Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
I am not sure what specific event others here have referenced, but the video I am referring to was of a pedestrian fatality in 1991.  The woman killed was accompanying the man walking alongside of her.  I was wondering if she was acquainted with him, or if they just happened to be two strangers side-by-side.  The reason I wondered is that the video indicates that the interaction between the two of them played a significant role in her death.     <o:p></o:p> With a little checking, I found out that they were acquainted and walking together.  He was her lawyer, and they were heading for a meeting with the woman’s ex-husband to finalize a divorce.  <o:p></o:p> Prior to the accident, the video shows other pedestrian activity, which indicates some degree of collective, general ambivalence toward the warning signals and bell.  Presumably, many pedestrians here are habituated to the warning, and are accustomed to the practical need to override it with their own judgment in times when the warning is not indicating an actual train danger.   <o:p></o:p> In this case, there was a real train danger from a fast express train that was approaching on the middle track, and was hidden by a standing commuter train.  The woman and her lawyer approached side-by-side with the man slightly ahead of her.  The hidden train was sounding its horn, and the man quickened his pace, as he decided that they could make it across, but they would have to speed up.  The woman apparently accepted her lawyer’s advice, perhaps suspending her own judgment.   <o:p></o:p> But, as the man speeded up his pace, the woman fell momentarily behind.  So she made a sudden effort to catch up with him.  He was taller than her, and was on her left side as the train approached from the left, so even when they passed the standing train, her view of the approaching train was probably blocked by the man beside her.   <o:p></o:p> What is obvious, is that she had accepted his judgement that they could make it across, and therefore, she was not looking for the train to make that judgement for herself.  All of her attention was on keeping up with him because if she relied on his judgment that they could make it across, she must not cross any later than he.  It would be okay for her to cross earlier than him, but not later than him.  So, in effect, she was racing him to the crossing with all of her attention on the race, while deferring to his judgment about the approaching train.  <o:p></o:p> However, at the last instant, when he saw the train, he realized that the train was approaching too fast for them to make it across, and he abruptly stopped.  But this need for reversing their decision was not communicated to her as she was relying on his judgment, so she kept going; not realizing the train danger herself until she had actually entered the fouling space of the track.  At that point, she made an abrupt stop, but was not able to reverse quick enough to clear the train.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag