I said what I've done in such situations and have a safety record to prove it.

Where is your proof for your theory that the engineer, intentionally and deliberately, hit this poor innocent truck? Where is this evidence for any claim that he didn't use the brakes, or had deliberately intended not to stop, or failed to take action to stop prior to impact?

Since this is mostly on a relatively flat section, and then even goes on a bit of a downhill grade, accelerating from the Station stop, the engineer could have easily had the train up to fifty plus mph., on this segment of the 70 mph passenger speed limit track (if I recall correctly, and nothing has changed there?, by the time he reached this intersection, if the engineer had truly not braked.

Since we have reasonably consistent reports of the impact speed range. I would have to guess, this engineer would have needed to do something to slow the train down to "15 or 20 mph." at or before impact. And, since you have no proof of your heinous but dubious accusations against this engineer, I'm going to have to guess he did brake the train before impact..... But, we'll just have to wait for those pesky facts, won't we?

As to witnesses about horns, well all sorts of folks see and hear, or not see and hear, or mishear, or are just confused, and remember different things, sometimes differently, during traumatic events.

So, I'll just have to wait for the other interviews before I put much stock in that, or have reviewed the other possibility, that the engineer, after hitting big hole, ran back into the car to get away from the point of impact, warning the passengers, like at Placentia...and maybe decided not to stay and blow the horn for that reason?

Then, of course, there are "eye witnesses", and then there are real "eye witnesses"....

Did you know that at the Covina fatality a few years back, a fella just showed up, and told all of the TV reporters and the cops that he was "there" and that the gates did not come down. Well, it turned out he was a "professional eye witness" at trains crashes, who had received court appearance fees from attorney's suing RR's. And, low and behold, when the authorities reviewed the tapes from the cameras on the train, and found that the were gates all the way down, and had even scraped the paint off of the hood of the car, as this individual continued into the path of the oncoming train and certain death. The cops arrested him for giving a false police report, and ruined his lucrative career as a professional RR trial perjurer, forever.

So even eyewitnesses are often not always entirely reliable sources, and even when they are, there perspective is still just limited to the part may have seen, not the complete story of events elsewhere, which may have been happening out of there sight.

I know that mundane explanations are just so boring, often having to do with things like sheer stupid, or even more common failures like malfunctioning gates. Certainly they are mundane compared to a phantasmagoric story line about an evil RR engineer, intentionally doing what would or could certainly be construed as a deliberate terrorist act, endangering his life and his passengers, in cahoots with all of the trial lawyers, by deliberately hitting that poor innocent truck. Which I believe was the theory you have put forth on this incident initially, right? And, which I'm still gonna call bull$#it, until you can show me anything real which proves otherwise.