Eastern Railroad Discussion > CSX loses to family of trespasser on trestle

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012-07-26/story/clay-jury-awards-164-million-family-teen-killed-when-hit-csx-train

Another jury of idiots.

If I was a juror, Ill teach the jury a lesson or two on railroads...Jeez....

CR

That's a tough one for the railroad even though the deceased guy was a trespasser. I'm thinking the crew had "front to rear no com" or some such thing with the EOT which would, by rule, make them a 30 MPH train. Again, I'm guessing on that.

When I was training to be an engineer I worked with fellas who told me they wouldn't "big hole" the automatic until they hit whatever it was that was on the tracks. With enough people playing chicken with trains these days I could understand that but it left me feeling uneasy. I always wondered if a court case could be made where a train didn't sttempt to stop and actually hit someone...what would be the outcome then? Anyway, I always at least set minimum, then get my 10 lbs, then kick it off if nothing happened. At least it is an attempt to stop. That has been picked up on a download due to the stretch braking rules we have and when asked why and my reason given nothing more was said. Dunno...what do you other engineers think?

This is a civil trial not a criminal trial, proof beyond a shadow of a doubt is not required. Any negligence at all makes CSX at least partially liable.

I really wonder how many of you people who always shout "idiot jury" have ever actually been on a jury.

There are a couple points to consider.

First, these awards, whether they make sense to us or not just go into the freight rate. CSX has loss data going back years, thru all kinds of mishaps. They have a good idea what losses will cost every year and build that into the rate. Just like they build the cost of hurricanes ans flood recovery into the rates.

Second, the states and the Feds can amend tort law to hold that trespassing on the ROW is not litagateable. Whether there is sufficient political will to do this is another matter. In many cases, it would require the ROW to be surveyed and posted, a la FEC. It is questionable if CSX would entertain that for their entire system, or even some critical parts thereof.

But if you wreck while speeding, you've bought the consequences.....

We all know that one factor would have changed the whole story...if the boy had stayed off the railroad tracks where he didn't belong. It's as simple as that. When you mix into the story the fact that the engineer was probably not following the rules of a failed EOT, and a sympathetic jury, you get the actual result. As an engineer myself, I can't say I wouldn't put a train in emergency in the same situation, but we all know, if you are that close, it wouldn't make any difference. If people would stay off of railroad property, there would be no pedestrian fatalities. Trains don't kill smart people, but they sure thin the herd of stupid ones.

NormSchultze Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are a couple points to consider.
>
> First, these awards, whether they make sense to us
> or not just go into the freight rate. CSX has loss
> data going back years, thru all kinds of mishaps.
> They have a good idea what losses will cost every
> year and build that into the rate. Just like they
> build the cost of hurricanes ans flood recovery
> into the rates.
>
> Second, the states and the Feds can amend tort law
> to hold that trespassing on the ROW is not
> litagateable. Whether there is sufficient
> political will to do this is another matter. In
> many cases, it would require the ROW to be
> surveyed and posted, a la FEC. It is questionable
> if CSX would entertain that for their entire
> system, or even some critical parts thereof.
>
> But if you wreck while speeding, you've bought the
> consequences.....

Excellent point. Juries are often sympathetic to tragic outcomes, and tend to overlook the stupid decisions that caused those outcomes.

MagnumForce Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is a civil trial not a criminal trial, proof
> beyond a shadow of a doubt is not required. Any
> negligence at all makes CSX at least partially
> liable.
>
> I really wonder how many of you people who always
> shout "idiot jury" have ever actually been on a
> jury.


I am not a lawyer and I don't claim to be one but I was always led to believe that prosecutor's job was to make a case based on evidence to show the defendant's guilt. It's a good defence atty's job to show plausible alternative scenarios to produce "reasonable doubt" that the defendant committed the crime. It is the job of the jury to decide whose case prevails. Nowhere is required to prove guilt "beyond a shadow of a doubt".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/12 20:33 by mkostecky.

Extrasouth, I don't think you could have said it any better! Your are 100% correct, if he would of stayed off property that he wasn't suppose to be on, none of this would have happened. E'nuff said!

Posted from Android

I was Brent. And I was one of two that "hung the jury" as we were not as easily persuaded by the prosecutor as the rest of the jury. I found out then and there that prosecutors as just as sleazy as some defense lawyers because they want to make a name for themselves and get promoted. The Jury supervisor was so mad at me that she slammed her fist on the table as she just wanted to go home.


MagnumForce Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> I really wonder how many of you people who always
> shout "idiot jury" have ever actually been on a
> jury.

I'm glad you made her mad. You should have stood your ground.

A couple of points:

First, there is no prosecutor if this is a civil trial. So it's solely a matter of one side pleading a civil case against another side pleading a civil case. And the standard of proof is "preponderance of the evidence" not "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Second, if you try to teach the jury anything about railroading (anything that isn't in the trial record) you will be thrown off the jury. You aren't supposed to be bringing specialized information into the deliberation.

Yes, a jury of idiots, even though there will always be idiots defending other idiots.

If some of the comments on the article's website are to be believed, the dad is a police officer, the mom a school principal, and the jury found CSX 60% liable and the trespassing instigator just 40% liable. Jury of idiots.

Compounded by a media full of idiots and political activist Utopians that helps idiots stay idiots. In a quick search of google, most of the written articles have no mention of trespassing. Can't find any that discuss percent of liability applied to the parties involved, composition of the jury, etc. Things that used to be standard in reporting of a trial, at least in the local community's media outlets. Too much reporting has been dumbed down, politicized, and emotionalized. Default story pitch of the noble downtrodden everywoman vs. the evil corporation.

Love the idiotic statement that CSX is a big corporation so $1.6 million won't hurt them. Are you aware of how much they penny pinch every little thing out here to save money? Sure there is some money set aside for contingencies, but $1.6 does matter and does add up. Are you aware how many CSX workers are currently furloughed right now?

You want to tell those furlough guys that CSX won't be impacted by $1.6 million and it won't affect how soon they are recalled? You really think they will buy that? Those are 'the little guys' you libs always claim you are helping by robbing those 'evil corporations' via ridiculous lawsuits, taxes, and handouts to the lazy and schemers. Gonna now run to mommy mod and get this post pulled or the thread closed once again when someone eviscerates the lib cut-n-paste arguments?

BTW, obviously it would have been better for the engineer to have applied some dynamics or maybe a little air earlier. Sometimes people freeze or delay because they have a hard time immediately believing something truly awful is really about to happen. But going too far and putting a train in emergency has the potential risk of a derailment, a risk increased if there really was no communication with the EOT. It isn't so simple as the simpletons and dishonest lawyers would have you believe.

I'm curious about the jury composition, because from the info so far (albeit imperfect), this judgement seems clearly to be based on (manipulated) emotions rather than facts.

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, a jury of idiots, even though there will
> always be idiots defending other idiots.
>
> If some of the comments on the article's website
> are to be believed, the dad is a police officer,
> the mom a school principal, and the jury found CSX
> 60% liable and the trespassing instigator just 40%
> liable. Jury of idiots.

If you want some real fun, check out decisions based on "joint and several liability". Many states have it.

Simply put, if you are found even 10% liable for somebody else's injuries, you could be forced to pay 100% of the damages if the other at fault parties are unable to pay.

Guy goes to your bar, and has two drinks. Walks out into the parking lot, and consumes a quart of vodka provided by a no good unemployed buddy as they sit in the car.

Drives off into the night with his headlights off, and hits a single mom returning from her second job, as she crosses a dark street entirely dressed in trendy black.

Your bar and the liquor store would end up paying all of the judgement in many states. Even though neither was able to anticipate the outcome of perfectly legal transactions.



>
> Compounded by a media full of idiots and political
> activist Utopians that helps idiots stay idiots.
> In a quick search of google, most of the written
> articles have no mention of trespassing. Can't
> find any that discuss percent of liability applied
> to the parties involved, composition of the jury,
> etc. Things that used to be standard in reporting
> of a trial, at least in the local community's
> media outlets. Too much reporting has been dumbed
> down, politicized, and emotionalized. Default
> story pitch of the noble downtrodden everywoman
> vs. the evil corporation.
>
> Love the idiotic statement that CSX is a big
> corporation so $1.6 million won't hurt them. Are
> you aware of how much they penny pinch every
> little thing out here to save money? Sure there
> is some money set aside for contingencies, but
> $1.6 does matter and does add up. Are you aware
> how many CSX workers are currently furloughed
> right now?
>
> You want to tell those furlough guys that CSX
> won't be impacted by $1.6 million and it won't
> affect how soon they are recalled? You really
> think they will buy that? Those are 'the little
> guys' you libs always claim you are helping by
> robbing those 'evil corporations' via ridiculous
> lawsuits, taxes, and handouts to the lazy and
> schemers. Gonna now run to mommy mod and get this
> post pulled or the thread closed once again when
> someone eviscerates the lib cut-n-paste
> arguments?
>
> BTW, obviously it would have been better for the
> engineer to have applied some dynamics or maybe a
> little air earlier. Sometimes people freeze or
> delay because they have a hard time immediately
> believing something truly awful is really about to
> happen. But going too far and putting a train in
> emergency has the potential risk of a derailment,
> a risk increased if there really was no
> communication with the EOT. It isn't so simple as
> the simpletons and dishonest lawyers would have
> you believe.
>
> I'm curious about the jury composition, because
> from the info so far (albeit imperfect), this
> judgement seems clearly to be based on
> (manipulated) emotions rather than facts.


Jury selection is an art form. Manipulating the jury is pure theater, exciting to watch when experts play the game

Well said, darkcloud. Thank you!

I did stand my ground, and so did the other juror.

jukeman5391 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm glad you made her mad. You should have stood
> your ground.