Trains.com

One is killed and two others critically injured while on bridge as Amtrak train arrives north of Santa Barbara

5451 views
92 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Sunny (mostly) San Diego
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by ChuckCobleigh on Sunday, October 12, 2014 11:32 PM

challenger3980
Unfortunately, a likely ending will involve the trespassers, or their Family collecting some un-deserved money, because an out of court settlement will be less expensive than the legal fees and unpredictable jury award.

This will never get to a jury.  If a case is filed, it will fall in a summary judgment motion: too much case law directly on point to overcome.

  • Member since
    February 2001
  • From: US
  • 52 posts
Posted by Schaffner on Sunday, October 12, 2014 11:15 PM

So, you're just assuming that the engineer violated rules calling for them to use the horn where designated?  My experience is that Amtrak trains do sound their horn where required, just like freight trains.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:42 PM

Buxtehude

Too bad, people.  Get a life.  Amtrak should have sounded their horn at least a half mile before a bridge, just like freight trains do before they enter a tunnel, especially when in this section of track, which is closely followed by Hwy 101.  They know where the bridges are.  Is pushing the horn button a couple of times so tiring to the engineer's hand?  Stupid people cross the tracks all the time here, but is Amtrak ignorant of this?  I doubt it.  I am putting the blame where it lies.  And if a freight train had killed those clueless people, I would be blaming UP.  It's called being corporately proactive!  My point is that no train should have arrived unexpectedly, passenger or freight.  Especially here.

 

And just because you find my headline abusive, is no reason to remove it, just because you disagree with how I write it.  Who are you, anyway?  Certainly, no better than me.

 

 

 

 

Were you the dead or the injured?

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:28 PM

Murphy Siding
Should a 747 be equipped with some kind of horn that it can blow in advance of setting down on a runway?  It's a similar set-up.  A runway and a rail line are both specific pieces of infrastructure made for use by specific types of heavy industrial equipment.

Runways are totally fenced off so that public access is difficult and rarely occurs.  Not similar.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Rhododendron, OR
  • 1,516 posts
Posted by challenger3980 on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:21 PM

Yes, the title could have been worded a bit better, I agree that it is very similar to what I would expect a newspaper to write as the story headline.

  As far as someone being OFFENDED by the thread title, sure wish my life's problems were so small that a thread title like that would be Offensive. Definitely a bit of thin skin around here.

  I DON"T agree that Amtrak was at fault in any way, shape or form, the Trespassers put themselves in harms way, no excuses there.

Unfortunately, a likely ending will involve the trespassers, or their Family collecting some un-deserved money, because an out of court settlement will be less expensive than the legal fees and unpredictable jury award.

 

Doug

May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Fountain Valley, CA, USA
  • 607 posts
Posted by garyla on Sunday, October 12, 2014 8:55 PM

tree68
 
Buxtehude
If I were an engineer, and I were traveling through that area, I'd be tooting my horn every 15 seconds or so, just because it was the right thing to do.  This is NOT a new problem. 

 

Alas, in the "land of fruit and nuts", said engineer would probably find himself charged (maybe even sued) for excessive noise/disturbing the peace.

Trying to figure out which trestle was involved.  Don't think it was the Gaviota Trestle itself, but I can't find a reference to "Vista Point" as mentioned in several news items.  The Arroyo Honda trestle would appear to be the best candidate, as the approach to the Canada Alcatraz trestle is a straight shot.  There is also a curve approaching Gaviota Trestle southbound.

In this article, a UP spokesperson specifically says that being on the tracks is trespassing:  http://www.keyt.com/news/amtrak-train-hits-three-people-kills-one/29072716

 

 

Not certain, tree68, but I think you're correct on the location being Arroyo Honda.  Between the factoids in the news accounts, and my visit to Google Earth, that place looks like the most likely candidate.

As for the suggestion (and consequences) of having an engineer perform warning toots above and beyond what is required by the FRA, I would only note that the Santa Barbara area has its full share of California's most-prosperous NIMBYs, probably ready and willing to hyperventilate (and litigate) over this.

Without making light of a tragedy, I'd like to see Amtrak and UPRR get to step out of this whole issue and just pit the would-be trespassers (and their advocates) directly against the NIMBYs, and see who prevails.

 

 

If I ever met a train I didn't like, I can't remember when it happened!
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, October 12, 2014 8:30 PM

Buxtehude

Which makes sense, of course.  The idea that a railroad track itself is sufficient warning of danger to trespassers.  Actually, I agree with that.  Above I always called these people who walk on the section as clueless or as stupid, which is what they are.  I think I should change the wording of what was of commission and of omission.  "Crime" might be too strong a word.  "Sin" might be better, in that it assumes decency, rather than the breaking of a law.  If I were an engineer, and I were traveling through that area, I'd be tooting my horn every 15 seconds or so, just because it was the right thing to do.  This is NOT a new problem. 

 

 But then someone would get hit by a train and sue, saying that the engineer knew of the problem, and should have blown the horn every 10 seconds. 

     Should a 747 be equipped with some kind of horn that it can blow in advance of setting down on a runway?  It's a similar set-up.  A runway and a rail line are both specific pieces of infrastructure made for use by specific types of heavy industrial equipment.  Would there be this kind of discussion if a 747 had killed one and injured 2 other tresspassers taking photos on a runway?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, October 12, 2014 8:11 PM

Buxtehude
If I were an engineer, and I were traveling through that area, I'd be tooting my horn every 15 seconds or so, just because it was the right thing to do.  This is NOT a new problem. 

Alas, in the "land of fruit and nuts", said engineer would probably find himself charged (maybe even sued) for excessive noise/disturbing the peace.

Trying to figure out which trestle was involved.  Don't think it was the Gaviota Trestle itself, but I can't find a reference to "Vista Point" as mentioned in several news items.  The Arroyo Honda trestle would appear to be the best candidate, as the approach to the Canada Alcatraz trestle is a straight shot.  There is also a curve approaching Gaviota Trestle southbound.

In this article, a UP spokesperson specifically says that being on the tracks is trespassing:  http://www.keyt.com/news/amtrak-train-hits-three-people-kills-one/29072716

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    April 2002
  • From: Northern Florida
  • 1,429 posts
Posted by SALfan on Sunday, October 12, 2014 8:00 PM

Another case of the vicious hunter-killer train not only swerving but jumping off the tracks and running down the roads and across the countryside maiming and killing everyone it sees (sarcasm dripping copiously).

  • Member since
    April 2002
  • From: Northern Florida
  • 1,429 posts
Posted by SALfan on Sunday, October 12, 2014 7:54 PM

BaltACD

Stupidity kills one and injures two others north of Santa Barbara.

 

 

Good shot, Oswald.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Iowa
  • 3,293 posts
Posted by Semper Vaporo on Sunday, October 12, 2014 7:14 PM

selector
 
Buxtehude

They were taking photographs on one of the bridges close to Refugio.  Of the four people on the bridge two got run over and were critically hurt, one was knocked clear into the side of a hill and was killed, one was able to get off the bridge before being struck.  

 

 

-Crandell

But by that logic, someone that jumped off a 10 story building didn't commit suicide; the sidewalk at the end of the free-fall killed them.

 

Semper Vaporo

Pkgs.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Sunday, October 12, 2014 3:59 PM

Buxtehude

They were taking photographs on one of the bridges close to Refugio.  Of the four people on the bridge two got run over and were critically hurt, one was knocked clear into the side of a hill and was killed, one was able to get off the bridge before being struck.  

 

Dave, I understand your meaning, but the three didn't kill themselves; they were killed, yes trespassing, but by contact with a rushing locomotive....belonging to Amtrak.   They didn't die running, they died via collision, and the collision was with a train.  So, the train did kill them.  You could argue philosophically that they killed themselves, but their instrumentality was only in being in a certain place.  Afterwards came the collision.

-Crandell

  • Member since
    November 2011
  • 18 posts
Posted by Buxtehude on Sunday, October 12, 2014 1:03 PM

Which makes sense, of course.  The idea that a railroad track itself is sufficient warning of danger to trespassers.  Actually, I agree with that.  Above I always called these people who walk on the section as clueless or as stupid, which is what they are.  I think I should change the wording of what was of commission and of omission.  "Crime" might be too strong a word.  "Sin" might be better, in that it assumes decency, rather than the breaking of a law.  If I were an engineer, and I were traveling through that area, I'd be tooting my horn every 15 seconds or so, just because it was the right thing to do.  This is NOT a new problem. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Sunday, October 12, 2014 1:00 PM

 How is this any different than the Alman movie trespassing? 1/2 mile would only be 30 seconds warning at 60mph, no change, idiots still dead.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Sunny (mostly) San Diego
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by ChuckCobleigh on Sunday, October 12, 2014 12:45 PM

Semper Vaporo

ChuckCobleigh:  Sorry... I am unable to follow the "who" of your "plaintiff" and the result of the case you mention. Who sued whom, for what reason, and who won?

The particular case was an unpublished 3rd District Court of Appeal opinion in the past few years affirming a summary judgment against a plaintiff who was crossing a railroad bridge near Roseville and was struck by a UP freight.  The opinion included a lengthy recitation of California case law which in essence held that a railroad track itself is sufficient warning of danger to trespassers.  It is not citable, which means that nothing in it was new law nor a new interpretation or application.  I'll see if I can find it on the sleeping computer.

EDIT: After awakening the sleeping beast, I found two similar cases, one being the case I mentioned above.  Turns out that a month after releasing the unpublished opinion, the Third District ordered the case published: Christoff v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 134 Cal App 4th 118.  This is obtainable online from the California Courts website, starting at their link to LexisNexus: http://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/CACourts/.

My favorite quote in the discussion is this from an 1893 case:

"A railroad track upon which trains are constantly run is itself a warning to any person who has reached years of discretion, and who is possessed of ordinary intelligence, that it is not safe to walk upon it, or near enough to it to be struck by a passing train . . . ." (Holmes v. South Pac Coast Ry. Co. (1893) 97 Cal. 161, 167..."

The Christoff case was cited in Lindsley v. Union Pacific Railroad (unpub. opn H030587, 6th District Court of Appeal, 2008) where again, trestle trespassers sued the railroad, the city, and one other defendant and had summary judgment entered against them, which was affirmed on appeal.  To me, it's almost legal malpractice to go forward with a case when there is nearly exact precedent against the client's position, but that's just my opinion.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Iowa
  • 3,293 posts
Posted by Semper Vaporo on Sunday, October 12, 2014 11:47 AM

ChuckCobleigh:  Sorry... I am unable to follow the "who" of your "plaintiff" and the result of the case you mention. Who sued whom, for what reason, and who won?

Semper Vaporo

Pkgs.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Sunny (mostly) San Diego
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by ChuckCobleigh on Sunday, October 12, 2014 11:30 AM

mudchicken

"+ a few"; They schould be using the word trespassing. (but probably won't, being they typically don't believe in personal accountability in that state either.)

Interestingly, lots of case law going back to the previous turn of the century and before to the effect of "you play on railroad track, you don't win when big bad train runs you over."  An oddity in California law, but the courts have been pretty consistent in tossing trespasser claims.  I know UP is pretty strong on fighting those suits and a case out of Sacramento several years ago was pretty well on point in upholding a summary judgment against plaintiff in a case remarkably similar to what was alluded to here.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Sunday, October 12, 2014 11:24 AM
Well aside from the actual blame, it seems to me that the controversy of how the thread title is worded is just a matter of semantics.  Saying someone got killed by a train is not the same as saying the train murdered them.  If someone is reported to have been electrocuted is that unfairly blaming electricity? 
  • Member since
    November 2011
  • 18 posts
Posted by Buxtehude on Sunday, October 12, 2014 11:11 AM

Thank you. If Amtrak does sound their horn as a matter of policy, and did here, then my argument is completely moot.  To my knowledge, they don't, but they should, if only because they must know by experience how many stupid people cross throughout this section of railroad, and how dangerous an area it is.  If any article actually says that Amtrak did sound the horn, then I'll change the headline as fast as my little fingers can type the difference.  Otherwise, there are sins of commission, but equally of omission as well.  This situation was of the latter type.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:50 AM

Buxtehude

Too bad, people.  Get a life.  Amtrak should have sounded their horn at least a half mile before a bridge, just like freight trains do before they enter a tunnel, especially when in this section of track, which is closely followed by Hwy 101.  They know where the bridges are.  Is pushing the horn button a couple of times so tiring to the engineer's hand?  Stupid people cross the tracks all the time here, but is Amtrak ignorant of this?  I doubt it.  I am putting the blame where it lies.  And if a freight train had killed those clueless people, I would be blaming UP.  It's called being corporately proactive!  My point is that no train should have arrived unexpectedly, passenger or freight.  Especially here.

And just because you find my headline abusive, is no reason to remove it, just because you disagree with how I write it.  Who are you, anyway?  Certainly, no better than me.

 

 

 
I'm not taking a position here, but I think it is ridiculous for there to always be a knee-jerk reaction of blaming the bearer of bad news: blaming the OP, blaming the media, blaming the victim, ad nauseam.  It makes it sound as though human lives are less important than a railroad.  
 
However, I also wonder where Buxtehude (BTW: great handle! s/he must either be from the town of the same name near Hamburg or be a fan of the baroque composer) got the information about the absence of a horn to warn.  I looked at about six news stories, none of which mentioned that rather pertinent matter.
 

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    November 2011
  • 18 posts
Posted by Buxtehude on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:35 AM

I see how it is.  When somebody doesn't agree with your opinion, yet presents a reasoned argument for his own opinion, he is suddenly branded a troll.  Call me all the names all you want.  It doesn't change the strength of my argument in the slightest, especially if that's all you can do against it.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: North Carolina
  • 1,905 posts
Posted by csxns on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:21 AM

Phoebe Vet
OK guys. Don't feed the troll.

Agree here.

Russell

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Sunday, October 12, 2014 10:02 AM

OK guys.  Don't feed the troll.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    November 2011
  • 18 posts
Posted by Buxtehude on Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:56 AM

Too bad, people.  Get a life.  Amtrak should have sounded their horn at least a half mile before a bridge, just like freight trains do before they enter a tunnel, especially when in this section of track, which is closely followed by Hwy 101.  They know where the bridges are.  Is pushing the horn button a couple of times so tiring to the engineer's hand?  Stupid people cross the tracks all the time here, but is Amtrak ignorant of this?  I doubt it.  I am putting the blame where it lies.  And if a freight train had killed those clueless people, I would be blaming UP.  It's called being corporately proactive!  My point is that no train should have arrived unexpectedly, passenger or freight.  Especially here.

And just because you find my headline abusive, is no reason to remove it, just because you disagree with how I write it.  Who are you, anyway?  Certainly, no better than me.

 

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:23 AM

You can add me to list of people offended by this headline.  They caused their own "DEATH BY STUPIDITY"".

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Sunday, October 12, 2014 8:45 AM

"+ a few"; They schould be using the word trespassing. (but probably won't, being they typically don't believe in personal accountability in that state either.)

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Sunday, October 12, 2014 8:19 AM

Put me on the list of people who are offended by the headline.

...and you are right that the melodramatic news media will use a similar headline.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, October 12, 2014 7:59 AM

Stupidity kills one and injures two others north of Santa Barbara.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Sunday, October 12, 2014 7:48 AM

This headline is not much different than what will run in local paper and go out over AP wire. While I understand your point methinks your skin is too thin.

Mac McCulloch

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Sunday, October 12, 2014 6:08 AM

"+1" to daveklepper's post above about the poorly constructed title of this thread.  We can do better than that here.

- Paul North.   

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy