Join the discussion on the following article:
Defendants post bail in Lac-Mégantic case
Wow, I rarely if ever hear anyone arrested here for accidents that take lives whether negligent or not. If anybody knows of a case in the U.S.A. let me know. This is the first I’ve heard, but I know it’s from Canada. The swat thing, a little too overboard I think.
If i remember correctly, the Fire in the locomotives was in the United States, and the explosion was in Canada.
If so, then there is not a way for the firemen to be arrested without an international incedent that would not be good for either country.
Mr. McFadden, a firefighter has training to mitigate a fire with some extra training/pre-fire planning as to specific hazards one may come face to face with in one’s jurisdiction. In an area where there is a nuclear power plant there will be an on site fire brigade with mutual assistance available from the local fire company. Would you expect the local firefighters to be able to shut down the plant safely with no assistance? They are not trained to that level (and not licensed to do so). That is the responsibility of the owner of the potential hazard. That is who we see being prosecuted here.
IF law enforcement had probable cause to use force (i.e. statements overheard or in writing indicating a suspect intended to resist arrest with a firearm) then their actions were justified. Otherwise it was a shameful show.
Mr. Benham, the first responders DID call the railroad and someone from the railroad came to the scene and declared it “safe.” Firefighters involved with an industrial property are not allowed to leave the scene (at least in the USA) until someone, a municipal representative like a fire marshal or subject matter expert from the owner of the property, has declared the scene safe. As far as I can tell from my experience and written accounts everything the first responders did was by the book.
Shows what a banana republicCanada really is. Only the frogs would do this.
I’m embarrassed to be Canadian.
Britt Reid,
…rarely for accidents…negligent or not…
I can’t supply a tort but in California, a charge can be brought for negligent homicide or negligent manslaughter…
F’rinstance: How fast can this thing go?
At 100 nautical miles an hour a trolling fisher crosses your bow.
Down on Folsom lake, now, they’re looking for the 100 mph boat that, had anyone survived, there was no intention of mayhem intended, doesn’t insulate the captain/helmsman from recklessly, and stupidly, killing a person, or people.
How much time and legal work, has been used on an absurd legal thought that a train should be run in a way that it must stop before smashing a motor vehicle at a crossing, obliterating a family?
Is that negligent killing?
So, have enjoyable contemplation on this…
BRITT REID III from FLORIDA said: Wow, I rarely if ever hear anyone arrested here for accidents that take lives whether negligent or not. If anybody knows of a case in the U.S.A. let me know. Mr Reid this is a reality commercial truck drivers face all the time if involved in a fatality accident no matter the cause. Personally I’ll take Quebec civil law over US common law it gives authorities a lot of lee way. I’ve been on the good side of this after an accident outside Montreal.
The firemen wee in contact with an MM&A employee. MM&A failed to secure the train after the fire.
Firefighters put out a fire, that’s what they’re supposed to do. They didn’t make the decision to park a train loaded with oil on a downward grade toward a town.
I agree with Mr. McFadden, what about the firefighters, who failed to contact the MM&A?
I’m not saying they were at fault, just seems like this circus is after anyone connected that night.
Sounds like a real circus court holding it in a sports complex. Why weren’t the firefighters who shut down the locomotive and caused this accident arrested also?
Shouldn’t Ed Burckhardt bear some responsibility for this accident? Seems to me by employing one person to run the train is pennywise and pound foolish. There needs to be at least two employees in the cab.
Lets follow the rationale: Burkhardt was doing with a one man crew what the governing authority allowed. If you are looking to get Mr. Burkhardt then get those who allowed one man crews.
Its stupid to run trains with only a single individual. Those officials, acting on behalf of the public safety, should know this.
I’d love to know why the sudden obsession with punishing firefighters for doing their job.
- An MM&A employee was ON THE SCENE when they turned off the engine. This was widely reported AT THE TIME. Whoever claimed they never notified the MM&A is making stuff up. There is no basis for this claim, the exact opposite has been reported in virtually every story about the incident that mentions the firefighter’s role.
- Turning off an engine is a required step in putting out a fire, it stops fuel from being recirculated.
- Had the locomotive been allowed to burn instead, the engine would have failed anyway.
This has nothing to do with the firefighters. I know we’re legitimately angry at the scapegoating of Harding here, but that doesn’t give license to lash out at other innocent parties too.
@JIM NORTON - I think the last thing the industry needs are regulators who insist on micromanaging railroads even more than they do.
The decision to run one-man crews was the MM&A’s alone. That they were “allowed” to do so is neither here nor there. MM&A was required, as we all are all the time, to use its best judgement as to whether something it could legally do was the appropriate thing to do.
(This is not to comment on the one man crew debate, merely the idea that regulators should bear responsibility for “not banning” things when the brown stuff hits the fan. Otherwise regulators are going to be banning a lot of things in future. Let’s start by banning all cars. They’re always going wrong, right?)
Mr. Cleveland; All the issues occured in Quebec
There was a photo taken near Nantes, of the locomotive on fire. All stuff about the fire being in the US is wrong.
Well for one thing , working for the railroad up here in Canada, I could tell you that for the past 30 years safety has become a declining issue, Profits first and if something happens then we’ll find some scapegoats to blame. First the goverment cut so many RR. inspectors, (especially the conservatives) that the only way to have a certain control was to give the railroads the safety management control (otherwisely said the goverment OK’d to the RR’s to make up their own safety rules, otherwisely said, the fox is in control of the hen house)) then some one at the TSB (Transportation Safety Board), would accept them, get them modified or refuse them (if they have time) , let me tell you that most were accected and that most if not all blame comes down to the operating employees,) As for the one man crew used on MMA, most probable, the argument that Burkardt and Co. must have used is that they do it on the Quebec, North Shore and Labrador RR… So probably without the TSB doing a risk management study it was accepted), the only difference being that the QNS&L carries iron ore has maybe 6 public crossings and not switching to do on the trip, not by far the exact situation on tthe MMA. Secondly, the dispatcher could of call back the engineer, but probably because of Corporate instructions and to keep costs down,(if you call back the engineer after his worked hours, the MMA would have had to call another engineer to finish the run while still paying the engineer that would of started one of the trailing units, there were a total of 6 units on that train, to keep the air on the train) and we would’nt be talking of all this )get the picture ( money money money ). Furthermore there were 8 occasions were the MMA had runaways in different locations along the railroad without the TSB intervening, Without removing all the blame from the three that were arrested, the list should also read the federal minister of transport, the TSB management ( who get their orders from the minister of transport) , of c