Another trespasser death

It is reported that a teenage girl has been killed on the railway near to
Wrexham this evening.

Ken Ward.

"DB." <anon@anon.tesco.net> wrote in message
news:E4Sqh.516$8j7.162@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Ken Ward" <ken.g1itv@MTLworld.com> wrote in message
> news:%XRqh.58049$KT2.37651@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>> It is reported that a teenage girl has been killed on the railway near to
>> Wrexham this evening.
>>
>> Ken Ward.
>
>
> A little more at:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6265307.stm
>
> FWIW, that says "the incident is believed to involve a young boy".
>
and at a footcrossing I believe.

KW

>the rest of the group ran off

Obviously up to something bad then. So kind of them to abandon their
friend though.

Still a tragic incicident and a great shame. My thoughts with all
those involved.

Chris Tolley wrote:
> The second word of the subject line is presumably the point at issue.

That raises an interesting point. Assuming the girl was on an official
foot crossing, would she have had the legal right to remain on that
crossing even if a train imminently required the same bit of land for
its passage? Has it ever been tested in court, I don't know.

George

furnessvale wrote:

> Chris Tolley wrote:
> > The second word of the subject line is presumably the point at issue.
>
> That raises an interesting point. Assuming the girl was on an official
> foot crossing, would she have had the legal right to remain on that
> crossing even if a train imminently required the same bit of land for
> its passage? Has it ever been tested in court, I don't know.
>
> George

A court can make whatever rulings it wants, but the rules of physics
will remain the same.

In message <%XRqh.58049$KT2.37651@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>, at 21:00:43 on
Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Ken Ward <ken.g1itv@MTLworld.com> remarked:
>It is reported that a teenage girl has been killed on the railway near to
>Wrexham this evening.

Probably not a trespasser, but a foot crossing user.

However, there is on average about one trespasser a week killed on the
railways, but not all become national news. Incidents on consecutive
days will happen sometimes at random.
--
Roland Perry

On 16 Jan 2007 01:52:16 -0800, "Mizter T" <mizter.t@> wrote:

>furnessvale wrote:
>
>> Chris Tolley wrote:
>> > The second word of the subject line is presumably the point at issue.
>>
>> That raises an interesting point. Assuming the girl was on an official
>> foot crossing, would she have had the legal right to remain on that
>> crossing even if a train imminently required the same bit of land for
>> its passage? Has it ever been tested in court, I don't know.
>>
>> George
>
>A court can make whatever rulings it wants, but the rules of physics
>will remain the same.
>
If she deliberately "remained" she would be a trespasser as she would
have ceased using the crossing for the purpose of passage. A Coroner
might eventually tease a few more facts from the available evidence
but if no-one apart from the unfortunate driver saw her then it could
remain a mystery why she was on the crossing at the wrong time.

":Jerry:" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message
news:45ad1dd2$0$97226$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>
> "Ken Ward" <ken.g1itv@MTLworld.com> wrote in message
> news:Ky7rh.62082$UC.58961@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>>
> <snip>
>>
>> You chose to reply to the message. If the thread is wrongly titled then
>> tell us what it should be??
>>
>
> "Another death" ?...

Is that to protect your sensibilities or were the gang not trespassers?

KW