Not to split hairs, but I believe the Chicago derailment caused the bridge (and train) to collapse onto the road and car below, and then the coal piled up around and over the wreckage of the bridge and car. As I recall, the car was covered up so much that no one had any clue it was there until the clean-up efforts got that far and uncovered it a day or two later.
The legally relevant facts are different enough in these 2 cases that there may well be different results - UP has substantial exposure to damages, whereas CSX does not. If these cases go far enough in the legal system to be the subject of a judge's written opinion, they could well have pedagogical value in law school classes and textbooks - even moot court arguments - as a 'compare and contrast' exercise.
In brief, in most states the property owner owes no duty to guard against (take steps to protect) an unknown and unforeseen adult trespasser - and hence is not liable - other than to not intentionally construct or recklessly leave a trap (pit, etc.) for the unwary trespasser.
- Paul North.
gardendancesomebody on the sidewalk next to the pool gets knocked over, hits their head on the sidewalk's concrete. I think that's closer to my hypothetical about what if CSX's derailment coal had killed someone on the public road beneath the bridge.
About two years ago, there was a real case in the north shore Chicago suburbs where a UP train derailed due to heat-kinked track at a overpass, spilling coal onto a car below and killing the elderly occupants. The lawsuit is still in process.
http://glenview.suntimes.com/2014/07/03/travel-restored-on-shermer-road-scene-of-fatal-train-derailment/
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
gardendanceDoes anybody think trespassing completely exonerates CSX or the swimming pool owner?
There's a lot of "it depends" there.
And a lot of the "it depends" keys on the location of the injured party at the time of the incident.
And I'm talking about adults, who theoretically have the ability to recognize right and wrong, and all those other things adults are supposed to be capable of doing.
Small kids and an attractive nuisance is another story entirely.
If an adult goes to a pool without even tacit approval of the owner ("Sure, use the pool any time!") and is injured diving into the shallow end (despite posted warnings), then it's mostly on the trespasser, state and local regulations notwithstanding.
I would opine that someone who is clearly trespassing should bear the bulk of the responsibility for their own injury. The railroad has a reasonable expectation that they will be able to use their property without interference. Should some accident befall a train, I would think that such an expectation would extend up to the property line.
Hence, the statement that if the two young ladies hadn't been on the bridge, they would not have been killed. If your car is parked in a legal parking lot adjacent to the tracks and gets schmucked by a derailed train, it's on the RR.
If a person or property is clearly not on railroad property but suffers injury or loss, then it would be on the railroad.
I would also opine that if the incident was found to be the fault of the railroad (poor maintenance, inappropriate action taken, etc) then that would cement the blame on the railroad and might increase the amount of damages paid to victims.
It might be argued that if the railroad did not do enough to prevent access to an attractive nuisance (the bridge), that could affect the split on blame. Ie, if the bridge were well protected by fencing, etc, but the trespassers circumvented said protection, I would say that the blame is solely on the trespassers.
If it can be shown that the railroad knew there was a trespassing problem (attractive nuisance) and did nothing to stem it, then some percentage of the blame may accrue to the railroad. But the fact would remain that the trespassers hold the bulk of the blame for their plight. Odds are that the property is posted, so the trespassers likely ignored a plainly posted warning.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
gardendanceDid enough coal spill onto the road underneath the bridge that it would have injured or killed someone?
It certainly looks possible, although a lot of the coal was caught by the bridge. Several cars in the parking lot appeared to be crushed, based on photos I saw.
Schlimm, not quite the example I was thinking of. How about an above ground pool breaks, something I've seen many times on America's Funniest Home Videos. 2 scenarioes:
somebody trespassing in the backyard gets knocked over, hits their head on a rock. Similar to this thread's incident with the 2 women trespassing on railroad property BUT NOT ON THE TRACKS.
or
somebody on the sidewalk next to the pool gets knocked over, hits their head on the sidewalk's concrete. I think that's closer to my hypothetical about what if CSX's derailment coal had killed someone on the public road beneath the bridge.
Does anybody think tresspassing completely exonerates CSX or the swimming pool owner?
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
schlimmA somewhat similar precedent is the many cases in which homeowners were found liable for damages if a child was seriously injured or drowned after trespassing in an unsecured (not supervised or not fenced) private backyard swimming pool.
The "attractive nuisance," and the reason so many areas require fencing, securable gates, and in some cases water motion alarms for pools.
On the other hand, we've lost a number of children in the river that runs through a small city near me. In each case, the children were at least momentarily unsupervised, and tracking dogs led searchers right to the edge of the river. One case involved a more-or-less public property (a library) - mom left the kids in the car while she went inside for just a few minutes. Another was private property that butts up on the river. Junior wandered outside.
gardendanceThis is not so clear cut as trespassing on the tracks. Even if they were trespassing on CSX property next to the tracks, CSX has some liability since the train derailed and hit them. What if they were on non-CSX property a foot or 2 away? Would you still blame the women because they were still trespassing, just on someone else's property?
A somewhat similar precedent is the many cases in which homeowners were found liable for damages if a child was seriously injured or drowned after trespassing in an unsecured (not supervised or not fenced) private backyard swimming pool.
Did enough coal spill onto the road underneath the bridge that it would have injured or killed someone? It sounds like CSX might want to count themselves lucky that they can use trespassing as a way to reduce the settlement.
The coal did spill off of CSX property, on to the road underneath the bridge and a parking lot. A little made it into the stream. This is why the "cover the coal cars" is being advocated, although chances are any cover would have failed in a derailment.
This is not so clear cut as trespassing on the tracks. Even if they were trespassing on CSX property next to the tracks, CSX has some liability since the train derailed and hit them. What if they were on non-CSX property a foot or 2 away? Would you still blame the women because they were still trespassing, just on someone else's property?
The article says there was some environmental concern about how much the derailed coal might have contaminated a nearby stream. Did the derailment stay completely in CSX's property?
KyleOne of the mothers wanted to know "how we can best prevent this tragedy". Lets start with people not trespassing. If no one was on RR property, no one would have died.
It sounds like CSX is going to need a water cannon to make that point in court.
NorthWest What I find interesting is the comments from the attorney representing the families of the dead. I don't see CSX offering the financial settlement and apology demanded, because of the trespassing. The lawyer seems to believe that the railroads are unsafe and poorly regulated, but fails to offer any useful solutions. The families are portraying the women as "innocent people" in the effort to swing public opinion their way. Based on past suits, I see CSX losing this, unfortunately. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/parents-of-ellicott-city-derailment-victims-speak-out-say-they-blame-csx-for-deaths/2014/07/15/db57a29a-0c70-11e4-8c9a-923ecc0c7d23_story.html http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-07-31/news/bs-md-derailment-final-report-20140731_1_elizabeth-conway-nass-rose-louese-mayr-ellicott-city-train-derailment
What I find interesting is the comments from the attorney representing the families of the dead. I don't see CSX offering the financial settlement and apology demanded, because of the trespassing. The lawyer seems to believe that the railroads are unsafe and poorly regulated, but fails to offer any useful solutions. The families are portraying the women as "innocent people" in the effort to swing public opinion their way. Based on past suits, I see CSX losing this, unfortunately.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/parents-of-ellicott-city-derailment-victims-speak-out-say-they-blame-csx-for-deaths/2014/07/15/db57a29a-0c70-11e4-8c9a-923ecc0c7d23_story.html
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-07-31/news/bs-md-derailment-final-report-20140731_1_elizabeth-conway-nass-rose-louese-mayr-ellicott-city-train-derailment
One of the mothers wanted to know "how we can best prevent this tragedy". Lets start with people not trespassing. If no one was on RR property, no one would have died. If I were CSX, I would give them an public apology and say "CSX sincerecly apologises for deaths that have happened on our property. However we have a strict no trespassing policy for safety reasons. These deaths are a direct result of the people trespassing. If these people weren't on CSX property they would have not died. The people who died and teir aren't the only ones who suffer. The crew on the train who had no control of the situation will have the emotional distress of knowing they operated a piece of equipment that ended up killing someone. These trespasser cause our employees emotional harm. We would like to ask everyone to stay off our property for your own safety. CSX would never willingly cause conditions that would cause harm to anyone."
Link to the NewsWire item about 2 other female trespassers on a bridge who didn't survive, sadly:
http://trn.trains.com/en/Railroad%20News/News%20Wire/2014/07/Ellicott%20City%20derailment%20caused%20by%20rail%20fatigue.aspx
WASHINGTON – A worn and fractured rail caused a CSX coal train derailment in Ellicott City, Md. that killed two female trespassers in 2012, the National Transportation Safety Board said in findings issued this week. The NTSB says it found evidence that the section of rail showed signs of “rolling contact fatigue,” or a “gradual deterioration of the rail-head surface” over time.
The break in the rail was several hundred feet from where two 19-year-old college students were seated on an overpass that carries the railroad above Main Street. They were trespassing at the time of the incident. . . . [snipped - PDN]
KyleWhat??? Only six months in jail and $1000 dollars in fines.... Personally, I think the RR should be pushing for harsher punishments!
Personally, I think the RR should be pushing for harsher punishments!
I would not be surprised if their punishment is much lighter than the maximum that you cite, or even if they get no fine or jail time at all. They are likely to end up on morning television where the theme will be how incredibly lucky they were to not get killed.
Their incredible good luck will be painted as a great achievement. They will be congratulated for having the presence of mind to lie down to clear the train. There will be sympathy for what they had to endure. There will be a passing nod to the illegal nature and a question to them about whether they have learned a lesson.
greyhounds They fought the law and the law won. http://www.midco.net/news/read/category/us/article/the_associated_press-2_charged_after_indiana_rail_bridge_close_call-ap
They fought the law and the law won.
http://www.midco.net/news/read/category/us/article/the_associated_press-2_charged_after_indiana_rail_bridge_close_call-ap
Can't blame it on kids - they were 34 & 36.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Kyle greyhounds They fought the law and the law won. http://www.midco.net/news/read/category/us/article/the_associated_press-2_charged_after_indiana_rail_bridge_close_call-ap What??? Only six months in jail and $1000 dollars in fines.... Personally, I think the RR should be pushing for harsher punishments! With the media's attention, harsh punishments would send a clear message to trespassers, and convince many it's not worth it. I would sue them for damage to equipment, and the engineer should sue for "emotional distress". Not to mention I think they might be able to stick some harsher charges, ex: reckless endangerment. I am no expert, but I am sure they can defiantly use these two as examples to many dumb people.
What??? Only six months in jail and $1000 dollars in fines....
Personally, I think the RR should be pushing for harsher punishments! With the media's attention, harsh punishments would send a clear message to trespassers, and convince many it's not worth it. I would sue them for damage to equipment, and the engineer should sue for "emotional distress". Not to mention I think they might be able to stick some harsher charges, ex: reckless endangerment. I am no expert, but I am sure they can defiantly use these two as examples to many dumb people.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Personally, I think the RR should be pushing for harsher punishments! With the media's attention, harsh punishments would send a clear message to trespassers, and convince many it's not worth it. I would sue them for damage to equippment, and the engineer should sue for "emotional distress". Not to mention I think they might be able to stick some harsher charges, ex: reckless endangerment. I am no expert, but I am sure they can defiantly use these two as examples to many dumb people.
Followup, from NBC News:
The two women, in their thirties (stupid, but not kids) have been taken into custody and will be facing charges of criminal trespass.
Seems that a witness got the license number of the getaway car - which was traced. The two women were caught in Florida, which indicates to me that someone must think this is a serious matter. Normally, trespass cases are seldom carried into the next county, never mind to a range of a thousand miles.
Then again, how much does it cost to true up the flat wheels on a unit coal train?
Chuck
Norm48327 "1. It is a very grainy and out of focus video... videos I have seen from other loco-mounted cameras are much better than that." S.V. Perhaps they bought those cameras from a bank.Have you ever seen clear video of a bank robber? That's the one place I think they would want clarity.
"1. It is a very grainy and out of focus video... videos I have seen from other loco-mounted cameras are much better than that."
S.V.
Perhaps they bought those cameras from a bank.Have you ever seen clear video of a bank robber? That's the one place I think they would want clarity.
I have always wondered why security cameras shown on TV are so grainy. With the technology of today, it would be easy to have High quality video and store it on large storage devices (that don't take up that much space. Also, when you see live feed on security cameras, the quality is pretty good. It would be great if someone could explain this. Do they convert it into low quality video to not require as much storage space? Or is it something else?
Ulrich Maybe these women will be smart enough to cash in on their fame/notoriety. A spot on Dr. Phil... a Playboy centerfold. This could be their ticket... (after they get out of jail).
Maybe these women will be smart enough to cash in on their fame/notoriety. A spot on Dr. Phil... a Playboy centerfold. This could be their ticket... (after they get out of jail).
I doubt it is a fake, the RR would have said by now. They don't want to encourage idiots to try this. Plus they released the names of the people if it were fake, they would just have shown the video.
The second woman was dropping into the same 'prone between the guard rails' position as she disappeared from view.
If, as is probable, the locos cleared the bridge, the scramble UNDER the cars would have been short (they weren't far from the end of the bridge) and probably made in combat crouch.
The NBC version claimed the clearance was eleven inches. I had my wife measure with a try square and yardstick, and even my bulk would have cleared. I'm taller, but I probably outweigh the heavier of those two by fifty kg. (Note that I have no intention of trying this stunt - EVER!)
As for escaping in a car, the crew probably noticed the, "NASCAR leaving after a pit stop," departure.
Rail cameras are usually mounted in the cab, shooting through the windshield. Some of the time they shoot in an area that is not covered by wipers, or the windshield is just dirty (many engines lack windshield washers) And depending on time of day, sun glare can be an issue.
If that was one of their 70M widebody type engines, there is a pretty big blindspot in front of the nose. So even though the person disappeared behind the nose, they still had time to lay down flat. I've known crews that hit people that fell under the plow and survived. It is possible.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Norm
Thank you... then that means the women must have either crawled under the train for the remaining length of the remaining bridge to get out to the side, or they went out the side and clung to the sides of the cars as they worked their way along the edge to the end... and I don't see that latter happening.
Coal cars would be easier to crawl lengthwise under than engines, I suppose, but still a harrowing and difficult thing to do.
I still think it is fake. But I can't think of a "good" reason for someone to do the fakery.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Semper Vaporo I know I will be branded as a... well... something; but I am thinking the video is fake. I know that there is a lot of evidence that the video is real... statements by the prez of the company, the statements that the women are known and subject to arrest and all that... And I can't really see any reason for someone to fake the video... But I still have trouble believing the video is real. My reasoning for thinking it is fake: 1. It is a very grainy and out of focus video... videos I have seen from other loco-mounted cameras are much better than that. 2. The one woman was laying down in the gauge and MIGHT have fit under the plow and under-parts of the engine, but the other woman was kneeling next to her as she went out of view behind the nose of the engine... I don't think she would have had time to turn and lay flat before being hit by the plow of the engine. 3. I really don't think the women were slender enough to fit under the engine and train cars. PERIOD. Yes, they ain't "fat" but they are not that skinny, either. 4. The women were said to crawl out from under the locomotives in one account, and from under the train in another account. Where did the crawl "to"... I believe the locomotives were off the bridge before it came to a stop, but I don't believe the whole train had cleared the women such that they could get up and walk back across the bridge to get away. I know the legend that it takes a mile to stop a freight train, but I have seen many trains of various lengths stop in much shorter distances from what I perceive to be similar speeds. I have not seen any statements as to whether it was a long train or a short train, or the weight of the train, so I cannot say how long it should have taken to get stopped, but if it were short enough to let the women crawl out from under at the rear, then it should have been able to stop long before it did. If it were a long train, then they would have to crawl a long way to get out from under to the rear. So did they crawl out from under to the side? And if so, how did they get off the bridge? There is NO ROOM for a person to walk along side the train and there is not that much to hang on to on the side of cars to be able to walk on the ends of the ties and not fall by hanging on to something. Did they crawl toward the engines and then come out from under the side... again, that is a long way to crawl in a very confined space. I would be interested to know if they are really prosecuted... if they are not, then that is another piece of evidence that the video is fake. You are free to think of me as you will... I just want to go on record as not believing everything I see or read on the internet.
I know I will be branded as a... well... something; but I am thinking the video is fake.
I know that there is a lot of evidence that the video is real... statements by the prez of the company, the statements that the women are known and subject to arrest and all that... And I can't really see any reason for someone to fake the video...
But I still have trouble believing the video is real. My reasoning for thinking it is fake:
1. It is a very grainy and out of focus video... videos I have seen from other loco-mounted cameras are much better than that.
2. The one woman was laying down in the gauge and MIGHT have fit under the plow and under-parts of the engine, but the other woman was kneeling next to her as she went out of view behind the nose of the engine... I don't think she would have had time to turn and lay flat before being hit by the plow of the engine.
3. I really don't think the women were slender enough to fit under the engine and train cars. PERIOD. Yes, they ain't "fat" but they are not that skinny, either.
4. The women were said to crawl out from under the locomotives in one account, and from under the train in another account. Where did the crawl "to"... I believe the locomotives were off the bridge before it came to a stop, but I don't believe the whole train had cleared the women such that they could get up and walk back across the bridge to get away.
I know the legend that it takes a mile to stop a freight train, but I have seen many trains of various lengths stop in much shorter distances from what I perceive to be similar speeds. I have not seen any statements as to whether it was a long train or a short train, or the weight of the train, so I cannot say how long it should have taken to get stopped, but if it were short enough to let the women crawl out from under at the rear, then it should have been able to stop long before it did. If it were a long train, then they would have to crawl a long way to get out from under to the rear.
So did they crawl out from under to the side? And if so, how did they get off the bridge? There is NO ROOM for a person to walk along side the train and there is not that much to hang on to on the side of cars to be able to walk on the ends of the ties and not fall by hanging on to something.
Did they crawl toward the engines and then come out from under the side... again, that is a long way to crawl in a very confined space.
I would be interested to know if they are really prosecuted... if they are not, then that is another piece of evidence that the video is fake.
You are free to think of me as you will... I just want to go on record as not believing everything I see or read on the internet.
Original report and the IRR statement said it was a 14000 ton coal train ie. approximately 100 cars and nearly 6000 feet. Speed was reported to be approximately 30 MPH. As the train starts on the bridge it can be heard that the train brakes were placed in emergency.
Sam: What railroad & how old were the ladies? I haven't seen anything on this. Also they said they got off the bridge and left in a car. After being run over? And did the crew see or help them in any way?
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.