Colorado Police Detain Suspect, Confine to Squad car on RR Tracks, Train Hits

[jeffhergert]

Euclid

 

 

Convicted One

Hard to believe the train didn't start blowing sooner when seeing a car stopped on the tracks.

 

 

That car on the track was also "lit up" with blue and red flashing lights, although it is not clear as to how they would appear to an approaching train.  If those lights were visible to the engineer, that should have been a convincing indication of an emergency situation with an emergency vehicle stopped on the track.

 

 

I've been waiting for someone to ask why the train didn't stop.

I'm not surprised that it was finally asked, or who asked it.  But 6 days?  I think Bucky's losing it.

Next it will probably be suggested that the young women purposely stopped where she did so the police car would stop where it did, on the tracks.  Maybe not on this or any railfan forum, though.

Jeff

[Convicted One]

jeffhergert

I've been waiting for someone to ask why the train didn't stop.

Seriously though...where is the train?  Not even an EOT visible down the tracks

[zugmann]

Convicted One

Seriously though...where is the train?  Not even an EOT visible down the tracks

https://youtu.be/9SW7qNcgy68 

~6:06 mark you can see the EOTD flashing.  You can also hear the brakes are set up as the train is going by. 

[Murphy Siding]

Convicted One

Okay, it turns out the vic is an active TSA agent, and the crossing in question has a history.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/train-crossing-fatal-history/73-19b1aa25-318c-4a0d-ad7d-1161398aa8aa

 

Do active TSA agents in Colorado carry firearms as part of their job? That might explain the holster, gun and ammo found in her truck.

[Euclid]

jeffhergert

 

 

Euclid

 

 

Convicted One

Hard to believe the train didn't start blowing sooner when seeing a car stopped on the tracks.

 

 

That car on the track was also "lit up" with blue and red flashing lights, although it is not clear as to how they would appear to an approaching train.  If those lights were visible to the engineer, that should have been a convincing indication of an emergency situation with an emergency vehicle stopped on the track.

 

 

 

 

 

I've been waiting for someone to ask why the train didn't stop.

I'm not surprised that it was finally asked, or who asked it.  But 6 days?  I think Bucky's losing it.

Next it will probably be suggested that the young women purposely stopped where she did so the police car would stop where it did, on the tracks.  Maybe not on this or any railfan forum, though.

Jeff

 

I have not asked why the train did not stop yet.  Your other question about whether the police should be exhonerated because the suspect forced them to stop on the track has been widly discussed in news coverage, and possibly touched on here as well.  I don't know what was happeing at the last instant at the crossing.  There was a door open in the driver's side.  I seem to recall some mention in the video of not having the keys to release the suspect.  

If those flashing red and blue lights were also directed to the line of track, and if there were no curve within a mile, that would have given a mile of warning.  That would be 60 seconds.  If the cop had the key, all he needed was probably 10-15 seconds.  

[7j43k]

The suspect FORCED them to stop on the tracks?  FORCED?

Probably used the Vulcan mind meld.

 

 

Ed

[Electroliner 1935]

As I see it, police were following training to fear the driver and stop behind vehicle. Driver stopped after crossing tracks so police stopped behind car and lost awareness of crossing. So after securing "perp" in cop car, their attention was diverted to vehicle and finding any evidence they could find. A SITUAIONAL AWARENESS failure. Good thing it was not fatal. But totally preventable. 

[Backshop]

Murphy Siding

 

 

Convicted One

Okay, it turns out the vic is an active TSA agent, and the crossing in question has a history.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/train-crossing-fatal-history/73-19b1aa25-318c-4a0d-ad7d-1161398aa8aa

 

 

 

 

Do active TSA agents in Colorado carry firearms as part of their job? That might explain the holster, gun and ammo found in her truck.

 

 

TSA personnel do not carry firearms.  They are not law enforcement.

Here's a question for our active and retired railroad T&E members that's been bothering me for awhile...

Every time there is a grade crossing incident, the usual suspect(s) say "the train crew could see the car/bus/truck on the tracks, why didn't they apply the brakes immediately?".  My question is--how often do you see a vehicle on the tracks when you're dangerously close and yet the vehicle makes it off the tracks before you get there?  In other works, is a collision a 1:100 occurance or a 1:1000 one? I think I know the answer and why air isn't dumped all the time.

[Convicted One]

Murphy Siding

Do active TSA agents in Colorado carry firearms as part of their job? That might explain the holster, gun and ammo found in her truck.

Seems to me that the police were responding to hearsay evidence?

[tree68]

Convicted One

Seems to me that the police were responding to hearsay evidence?

I think it's been said that this was as the result of a reported road rage incident.

The police can only respond to what they are told (see "swatting").  

[BaltACD]

Backshop

 

Murphy Siding 

Convicted One

Okay, it turns out the vic is an active TSA agent, and the crossing in question has a history.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/train-crossing-fatal-history/73-19b1aa25-318c-4a0d-ad7d-1161398aa8aa 

Do active TSA agents in Colorado carry firearms as part of their job? That might explain the holster, gun and ammo found in her truck. 

TSA personnel do not carry firearms.  They are not law enforcement.

Here's a question for our active and retired railroad T&E members that's been bothering me for awhile...

Every time there is a grade crossing incident, the usual suspect(s) say "the train crew could see the car/bus/truck on the tracks, why didn't they apply the brakes immediately?".  My question is--how often do you see a vehicle on the tracks when you're dangerously close and yet the vehicle makes it off the tracks before you get there?  In other works, is a collision a 1:100 occurance or a 1:1000 one? I think I know the answer and why air isn't dumped all the time.

A additional consideration is - everytime a train goes into emergency, at least under CSX rules, if the train contains HAZMAT it must be inspected, on the ground, to and including the last HAZMAT in the train.  Considering PSR train sizes that can easily be a multiple hour happening.

The other reality, when a train operating at track speed, is close enough to see that something is blocking the track - the train is way, way, past braking distance that would permit stopping before the obstruction.

[tree68]

Backshop

Every time there is a grade crossing incident, the usual suspect(s) say "the train crew could see the car/bus/truck on the tracks, why didn't they apply the brakes immediately?". 

I think this is born of the mistaken assumption that a train can stop on a dime.  As Balt points out, tain't so.

My usual answer is "it depends," which confounds those looking for black and white answers.

If you see someone in a crosswalk ahead of you while you're driving, you'll probably at least take your foot off the gas, and may shadow the brake pedal.  If it appears that you're not slowing enough, you'll apply some brakes.  You probably aren't going to do a panic stop on a busy street because you see a pedestrian half a block ahead of you.

Likewise, if someone steps out from between parked cars ten feet in front of you, you're going to hit them, no question.  So the wise move is to make a controlled stop.  A panic stop may put you into a skid and slide you into those parked cars.

It depends.

[Convicted One]

tree68

I think it's been said that this was as the result of a reported road rage incident.

And I don't want to stray too far away from "trains", but specific to the allegation .....credibility of accuser vs accused has me wondering? Would you be happy being wrestled into the back of a squad car based upon no more than a call from someone's cell phone?

[Euclid]

Backshop

Every time there is a grade crossing incident, the usual suspect(s) say "the train crew could see the car/bus/truck on the tracks, why didn't they apply the brakes immediately?".  My question is--how often do you see a vehicle on the tracks when you're dangerously close and yet the vehicle makes it off the tracks before you get there?  In other works, is a collision a 1:100 occurance or a 1:1000 one? I think I know the answer and why air isn't dumped all the time.

There are two schools of thought on this.  One is black and white and the other is not.  For the black and white school, adherents say they never respond to a pending collision by braking until the collision happens.  They say they can’t stop in time to avoid the collision anyway, and dumping the air might derail the train.  That school is indeed black and white.

 

The other school tends to error on the side of caution by appropriate brake application if it appears that a collision is likely.  They realize that even if they can’t stop in time, they might slow enough to reduce the impact or give more time for a fouling vehicle to clear.  Either one of these outcomes can save lives.  They also realize that in heavy road traffic with trains approaching slowly, it is unrealistic to dump the air every time a driver cuts it close, such as a near miss with the train missing the vehicle by only a few feet.   In the first place, many of these incursions do clear in time.  Second, the train speed is often very low thus reducing the threat of serious injury or death.  Third, many times these are so close that the engineer cannot have much if any effect in either stopping or slowing down.  So this is not black and white because there is no clear answer. 

 

Where this non-black and white school makes the most sense is in cases where a vehicle appears to be stopped or stalled on the track from a relatively long distance such as 1,000-5,000 feet.   In this case, there is time for braking to make a difference.  There is also time to verify that the vehicle is likely to be stalled if it is not moving. Even if the train cannot stop in time, there is potential for significant speed reduction.

 

Out of curiosity, I asked reps from the FRA and Operation Lifesaver what they thought of these two schools of thought.  They both told me that they have heard many engineers say they would not dynamite the brakes until after a collision occurs.  Both told me they don’t know if these people would actually stick to that protocol or if they just say they would.  Both told me they always advised their engineers to follow the non-black and white school; and therefore should not rule out ahead of time, any application of air prior to an impending collision.  They said that if you do that, you might stick with that position by habit and later regret it seriously.  Both told me it was not the engineer’s job to worry about derailing the train when emergency braking is justified.  They also told me that the company could face substantial liability if an engineer testifies in court that he/she did not do everything possible to mitigate the collision or resulting injuries. 

[7j43k]

Convicted One

 

 

tree68

I think it's been said that this was as the result of a reported road rage incident.

 

 

And I don't want to stray too far away from "trains", but specific to the allegation .....credibility of accuser vs accused has me wondering? Would you be happy being wrestled into the back of a squad car based upon no more than a call from someone's cell phone?

 

 

No one was "wrestled" into the back of a squad car.  The door was opened, and she was instructed to "take a seat".

If someone reports a crime using a cell phone, it should be taken seriously.  That includes the possibility that you have the wrong person, it's a false report, there have been one or more misinterpretations.  I think the cops could have handled the stop better.

"Detainee" appeared to lie to police when she denied there was a weapon in the car. Not a good look.

 

Ed

[Steven Otte]

This thread has gotten argumentative, nasty, and personal, so I'm locking it. If for some reason you think this topic hasn't been discussed to death already, start another thread, but keep it civil or the same thing will happen.