Merseyrail Guard to be prosecuted - cleared

[Boris]

http://www.rmt.org.uk/about/health-and-safety/health-and-safety-circulars/martin-zee--guard-merseyrail121115/

 

I read that and think what the hell is the world coming to?

[Chris116]

It is to be hoped that the Judge or magistrates throw the case out and tell the CPS how stupid they have been.

[Boris]

If the case is as set out in the letter I'm alarmed that the CPS have even made the decision to prosecute.  If this guy is found guilty its a charter for every idiot in the country to do as they please on the railway knowing that they can get away with it.

[Zomboid]

I think you'll need a more independent source than the rmt to understand what's actually going on. Not that I'm anti union, but their job is to stand behind their members rather than present a balanced report...

[Boris]

Exactly, its like saying a Driver is guilty for hitting a trespasser, utter madness.

[Derekstuart]

Zomboid makes a good point that made me read this again.

 

Guard presses door close. BEEP BEEP BEEP...
Passenger races the door and then gets caught

Train starts to move, passenger injured.

 

Now look at V2

 

Guard presses door close. BEEP BEEP BEEP...
Passenger races the door and then gets caught

Guard looking out of window until the train clears the platform

Guard immediately presses a single push on the communication buzzer for driver as the recognised signal for STOP IMMEDIATE/ or in this case - DO NOT MOVE.

Passenger now safe but potentially prosecuted under railway bylaws. Guard and driver commended for their actions etc.

 

Also- and I may be wrong on this, so any professionals please confirm: Although the brake handle is locked out of the system in the trailing cab, the emergency position is still operable?

Edited November 19, 2015 by Derekstuart

[Red Devil]

I think you'll need a more independent source than the rmt to understand what's actually going on. Not that I'm anti union, but their job is to stand behind their members rather than present a balanced report...

 

True, but

 

'Additionally we note Brother Zee has been provided full legal assistance from the RMT in an attempt to clear his name and ensure justice is sought. This GGC recognises and welcomes the support Merseyrail have provided for our Member during this difficult time, firstly for the offer of providing legal assistance for our Member '

 

It seems that it's not just his union backing him.

[Davey]

 I cannot for the life of me understand how the CPS have arrived at the decision to proceed with a prosecution! Whilst I have every sympathy for the injured woman, the fact remains that she attempted to board a train when the carriage doors were in the act of closing. She behaved very stupidly and any injuries she sustained were a direct result of her own actions. How on earth can the CPS arrive at a decision to prosecute when the guard was performing his duties in line with current operating procedures. In view of the circumstances of this accident, I think a more appropriate interpretation of the initials CPS would be the CLOWN PERSECUTION SERVICES!!!!

[Zomboid]

I don't know the facts, but if the rmt and merseyrail are both standing behind the chap, you'd have to assume the CPS think they have quite a strong case. I guess the legal process will play out.

We certainly can't judge here based solely on the case for the defense, which is what we've got right now.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Zomboid

[31A]

Zomboid makes a good point that made me read this again.

 

Guard presses door close. BEEP BEEP BEEP...

Passenger races the door and then gets caught

Train starts to move, passenger injured.

 

Now look at V2

 

Guard presses door close. BEEP BEEP BEEP...

Passenger races the door and then gets caught

Guard looking out of window until the train clears the platform

Guard immediately presses a single push on the communication buzzer for driver as the recognised signal for STOP IMMEDIATE/ or in this case - DO NOT MOVE.

Passenger now safe but potentially prosecuted under railway bylaws. Guard and driver commended for their actions etc.

 

Also- and I may be wrong on this, so any professionals please confirm: Although the brake handle is locked out of the system in the trailing cab, the emergency position is still operable?

 

Hi Derek, although I'm not familiar with the controls on Merseyrail emus, with most trains the Guard would have various means of stopping the train himself as an alternative to alerting the Driver by 'one' on the bell/buzzer, if he thought the emergency was such as to warrant it - operate nearby Pass Comm, put the brake handle in the rear cab into 'Emergency' (as you say), or even interrupting the door interlock by using an Emergency Egress or opening his local door (not recommended except in dire emergency as the stop is very sudden and may cause injury to standing passengers!).

[Dungrange]

I agree that we don't know the facts and a union view point is usually biased.  What I'm not clear on is exactly what happened after the woman tried to board.  The trains in Merseyside may be different to the ones I am used to in Scotland, but is the door closing procedure not in two parts?

 

I'm fairly sure when watching trains depart at Haymarket that the guard closes all doors but the last whilst standing often half in and half out of the train.  Once all doors but one are closed and the guard can see that all on the platform are standing clear of the train, the guard then boards the train via the only open door and signals the train to depart whilst doing so.  If the train moved with the woman caught in the door then it only makes sense if the door that she tried to board was the one where the guard was standing having already given the driver the signal to proceed.

 

Unfortunately there are plenty of passengers with little common sense.

[Bon Accord]

 I cannot for the life of me understand how the CPS have arrived at the decision to proceed with a prosecution! Whilst I have every sympathy for the injured woman, the fact remains that she attempted to board a train when the carriage doors were in the act of closing. She behaved very stupidly and any injuries she sustained were a direct result of her own actions. How on earth can the CPS arrive at a decision to prosecute when the guard was performing his duties in line with current operating procedures. In view of the circumstances of this accident, I think a more appropriate interpretation of the initials CPS would be the CLOWN PERSECUTION SERVICES!!!!

 

Absolutely agree, but we live in an age such that when the general public move out of their home/work comfort zone they give a good impression of severe learning difficulties, consequently idiocy and stupidity rule supreme. All of this backed up by the army of litigation vultures constantly advertising on TV and radio.

It was only a matter of time before something like this occurred - we should expect much more of it, sad to say.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

But this is the way the law works chaps. What was perfectly acceptable yesterday: we'll hang Johnny Scruff by the neck for snatching this lady's watch, Mr Soberly-Dignified was perfectly entitled to insert his pistol up the housebreaker's posterior orifice and pull the trigger; turns out to be unacceptable to the later thinking of the majority, even though that all seems perfectly reasonable to me. And the only way of assessing where the public opinion lies is by trial unfortunately.

 

I had to endure the weary grind of this some years ago: two people, each believing they were aiding the other, succeeded in falling over, with quite a nasty injury to one party resulting due to impact with a low wall. A valiant attempt was made to implicate architectural features of centuries standing in the heinous infliction of this injury. Presiding magistrate threw it out.

 

If the facts are as represented, then  - while it is stressful for the guard - he will be exonerated, and at most the TOC or some other superior body quailified to look at this matter will be required to review whether procedural change or the like can afford yet better protection against passenger error.

[jjb1970]

I think the law will take its course. I do not know the details of this case but the CPS do not normally bring vexatious cases to court and if the court finds it is a silly case then it'll be dealt with appropriately. One thing to keep in mind is that generally legal cases are less interested in right and wrong than whether or not there is grounds for believing acts were contrary to the law.

I think it is very easy to see cases like this and call the law an ass and lose sight of the fact that if somebody is hurt as a result of negligent behaviour then it is correct that there should be a legal process. If the guard acted correctly then he will be acquitted, if his actions were not in accordance with rules and procedures then it is not the law that is an ass.

My feeling is we should let the court hear the evidence and arrive at an informed decision.

[david.hill64]

At first glance this seems grossly unfair on the guard, but don't forget that there has been a previous prosecution involving a Merseyrail guard:

 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/merseyrail-guard-christopher-mcgee-jailed-3329790

 

Knowing this, it's possible that the ambulance chasers have seen an opportunity to get some cash and have been pushing for a prosecution.

 

It isn't proper to speculate before a trial, but I cannot help but wonder why RAIB were/are not involved. This incident isn't in the list of current investigations.  

 

Also, if an internal enquiry has concluded that it is a system risk and not an individual's fault, why then are the CPS not going after Merseyrail? (Unless of course they are).

 

More to this than we currently understand for sure.

[jjb1970]

At the risk of introducing prejudice of my own, I've seen a lot of cases over the years that seemed very simple when presented by the media but which were far from being so simple if studied in any detail. Equally I have seen people prosecuted in circumstances that were frankly unjust in my opinion. At the moment I do not see that there is enough in the public domain to really comment on whether this case is in the former or latter category.

I must admit the question David Hill asks about Merseyrail is the one that I've asked myself. Given the previous sad incident which was not so long ago then what changes to their procedures and risk assessments were made (clearly, any fatal injury should trigger a review of risk assessments and procedures to establish if they remain suitable in the light of experience).

[40044]

I agree that we don't know the facts and a union view point is usually biased.  What I'm not clear on is exactly what happened after the woman tried to board.  The trains in Merseyside may be different to the ones I am used to in Scotland, but is the door closing procedure not in two parts?

 

I'm fairly sure when watching trains depart at Haymarket that the guard closes all doors but the last whilst standing often half in and half out of the train.  Once all doors but one are closed and the guard can see that all on the platform are standing clear of the train, the guard then boards the train via the only open door and signals the train to depart whilst doing so.  If the train moved with the woman caught in the door then it only makes sense if the door that she tried to board was the one where the guard was standing having already given the driver the signal to proceed.

 

Unfortunately there are plenty of passengers with little common sense.

AIUI - Guard closes passenger doors and checks all appears ok. Guard then closes his local door (which don't have opening windows on 507/508 stock), and bells the train away.

[rockershovel]

CPS have a considerable record of poor or incorrect judgement. They are highly politicised and at times, openly activist, as shown in the case if dragging Emma West through multiple courts, and another similar case.

 

What puzzles me, is why a case which appears to be a purely civil matter involves CPS at all.

Edited November 20, 2015 by rockershovel

[Boris]

This case has wide reaching implications, by extension on DOO services the Driver could be prosecuted for the same thing happening.  I really hope common sense prevails and this case is buried where it should be.

[Talltim]

To me it comes across as an unusually well written and measured release by the RMT, normally they are so worded that I end up thinking they have completely missed point even though I agree with the issue are raising. I suspect it wasn't written by Mick Cash...

It is perfectly possibly to follow all instructions and regulations to the letter and still do something illegal, however the fact that both the RMT and MerseyRail legal teams are behind him would imply that they don't consider that so. If there was something wrong with the dispatch procedure then you would expect MerseyRail to keep quiet.

The CPS is not involved in private prosecutions, but they do have the power to take them over if they consider it to be in the public interest (they can also take them over and shut them down by presenting no evidence if they want, but it doesn't sound like that is the case here).

Its very puzzling, either Mr Zee didn't follow the correct procedure, which seems unlikely given his backing, or he did and the procedure is wrong, which also sounds unlikely given that it is him and not his employers going to court.

[Richard E]

CPS are only supposed to proceed if the case meets two criteria:

 

There is a reasonable prospect of a conviction and

The prosecution is in the public interest

 

Now we may have a bit of a bias here but the consensus seems to be that the first condition is probably not met.

 

If it does succeed at what point is it going to be safe for a guard to give the right away given I've regularly seen people try to open doors as a train is pulling out of the station despite being told to stand back by platform staff?

[phil-b259]

I agree that we don't know the facts and a union view point is usually biased.  What I'm not clear on is exactly what happened after the woman tried to board.  The trains in Merseyside may be different to the ones I am used to in Scotland, but is the door closing procedure not in two parts?

 

I'm fairly sure when watching trains depart at Haymarket that the guard closes all doors but the last whilst standing often half in and half out of the train.  Once all doors but one are closed and the guard can see that all on the platform are standing clear of the train, the guard then boards the train via the only open door and signals the train to depart whilst doing so.  If the train moved with the woman caught in the door then it only makes sense if the door that she tried to board was the one where the guard was standing having already given the driver the signal to proceed.

 

Unfortunately there are plenty of passengers with little common sense.

 

Please remember that door control systems are not the same across trains. Broadly speaking those ordered since privatisation have provided guards door controls throughout the train so that the guard does not have to return to the rear cab. This is what gives rise to the 'shut all doors except the one the guard is standing at' syndrome.

 

The Merseyrail 507 & 508 fleet, like the 455 fleet in south London, or the 313s, or 317s, or 321s etc do not have intermediate door controls fitted and the guard must operate them from the rear cab, a factor which has both advantages and disadvantages, depending on the situation.

[Talltim]

I'd have thought trains departing on time because guards aren't having to worry about prosecution despite following the rules would be in the public interest...

[david.hill64]

If I were the Operations Director of a TOC, and a member of my staff was successfully prosecuted for following company procedures, then I would have to ask myself could I continue to operate knowing that my procedures were deemed to be so unsafe as to allow the prosecution to succeed. Even the possibility of a successful prosecution would give cause for concern. Assuming I still have a job, I think in case of a successful prosecution I would have no option but to stop all services until new procedures have been developed, approved and staff properly trained. There might also be technical changes required.

 

If I were the Operations Director of another TOC using similar despatch procedures, I too would have to wonder about the viability of continuing my operations.

 

Would I be being over-cautious? 

[Zomboid]

Based on the evidence we've seen here, of course it doesn't seem likely that there will be a conviction.

Most people would be acquitted if the jury only listened to the case for the defense.

Once the prosecution has had their say and the witnesses have been cross examined the picture will look very different. Maybe the accused will be proven innocent, maybe not, but we are in no position to suggest that this is a ridiculous prosecution on this forum.