Advanced search

Train Guard Found Guilty Over Girl's Death

(215 Posts)
blisterpack Wed 14-Nov-12 22:38:58

I saw this article today and am really confused. How can a train guard be found guilty of manslaughter when an accident like this happens? And the quote from the poor guard,
McGee told the jury he thought Georgia was moving away from the train when he gave the signal to depart. He also said he did not know how drunk she was.

Should he have known then? confused

citybranch Thu 15-Nov-12 22:31:28

I always re-open the doors if a couple/family/group run on as they are closing and half of them don't make it. Looking at that still of Georgia on the platform alone, wanting to get back on, I would re-open. No skin off my nose, its a few seconds. I wouldn't think twice. No controller has ever pulled me up on a delay.

itsashameaboutray Thu 15-Nov-12 22:50:55

Someone up thread said she could quite easily have walked to the next station and got another train.

Probably what the driver of the bus thought when he refused entry to the young women who was beaten and raped last year. These two men had a duty of care, their failure of that duty had horrendous outcomes.

Of course we can't predicate every outcome of our actions but we can act like decent human beings and help those in need of a little goodwill. Which both these girls so obviously needed

spoonsspoonsspoons Thu 15-Nov-12 23:04:02

rapists are responsible for rape. Saying a third party, e.g. the bus driver is responsible because he increased her vulnerability is a small step from saying the victim bears some responsibility for being in that situation. only the rapist is responsible

diddl Fri 16-Nov-12 07:30:04

I agree that he was ultimately responsible-he shouldn´t have let the train go.

It´s just so tragic.

I find it sad that after getting so drunk at a party-she had gone into the city-to drink more.

i found what her mum said offensive tbh-that it´s what teenagers do.

itsashameaboutray Fri 16-Nov-12 07:59:45

Okay maybe not the best example, but it is an example of what happens when people in a position of trust and responsibility fail in that duty. Its one of the fundamental values we teach our children surely.

Our actions have consequences for other people and we need to take responsibility for those consequences.

Yes this girl was drunk, who didn't at that age. She was drunk, so what she was still a young vulnerable children which this adult decided in a split second wasn't worth the two or three seconds delay it would have added to his evening.

diddl Fri 16-Nov-12 08:03:55

I didn´t get drunk at 16-or take drugs & I don´t think that I was unusual.

Am nearly 50 now.

1sassylassy Fri 16-Nov-12 08:49:50

I think we have to forgive her mum for what she said,she has lost a child,without a doubt the worst thing that can happen to a parent.
However I do feel that each and every parent has a duty to teach their dc,s that they have a duty of responsibility to themselves,that alcohol and drugs will impair their judgement and therefore may make them more vunerable.Too many young people think it wont happen to them but it can and it does.

MysteriousNameChange Fri 16-Nov-12 09:14:55

I think the guard was negligent. I think the drink and drugs did contribute but then he had a duty of care. I don't think it's right for the parents to say the only liability that night was the guard, but I understand why they're saying it.

I do worry that she would've had an awful night had she carried on, to already be at that state before they went into Liverpool.

But any awful night is better than death sad

ArkadyRose Fri 16-Nov-12 12:34:47

I used to work for London Underground (first on stations, later as Line Controller of the District Line for a while), and LU has the same policies and procedures as the mainline rail services - and basically he was grossly negligent. You do NOT signal that the train can depart unless every person on the platform is back behind the yellow line. It's pretty black-and-white. She was touching the train, therefore he should not have signalled the all clear. If he could not see clearly whether she was touching the train or not, the procedures state quite inequivocably that he should have moved to where he could see clearly.

Cozy9 Sun 18-Nov-12 07:51:24

The parents are stupid for saying that getting blind drunk and drugged up is "what all 16 year olds do". It isn't.

edam Sun 18-Nov-12 08:10:33

Arklady's right but I still think the sentence was severe. However, I also hear on the grapevine - and this may just be gossip - that her Mother was actually living in Ireland and her Dad was in Wales that weekend, so they weren't taking personal responsibility for their 17yo dd who was going out and getting blind drunk and taking drugs (presumably she was with someone they considered responsible though). And have been pretty aggressive, blaming the family of the friend whose birthday it was and everyone but themselves. I'm not accusing them of being bad parents, just saying they appear to be keen to blame everyone else, when they weren't there looking after their daughter.

SaraBellumHertz Sun 18-Nov-12 08:21:26

He didn't make a mistake.

His main role as a train guard was to ensure it was safe for the train to leave the station. You'd have to be brain dead not to realise that if someone is leaning on the train it is unsafe. Yet he gave the order. It was deliberate.

I have seen the CCTV: he saw that girl and didn't care. Maybe he was concerned about the train leaving on time, maybe he was thoroughly pissed off with her drunken behavior and wanted to shock her.

insancerre Sun 18-Nov-12 08:56:59

you can't take 'personal responsibility' for a 1 year old
They are responsible for themselves (I have one). They will experiment and make mistakes, it's all part of growing up.
What difference does it make if the parents were in wales, Australia, the moon or tucked up home in bed?
The guard didn't do his job and she ended up dead. Of course he is liable.
I think the Mccains were more guilty of neglect than these parents but we're not allowed to say that out loud on here.

insancerre Sun 18-Nov-12 08:57:28

*16 year old

RabidCarrot Sun 18-Nov-12 09:58:49

I have a 16 year old and he does not spend his weekends getting blind drunk, taking drugs or going out late on his own, and before people go yeah yeah how do you know, I will tell you how, we have rules and he goes to his Saturday job, he comes home he has his dinner and he plays X box, watches DVDs or has his friends round to us, if he goes to his friends he in home by 11pm, I know all his friends, and when one of his friends started smoking dope my son stopped having him round.

While I do feel so very sorry for this girls parents for losing their child maybe they are putting all the blame on the guard because deep down they know the blame lies in part closer to home and just can not admit it.

CaptainDennyisDead Sun 18-Nov-12 10:49:53

Rabid, I think you are talking out of your arse. So what if your son has a very strict and sheltered upbringing? At 16 I was in nightclubs and that was a few decades ago. I wasn't heavily into drinking but some that I knew were. I then went onto a good degree, 2 great careers and live a pretty solid adult life, church included. I'm probably verging on Mumsy really, now. The parents were not to blame, the man appreared to have a malicious, spiteful thought and he is paying for it, as he should.

CindySherman Sun 18-Nov-12 11:26:34

Of course the parents aren't to blame how ridiculous.
Justice was done. He purposely sent the train on its way with a vulnerable girl leaning on it. Don't bring her parents into this.

diddl Sun 18-Nov-12 12:08:12

" the man appreared to have a malicious, spiteful thought"


It wasn´t safe to let the train go-that surely is the end of the matter?

CaptainDennyisDead Sun 18-Nov-12 12:14:10

diddl what kind of thought do you think he had? He has been found guilty of manslaughter. He wasn't thinking anything overtly positive.

diddl Sun 18-Nov-12 13:37:16

Unfortunately, he probably wasn´t thinking at all.

Of course he has been found guilty of manslaughter-his negligence led to her death.

Does that mean that it was deliberate?

CaptainDennyisDead Sun 18-Nov-12 16:09:52

I think but no idea of the legalities of it but think it is something to do with him making a conscious decision (active) rather than failing to do something (passive).

lionsgate Sun 18-Nov-12 17:19:38

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

CindySherman Sun 18-Nov-12 17:21:35

A young Woman's life is really worth nothing to some people.

Pinkforever Sun 18-Nov-12 18:19:23

Of course her parents have to take some of the blame-they allowed their underage child to go out and get blind drunk and high and not only condoned it but tried to normalise it.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 Sun 18-Nov-12 18:23:26

I hope they never read that

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now