prosecution on private road
Discussion
The Driver of the Merc that came second in the Steam Loco v Merc contest, is not being done by plod as ir was on a private rd
However a few months ago didn't a guy in the south of the country get done for killing a lad when he couldn't control the car and it spun out .Wasn't that on a prtvate road? and was it due to the fact someone got killed made the difference. ( i cannor remember if points/ban was included in the verdict)
However a few months ago didn't a guy in the south of the country get done for killing a lad when he couldn't control the car and it spun out .Wasn't that on a prtvate road? and was it due to the fact someone got killed made the difference. ( i cannor remember if points/ban was included in the verdict)
silverfoxcc said:
Steam Loco v Merc contest
Is there a video of this?As for the question in hand, I'd imagine a fatality would make a big difference - Opens up a lot of other charges I'd have thought (Manslaughter etc) - This seems to shed some light: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-07-13/d...
Haltamer said:
silverfoxcc said:
Steam Loco v Merc contest
Is there a video of this? ... silverfoxcc said:
The Driver of the Merc that came second in the Steam Loco v Merc contest, is not being done by plod as ir was on a private rd
However a few months ago didn't a guy in the south of the country get done for killing a lad when he couldn't control the car and it spun out .Wasn't that on a prtvate road? and was it due to the fact someone got killed made the difference. ( i cannor remember if points/ban was included in the verdict)
What are you expecting the Police to charge the driver with? - Failing to obey a stop light?, failure to give way to a fHowever a few months ago didn't a guy in the south of the country get done for killing a lad when he couldn't control the car and it spun out .Wasn't that on a prtvate road? and was it due to the fact someone got killed made the difference. ( i cannor remember if points/ban was included in the verdict)
king great big train?, DWDCA? 
The Police don't charge everyone involved in a collision with an offence, especially when no one's hurt, and the only real damage is to the person at fault's property.
Or is it your thinking that running into a steam train and having you car smashed to bits, is the same as losing control of your car and ending someone's life?
silverfoxcc said:
The Driver of the Merc that came second in the Steam Loco v Merc contest, is not being done by plod as ir was on a private rd
However a few months ago didn't a guy in the south of the country get done for killing a lad when he couldn't control the car and it spun out .Wasn't that on a prtvate road? and was it due to the fact someone got killed made the difference. ( i cannor remember if points/ban was included in the verdict)
The Ferrari F50 incident? That was local to me. And whilst it was a "private road" in so far as it wasn't the "public highway", it was, for all intents and purposes, a road with an implied right of public access. It is the only road into a cafe and a farm shop, among a bunch of other small businesses. However a few months ago didn't a guy in the south of the country get done for killing a lad when he couldn't control the car and it spun out .Wasn't that on a prtvate road? and was it due to the fact someone got killed made the difference. ( i cannor remember if points/ban was included in the verdict)
That, plus the fact that the youngster was killed, quite rightly attracted police/CPS attention.
The Merc v. steam train article ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshi... ) mentions that police in attendance stated that neither the Mercedes driver or the three train crew were hurt. That probably has a huge bearing on the treatment of the case.
It still begs the question "how the juddering f
k can you be paying so little attention while driving that you miss the level crossing lights and sirens, AND the large blue steam locomotive?" It's not even as if it was travelling very fast at all. 8 mph! I really hope that the railway operator didn't have to cancel the dining train, or the driver's insurance should get spanked for the cost of refunds. Which will probably hit the driver hard in the pocket come renewal time...
Oh, and a quick look on the internet suggests that the total weight of that loco and tender, coaled and watered for running, is somewhere north of 75 tons. In terms of a collision with any make/model of car, it's very much going to be "no contest" really...
The loco in question is also a unique survivor of it's class. There are no others known to be in existence, let alone running on a preserved historic railway. All the rest of the 289 engines produced were scrapped.
The loco in question is also a unique survivor of it's class. There are no others known to be in existence, let alone running on a preserved historic railway. All the rest of the 289 engines produced were scrapped.
dhutch said:
yellowjack said:
...a quick look on the internet suggests that the total weight of that loco is somewhere north of 75 tons. "no contest" really...
Plus a rake of coaches behind it anf I expect you could call it 200 ton easy. 
Jakg said:
4rephill said:
What are you expecting the Police to charge the driver with? [...] DWDCA?
If the driver had been a 17-year old in a Saxo, do you think the Police would do nothing?Did the 17-year-old have his clubs in the boot, and was he on the way to play a round with the chief Constable...?
Jakg said:
f the driver had been a 17-year old in a Saxo, do you think the Police would do nothing?
Back when I was young and silly I had an altercation at speed with a brick wall... it ended with a careless driving course, but the traffic officer that had 'the chat' told me he was pressing forward with that charge because "I fit the profile" - being under 25, male - if I'd been a few years older it would have been 'chalked up to experience'.To be fair they were right in charging me, but at the time it seemed a bit harsh being profiled.
yellowjack said:
It still begs the question "how the juddering fk can you be paying so little attention while driving that you miss the level crossing lights and sirens, AND the large blue steam locomotive?" It's not even as if it was travelling very fast at all. 8 mph!
I really hope that the railway operator didn't have to cancel the dining train, or the driver's insurance should get spanked for the cost of refunds. Which will probably hit the driver hard in the pocket come renewal time...
Didn't the train driver see the Mercedes coming?k can you be paying so little attention while driving that you miss the level crossing lights and sirens, AND the large blue steam locomotive?" It's not even as if it was travelling very fast at all. 8 mph! I really hope that the railway operator didn't have to cancel the dining train, or the driver's insurance should get spanked for the cost of refunds. Which will probably hit the driver hard in the pocket come renewal time...
The Mad Monk said:
Didn't the train driver see the Mercedes coming?
No-one can be this retarded while still being capable of breathing unaided, so I'm just going to call "Troll".If, however, you really are that thick...
There's a reason why, at level crossings, locomotives/trains ALWAYS have right of way/priority when the crossing signals say they do, and it's because they don't stop at all quickly. The law requires car drivers to stop when instructed, because a railway vehicle that has a stopping distance in excess of the distance remaining between them and the crossing has passed the point of no return. So whether or not the locomotive driver has seen the car is a moot point. No matter what the driver of that engine (built, after all, in 1912, with 106 year old braking technology) tries to do with regard to stopping more quickly, it will not work because physics pokes it's nose into the matter.
People who take risks at level crossings are high order c
ts, and deserve everything they get. But I wish they would just wise up and obey the signals really, because train crews don't deserve to have to live with the aftermath of incidents that are definitely NOT their fault.Having driven a steam engine, for once, I am qualified to comment.
The driver can't see anything of the track in front of him. He can see signals, but that is about it. Going in reverse, he would see signals if he leaned out of the cab, which he was probably doing, and would be able to stop in time for whatever the signal was telling him to do half a mile up the track. The driver probably also has a physical token, of which there is only one, which give authority to be on the track.
I remember asking the real driver of the train I was driving at about 60 mph what would happen if something else was on the track. He shrugged and said "you wouldn't feel a thing".
Basically you can't see and you can't stop. The bloke in this instance probably had no clue that he hit something other than the screeching noise from the tearing metal. Which is why everything else gives way to trains.
The driver can't see anything of the track in front of him. He can see signals, but that is about it. Going in reverse, he would see signals if he leaned out of the cab, which he was probably doing, and would be able to stop in time for whatever the signal was telling him to do half a mile up the track. The driver probably also has a physical token, of which there is only one, which give authority to be on the track.
I remember asking the real driver of the train I was driving at about 60 mph what would happen if something else was on the track. He shrugged and said "you wouldn't feel a thing".
Basically you can't see and you can't stop. The bloke in this instance probably had no clue that he hit something other than the screeching noise from the tearing metal. Which is why everything else gives way to trains.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff