Christopher McGee------The Liverpool Rail Guard.

[susan]

Hi Patti so pleased to hear you do not want to electricute the whole of Britain.  A type of metal grid should be attached to the platform so that when the train arrives at the station the gap between the platform and the train is not there thus preventing a person falling between the platform and the train.  I am afraid to say safety does not come first profit does.

[lookout]

Hi Susan

I don't mean electrifying gates i mean electronic....like sfatey gates on a platform....

Patti this poor man has been used as an example. By not following the guidelines that were in place,the teen sadly died,,but even if he had followed the guidelines,she would still have died by falling on the lines as she was so unsteady and should have been accompanied by someone.
This poor man and his family.

Tyler,,when my g/daughter was a teenager out with her friends and experimenting with drink,,her friends always called my daughter to say she was either drunk or in a heap somewhere,but at no time was she ever left to find her own way home,,so as regards thinking " it could have been one of my own ",,that would never have happened in the first place as we showed concern for our " lovely daughter/g/daughter ".

[Bridget]

I have to agree with Susan on this case.The guard had a duty of care and just simply did not do his job properly.This tragedy was all caught on CCTV and the shot that was printed in the papers was damning enough without seeing the actual footage.I wonder how many of you would feel sorry for this man if the victim was your beautiful daughter?Whether she was drunk or not,the guard should NEVER have allowed the train to pull away whilst this young lady (or anyone else for that matter) was so close to the train.Even more so if he had witnessed her acting erratically.Sorry in advance if my post offends,it is just my opinion.

I completely agree with this, and everything Susie has said. If he assumed that she would move away when the train moved he took a huge gamble with her life and she paid the price. What is the point of having a guard if it's not to prevent this sort of thing happening? Her death was horrific, and completely avoidable.

[tyler]

I completely agree with this, and everything Susie has said. If he assumed that she would move away when the train moved he took a huge gamble with her life and she paid the price. What is the point of having a guard if it's not to prevent this sort of thing happening? Her death was horrific, and completely avoidable.

Well said Bridget.I completely respect Lookout's opinion.I just dont agree with it,thats all. x

[Patti]

Patti this poor man has been used as an example. By not following the guidelines that were in place,the teen sadly died,,but even if he had followed the guidelines,she would still have died by falling on the lines as she was so unsteady and should have been accompanied by someone.
This poor man and his family.

Tyler,,when my g/daughter was a teenager out with her friends and experimenting with drink,,her friends always called my daughter to say she was either drunk or in a heap somewhere,but at no time was she ever left to find her own way home,,so as regards thinking " it could have been one of my own ",,that would never have happened in the first place as we showed concern for our " lovely daughter/g/daughter ".

Hi Lookout

In all fairness they both had a duty of care. He had a duty to make sure the coast was clear for the train to move on and it clearly wasn't.  But, on saying that, he had not intended to cause her death or any harm.  He was not to know that she would fall to her death.  He was not to know she was drunk and had been taking drugs....She also had the responsibility of looking after herself, but sadly for her and her family she died in awful circumstances, which to me was a horrible accident waiting to happen. 

I do think the sentence was harsh and, I do think this will effect him and his own family for the rest of their lives....

There is never an even balance when this sort of thing occurs. Someone has to take responsibility or be made to take responsibility for their actions.  Sadly the young girl can't but the rail guard has to be sure take some responsibility for his own actions....in allowing the train to leave while she was still propped up against it....but, not to the extent of such a harsh sentence.  It;s difficult because I can see it from both sides....and I'm not the Liberian! 

[Bridget]

Hi Lookout

In all fairness they both had a duty of care. He had a duty to make sure the coast was clear for the train to move on and it clearly wasn't.  But, on saying that, he had not intended to cause her death or any harm.  He was not to know that she would fall to her death.  He was not to know she was drunk and had been taking drugs....She also had the responsibility of looking after herself, but sadly for her and her family she died in awful circumstances, which to me was a horrible accident waiting to happen. 

I do think the sentence was harsh and, I do think this will effect him and his own family for the rest of their lives....

There is never an even balance when this sort of thing occurs. Someone has to take responsibility or be made to take responsibility for their actions.  Sadly the young girl can't but the rail guard has to be sure take some responsibility for his own actions....in allowing the train to leave while she was still propped up against it....but, not to the extent of such a harsh sentence.  It;s difficult because I can see it from both sides....and I'm not the Liberian! 

Sorry, but I just can't agree.

The sides of trains are not completely smooth. Even if she hadn't have lost her balance and fallen, her body or her clothing could have been caught on something on the side of the train and she could have been hurt or even killed.

He was an experienced guard, he knows that drunk people get on trains. He also had reason to know that she was drunk, because she had already got off the train at the wrong station further back up the line and got back on. Even if he didn't realise that she was drunk he could not have known that she would safely move away as the train moved.

He had other choices. He could have opened the doors so that either she could get back on, or her friends could get off and attend to her. He could have held the train until she was safely removed from it. He could have removed her to safety himself. But instead he decided to 'force' her off it by allowing the train to move, a decision which cost her her life. I'm finding it hard to see how his sentance was too harsh to be honest.

[Jo]

I just wonder what would have happened if it was an unmanned station like Goldthorpe, Thurnscoe etc? It would probably be the same except the driver may not have even known an accident had occured.
If it had been a bus or a taxi, the lady probably wouldn't have been allowed to board due to her being drunk. I still don't think the guard should be held totally responsible for this.

[Patti]

Sorry, but I just can't agree.

The sides of trains are not completely smooth. Even if she hadn't have lost her balance and fallen, her body or her clothing could have been caught on something on the side of the train and she could have been hurt or even killed.

He was an experienced guard, he knows that drunk people get on trains. He also had reason to know that she was drunk, because she had already got off the train at the wrong station further back up the line and got back on. Even if he didn't realise that she was drunk he could not have known that she would safely move away as the train moved.

He had other choices. He could have opened the doors so that either she could get back on, or her friends could get off and attend to her. He could have held the train until she was safely removed from it. He could have removed her to safety himself. But instead he decided to 'force' her off it by allowing the train to move, a decision which cost her her life. I'm finding it hard to see how his sentance was too harsh to be honest.

Like I said he had to take some responsibility for his actions.  I still say the sentence was harsh! when you compare it to that of a child abuser....

He had not set out to kill her, he had poor judgement and that led to her death.  But, the young girl also had the responsibility for her own well being ....:/

[Bridget]

Like I said he had to take some responsibility for his actions.  I still say the sentence was harsh! when you compare it to that of a child abuser....

He had not set out to kill her, he had poor judgement and that led to her death.  But, the young girl also had the responsibility for her own well being ....:/

The way I see it he made a decision which was reasonably likely to result in injury or death when he had other, completey safe options. I think we'll have to agree to diagree 

[Bridget]

I just wonder what would have happened if it was an unmanned station like Goldthorpe, Thurnscoe etc? It would probably be the same except the driver may not have even known an accident had occured.
If it had been a bus or a taxi, the lady probably wouldn't have been allowed to board due to her being drunk. I still don't think the guard should be held totally responsible for this.

Yes, but that's got more to do with the vomit factor than the safety factor. If you allow drunk people on your transport system you have to take reasonable account of their intoxication when considering their safety.

[Patti]

The way I see it he made a decision which was reasonably likely to result in injury or death when he had other, completey safe options. I think we'll have to agree to diagree 

Of course he had responsibility, I agree with you on that.  The safety of the platform is solely his.

What I am saying is that he may not or might not had foreseen that his actions may have resulted in her death.

Regarding health and safety, we are all responsible for ourselves and each other. 

Bridget you always disagree with me....

[Patti]

Yes, but that's got more to do with the vomit factor than the safety factor. If you allow drunk people on your transport system you have to take reasonable account of their intoxication when considering their safety.

The rail guard is not responsible for allowing her into the station....

[Bridget]

Of course he had responsibility, I agree with you on that.  The safety of the platform is solely his.

What I am saying is that he may not or might not had foreseen that his actions may have resulted in her death.

Regarding health and safety, we are all responsible for ourselves and each other. 

Bridget you always disagree with me....

I think it was reasonably forseeable that allowing a train to move whilst a person (drunk or sober) is leaning on it is likely to result at least in injury.

Of course her intoxication contributed to what happened, but that doesn't excuse him, IMO.

[Patti]

I think it was reasonably forseeable that allowing a train to move whilst a person (drunk or sober) is leaning on it is likely to result at least in injury.

Of course her intoxication contributed to what happened, but that doesn't excuse him, IMO.

I agree with you....I didn't say he should not be accounted for his actions, I merely said that I thought his sentence was a bit harsh. 

You would think with the profit the railways make, they would have at lease invested some of that profit into making the platforms of its Victorian Stations more safe for their passengers to travel on....This young girl is not the first to die as a result of falling from the platform..I dare say she wont be the last....

If I was to sell my house with a wall at foot level that had a sheer drop of over 2 feet, I would be made to put up a safety fence/gate/wall to ensure whoever bought my house did not have an accident...it is part of building regulations....

British rail have no safeguards, was it not recently on a over crowded platform another young girl fell onto the track....Anyway I am going of piste. lol 

[Bridget]

I agree with you....I didn't say he should not be accounted for his actions, I merely said that I thought his sentence was a bit harsh. 

You would think with the profit the railways make, they would have at lease invested some of that profit into making the platforms of its Victorian Stations more safe for their passengers to travel on....This young girl is not the first to die as a result of falling from the platform..I dare say she wont be the last....

If I was to sell my house with a wall at foot level that had a sheer drop of over 2 feet, I would be made to put up a safety fence/gate/wall to ensure whoever bought my house did not have an accident...it is part of building regulations....

British rail have no safeguards, was it not recently on a over crowded platform another young girl fell onto the track....Anyway I am going of piste. lol 

I agree that the railways have somehow gotten away with not upgrading stations (and level crossings etc) to a standard of safety which would be expected in just about any other industry, and especially one which is used by so many members of the public.