch problems on our routes and I can see this being stepped up.

Bring on the rush hour delays!
 

12CSVT

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2010
Messages
2,611
A bad day for justice.

While I don't deny that the death of a young woman is a tragedy, perhaps if she hadn't been drunk and incapable (an offence under criminal law), hadn't consumed illegal drugs (another offence under criminal law), hadn't been unfit to travel though excessive drinking (an offence under railway bye-laws), hadn't been fooling about both on the train and at several stations en-route, she would have been alive today.
 

Tibbs

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2012
Messages
894
Location
London
A bad day for justice.

While I don't deny that the death of a young woman is a tragedy, perhaps if she hadn't been drunk and incapable (an offence under criminal law), hadn't consumed illegal drugs (another offence under criminal law), hadn't been unfit to travel though excessive drinking (an offence under railway bye-laws), hadn't been fooling about both on the train and at several stations en-route, she would have been alive today.

None of which removed his duty of care.

He's guilty, the court said so and now the appeal has agreed.

Fortunately, your efforts to smear the poor (dead) victim will not change that.

Also from what I remember from quality shows as Interceptors, consuming illegal drugs is not illegal, nor is being under the influence of them. Being in possession of them is, as is dealing (tut tut Tulisa, allegedly) or driving under the influence etc etc
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
5,022
I can't agree with this. This is a day for reminding rail staff of their roles and responsibilities rather than trying to tarnish the memory of a young lady who was killed because of negligence on the part of the guard.

Quite. He gave the ding ding and away while she was leaning against the train. It may just have been a momentary lapse of concentration, but we all must pay the price for a mistake we make. Sadly McGee will pay for it with a 5yr sentence.

We are all responsible for own actions, traincrew are no exception.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,515
Location
Yorkshire
The sentence is utterly insane though, and is evidence of how ridiculous our legal system is. Violent crimes are considered far less serious (as I posted previously).

Let's face it, if he had been drink driving, run her over, and fled the scene, put someone in a coma, etc, etc, he'd have probably had a more lenient sentence. Now that's just crazy and indefensible.

I couldn't name them but I can think of people off the top of my head who have carried out numerous assaults, and will continue to do so, but get away with it. Our legal system seems to encourage such behaviour and we tolerate it. It's apparently much more serious to make an error of judgement when despatching a train or to allow some people to download songs, than it is to almost kill someone!
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
5,022
Let's face it, if he had been drink driving, run her over, and fled the scene, put someone in a coma, etc, etc, he'd have probably had a more lenient sentence. Now that's just crazy and indefensible.

So say for instance, run two people over, killed them and fled the scene driving while disqualified? 10.5 years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-22621623

I can't disagree that some crimes get disparagingly short sentences, but it is not a race to the bottom of the barrel. Just because others get disproportionally short sentences does not mean McGee also should too.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,906
Location
Richmond, London
The sentence is utterly insane though, and is evidence of how ridiculous our legal system is. Violent crimes are considered far less serious (as I posted previously).

Let's face it, if he had been drink driving, run her over, and fled the scene, put someone in a coma, etc, etc, he'd have probably had a more lenient sentence. Now that's just crazy and indefensible.

I couldn't name them but I can think of people off the top of my head who have carried out numerous assaults, and will continue to do so, but get away with it. Our legal system seems to encourage such behaviour and we tolerate it. It's apparently much more serious to make an error of judgement when despatching a train or to allow some people to download songs, than it is to almost kill someone!

I agree with all that you have said but none of this should detract from the actions of the guard on that fateful evening. Let’s hope that this kind of incident never occurs again for the sake of passengers and rail staff.
 

martybabes

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
181
Location
Glos
Where you hold a position of responsibility for the safety of the travelling public, you breach that duty and a life is lost, then prison is not an unreasonable expectation. The length of time spent at Her Majesty's pleasure will be determined by inter alia the nature of your duty of care, how it was breached (carelessly, negligently or recklessly) and any contributory factors of the deceased.

From what I can see, if a drunken young person is leaning against the train prior to its departure, and you know that person is drunk yet you still allow the train to depart, five years is about right. It gives you plenty of time to reflect on what you should have done instead of what you did.

If you cannot accept and discharge the level of responsibility your job demands, find another job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top