Five years - too much?

very sad situation that parents seem not to know what children are up to, maybe we were old fashioned but we would not have let 16 year old behave in that fashion but seems anything goes nowadays.

Intersting point about drivers on discpinary if they move off before passengers alight or board, as it seems to happen all the time.

None of us can possibly know the full fact, it seems a great shame that parents do not take on the duty of care to ensure they know what is happening to their teen agers.
I know of a girl who has been "done" for drink driving 3 times!! she still did not receive custodial sentence, just years probation, seems dreadful to me that she could have killed someone and gets off more or less scott free!!

How tragic for the parents to have lost their daughter in this way and how awful for this man to have to carry the guilt with him for the rest of his life,the sentence I think was too harsh as the full facts have not been stated in the media, this young girl happened to be in the same class at school as my DGS4 and there would be no way he would be out with friends drinking in pubs and taking drugs as these teenagers where but there for the grace of god,a better way would have been to remove all the drunken teens and call for their parents to escort them home and maybe that fateful incident may not have happened.

he was in the wrong .that train should never of moved ,if any think the gaurd should of got the girl on the train safe or phoned the police if she was that drunk a least that way she would be still alive xx

From what was said in the papers, he very deliberately gave the signal for the train to start although he could see the girl leaning on the train. Supposing she hadn't been drunk but had been taken ill suddenly. I have been close to staggering home in the past when a severe attack of migraine started at work and I had a long journey home by public transport.

He was also, in the old sense of the word, a public servant, directly responsible for the safety and security of the passengers on or boarding or alighting from the train. My daughter was a Mystery Shopper for London buses some years ago and she had a list of three things that if the driver did she had to alight at the next stop and report immediately. One of them was if the driver started to move the bus before all passengers had alighted or boarded. This was such a heinous crime that the driver would be out of the cab and on a disciplinary the moment he reached the depot. This train guarde was in a special position of duty to protect the passengers and he deliberately put a passenger in such danger that she was killed. The sentence was justified.

The girl was leaning on the train, it doesn't matter why - the guard should not have given the signal to go.

As others have said, five years seems excessive but a custodial sentence is appropriate.

do we now live in a nanny state whereby Guards have to look out for people high on drugs and alchohol?

I agree if we know all the facts that it seems he could have prevented the tragedy, but is does not seem that she was capable of travelling safely on public transport. Her age at 16 seems to make me wonder were her parents aware of her drug usage? It is a very sad case for all concerned. Did herown parents not have a duty of care also?

Drunken and drugged drivers and those who drive recklessly when sober all deserve harsh punishments especially when they cause death /injury. I have not read all details of the train guard case but part of his job is to keep the public safe from rail accidents. If he was genuinely unaware of the girls physical condition then the sentence is harsh. If he knew and acted to 'teach her a lesson' then he took a gamble and both she and he lost.

It does seem a bit irresponsible (and probably against his rules) to send the train on its way when someone was leaning on it, drunk or not.

What is highlighted by the OP's links is the peculiar attitude that courts take to driving offences. Driving a car is the equivalent of wandering around with a loaded gun. The sort of "accidents" that are caused by drunk or irresponsible driving should carry similar penalties to waving a gun about in a public place and killing someone.

He thought she would move as the train started to move. He wasn't psychic. We know she was drunk and high on mkat at the time but he didn't. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Five years seems very harsh for what was in effect an accident.

No he failed in his duty of care.

On saturday night at around midnight a young girl of about 15/16 knocked on our door very drunk and in tears saying she could not find her way home although she did know her address. She lived about 15 mins walk away (for someone sober). I was concerned for her safety so put her in the car and drove her home. No duty of care on my behalf just concern for a young an vulnerable girl. Personally I would expect better behaviour from a guard trained to look after the public.

As for the girl being culpable how many of us have not got ouselves into difficult situations when young. She was only 16.

Also feel that penalties for dangerous driving are always too lenient.

phoenix All the more reason for the guard to take care.

Also bearing in mind that the man who was killed had not put himself at risk (other than actually being on the road) whereas that poor girl was under the influence of both drugs and alcohol.

In todays Telegraph there is a small article about a man given a 2 year sentence for causing the death of another driver. It says that the man had been driving at 128 mph shortly before the accident, and that he had previous convictions for speeding and using a mobile phone whilst drving.

It also states that he will be released on licence after he has served half of his sentence.

So how does that sit with the five years given to the railway guard?

He could see the drunken girl leaning against the train but still deliberately gave a signal for departure. I think he behaved very wrongly. Perhaps compared with instances of people killed by dangerous driving, as in ga's second link, five years seems harsh. Alternatively, perhaps the sentences for dangerous driving, as in the link, compared with the guard's five years seem absurdly lenient.

Reading about the case earlier in the week, the defendant's actions reminded me of those bus drivers (and in past years, conductors) who would deliberately slam the doors shut or ring the bell if they saw someone running for the bus...
Five years does seem excessive, though.

I agree with you grannyactivist. Five years in prison (will probably serve 2.5 years for good behaviour) sounds excessive for someone who had a good work record previously.

We were not on the jury so did not hear all the evidence, but sometimes a prison sentence is just about the worse thing you can hand down to a man who will, no doubt, pay for it for the rest of his life.....in oh, so many ways.

I remember when my children were small, a local bus driver reversed and killed my friend's 11 year old son when he was standing behind the bus and not quite visible to the driver. That was also considered to be manslaughter as he was charged with driving without due care and consideration and had thought that all the children were "away" from the bus - but my friend, who was emotionally bereft for ever more, did not want the driver punished. She knew that he would be 'punished" for ever more and a prison sentence would never bring her son back. Sometimes prison is not the answer.

No. I think it's right. Incredible dereliction of duty.

THATS A difficult one, I must admit when I read about it last week in paper before his sentence I did feel well come on if she was so drunk she must be in some way responsible???!!

If you drink to that degree and travel on public transport there has to be some measure of self responsibility.

5 years seems so harsh when othere crimes seem to get so little, but I do understand maybe he could have prevented this tragedy is an awful situation.

I think that I have to agree with you, ga .