 |
Re: Mr. Bruce: Re: Metrolink Safety Panel report
Author: John Bruce
Date: 01-10-2009 - 09:19
Dr. Z said, "But first, let us all pause for a minute of silence in observance of National Armchair Expert Day."
Well, let's keep in mind that in a free society, citizens/taxpayers/passengers are entitled to make up their minds based on what they read or see in the press. So let's walk back the cat:
1. Connex, a company with a bad safety reputation, hires Sanchez, who has a record of a shoplifting felony arrest that was plea bargained to a misdemeanor specifically so he could continue to pursue a rail career. (Wow. Sounds like the kind of employee you'd want, huh?)
2. Sanchez is the engineer in a head-on which is 99.999% certain caused by Sanchez texting. It appears that this is a habit he's picked up over time. Common sense (aka armchair expertise) suggests this is conduct so bizarre that it had to have attracted notice.
3. A lawyer for some of the victims says he has a witness who in fact had noticed Sanchez's texting and had complained about it. (Some news accounts say twice, by the way.) Connex, accourding to this account, blew it off. The allegation also asserts a supervisor found a personal cell phone switched on in Sanchez's grip, but this also came to nothing. Again, assuming Sanchez had a habit of texting while at the throttle, it sounds completely credible that someone would notice this and report it.
It seems to me that there are two interesting points of view on this forum. One, represented by Dr. Zarkoff, seems based on a primitive sense of job entitlement, and says nobody should be penalized for rule violations, and anyone who says otherwise is just an armchair expert. After all, Dr. Z wasn't one of the killed and injured at CP Topanga.
Another, represented by OPRRMS, who it seems to me should know better, seems to be that by a series of logical hail-Mary plays, you can argue that nothing happened here that was anybody's fault. The rules against x,y, and z weren't exactly in effect at exactly the right time, in exactly the right ambient temperature, and so we're all just gonna shrug it off. Anyhow, Hillenbrand claims the signal was green. Sounds like the elderly railroaders I've come to know elsewhere.
Our legal system provides for accountability in situations like this when all else fails, and it does seem that all else has failed, at least for the dead and injured. OPRRMS seems all bent out of shape that a lawyer with expertise in the rail industry should be representing some of these victims.
As a member of the informed public, I'm entitled to draw my own conclusions, about Sanchez and about the guys who seem to want to circle the wagons.
Well, let's keep in mind that in a free society, citizens/taxpayers/passengers are entitled to make up their minds based on what they read or see in the press. So let's walk back the cat:
1. Connex, a company with a bad safety reputation, hires Sanchez, who has a record of a shoplifting felony arrest that was plea bargained to a misdemeanor specifically so he could continue to pursue a rail career. (Wow. Sounds like the kind of employee you'd want, huh?)
2. Sanchez is the engineer in a head-on which is 99.999% certain caused by Sanchez texting. It appears that this is a habit he's picked up over time. Common sense (aka armchair expertise) suggests this is conduct so bizarre that it had to have attracted notice.
3. A lawyer for some of the victims says he has a witness who in fact had noticed Sanchez's texting and had complained about it. (Some news accounts say twice, by the way.) Connex, accourding to this account, blew it off. The allegation also asserts a supervisor found a personal cell phone switched on in Sanchez's grip, but this also came to nothing. Again, assuming Sanchez had a habit of texting while at the throttle, it sounds completely credible that someone would notice this and report it.
It seems to me that there are two interesting points of view on this forum. One, represented by Dr. Zarkoff, seems based on a primitive sense of job entitlement, and says nobody should be penalized for rule violations, and anyone who says otherwise is just an armchair expert. After all, Dr. Z wasn't one of the killed and injured at CP Topanga.
Another, represented by OPRRMS, who it seems to me should know better, seems to be that by a series of logical hail-Mary plays, you can argue that nothing happened here that was anybody's fault. The rules against x,y, and z weren't exactly in effect at exactly the right time, in exactly the right ambient temperature, and so we're all just gonna shrug it off. Anyhow, Hillenbrand claims the signal was green. Sounds like the elderly railroaders I've come to know elsewhere.
Our legal system provides for accountability in situations like this when all else fails, and it does seem that all else has failed, at least for the dead and injured. OPRRMS seems all bent out of shape that a lawyer with expertise in the rail industry should be representing some of these victims.
As a member of the informed public, I'm entitled to draw my own conclusions, about Sanchez and about the guys who seem to want to circle the wagons.
