# 98(2/20/14) Delayed Jesup GA-CSX train strikes trespassers-Doctortown



## RampWidget (Feb 20, 2014)

98(20) Delayed Jesup account CSX train striking trespassers at Doctortown

A northbound CSX intermodal train struck several persons trespassing on the Altamaha River trestle at Doctortown, Ga. This is between Savannah & Jesup. Reports from first responders at the scene are one fatality, one critically injured, and one with unknown injuries.

98(20) is stopped at Jesup waiting for the local authorities to complete their investigation. 52(20) is not too far behind and could potentially be delayed as well.

http://www.wsav.com/story/24780061/one-killed-two-injured-in-wayne-county-train-accident


----------



## NE933 (Feb 20, 2014)

Drivel media reporting:

1. This is NOT a train accident.

2. Filming by the track on a bridge. Huh? Was the track on the bridge? Were they near the track on the bridge or off the bridge and by the track?

3. ~ they do have deputies and a witness on the scene ~ So are they law enforcement? Interns? And who's the witness in relation to the filming crew? Since it was caught on film why should we bother with a witness?

4. Why did a group of filming idiots decide to endanger themselves by going onto a railroad bridge with freight and passenger trains running daily? Why isn't anyone at WSAV asking that question?


----------



## RampWidget (Feb 20, 2014)

News has already hit Hollywood...

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/midnight-rider-crew-member-killed-in-georgia-train-accident-1201114468/


----------



## RampWidget (Feb 20, 2014)

52(20) now stopped at Jesup behind 98(20)


----------



## RampWidget (Feb 20, 2014)

98(20) moving again after about a 2 hour 45 minute delay; 52(20) moving again after about a 40 minute delay.


----------



## SarahZ (Feb 20, 2014)

> The crew, including director Randall Miller, had placed a bed on the tracks for the scene and was expecting two trains on the local bridge, one in each direction, when a third train arrived unexpectedly.A whistle warned the crew members of the next train, giving them less than a minute, which was too late.
> 
> Miller, who also directed the 2008 film “Bottle Shock,” and the still photographer* rushed to get the bed off the tracks while the rest of the crew tried to get off the bridge on a plank walk-way*. They were still trying to get off the bridge when the train arrived.The second camera assistant was then struck and killed by the train.


Just run! Why on earth would you try to save that?


----------



## MrFSS (Feb 20, 2014)

Did the movie company have permission from CSX to be on the bridge? If so, you'd think there would have been some type of communication going on!


----------



## SarahZ (Feb 20, 2014)

I wondered the same thing. They said they "expected" two trains, but did they have a timetable or just go by what they'd heard/witnessed or what?

I figured, with permission from CSX, they'd have someone there with a radio who could monitor traffic and let them know when it was okay to film and when it was time to clear. They could also hold trains in a block until it was clear, yes?


----------



## RampWidget (Feb 20, 2014)

The production company did not have permission to be on CSX property, I understand. That's why they were considered to be trespassers upon private property.

edit: clarity, as usual


----------



## ACS-64 (Feb 20, 2014)

MrFSS said:


> Did the movie company have permission from CSX to be on the bridge? If so, you'd think there would have been some type of communication going on!


That is my big question too. The circumstances with the information shared so far do not follow logical standard operating procedures. If CSX gave permission and was allowing such a filming on the active rail line there would've been a lot more protections place, like flag/watchmen on the ground and speed restrictions. Doesn't sound like a situation that would've made it through the legal department nor approved due to liability regardless.


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 20, 2014)

Aloha

Generally when a commercial "film" apply for a County film permit they are required to submit a record of all Private permissions receive for any access to private land before a county permit is done. If they failed to do this, including the supporting insurance, I feel real sorry for the injured as worker comp will not cover.

What a legal, stupid mess!


----------



## FriskyFL (Feb 20, 2014)

This was akin to a mass suicide attempt, not an "accident". Mindless lemmings.


----------



## afigg (Feb 20, 2014)

NE933 said:


> Drivel media reporting:
> 
> 1. This is NOT a train accident.
> 
> ...


This was a breaking news story. The WSAV report that was linked to was a very brief early report. Questions and more information will be in updated reports that are now showing up. I don't see the problem with the initial WSAV report. And yes, it appeared to have been an accident involving a train, so a train accident is a legit description.

Based on the later news, there will be a lot of questions as to why the film crew was on the bridge and what the heck was going on.


----------



## Nathanael (Feb 20, 2014)

Good grief. They knew it was an active railroad line, and they trespassed on a BRIDGE? Darwin Award time.


----------



## MrFSS (Feb 21, 2014)

GG-1 said:


> Aloha
> 
> Generally when a commercial "film" apply for a County film permit they are required to submit a record of all Private permissions receive for any access to private land before a county permit is done. If they failed to do this, including the supporting insurance, I feel real sorry for the injured as worker comp will not cover.
> 
> What a legal, stupid mess!


Eric - why wouldn't it be a work comp claim? Work comp does not deny based on stupidity! I handled WC claims in many states for 25 years. Everything I read here lends itself to being covered. Maybe Georgia has strange laws, but I would think the victims would be fully covered. Only thing that would keep them from being covered is if they were independent contractors and not employees of the film company. And there is case law around that sometimes even allows the independent contractor to fall under the WC policy of the business they work for.


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2014)

MrFSS said:


> Eric - why wouldn't it be a work comp claim? Work comp does not deny based on stupidity! I handled WC claims in many states for 25 years. Everything I read here lends itself to being covered. Maybe Georgia has strange laws, but I would think the victims would be fully covered. Only thing that would keep them from being covered is if they were independent contractors and not employees of the film company. And there is case law around that sometimes even allows the independent contractor to fall under the WC policy of the business they work for.


Do WC claims cover people while they engaged in an illegal act (trespass in this case)?


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2014)

Now that it has been established that the film crew DID have permission to be on the bridge, perhaps certain posters would like to modify their initial remarks.


----------



## FriskyFL (Feb 21, 2014)

Guest said:


> Now that it has been established that the film crew DID have permission to be on the bridge, perhaps certain posters would like to modify their initial remarks.


What is your source for this? I'd find it highly unlikely thst CSX would give permission to film on a busy main line at any time of day.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Ryan (Feb 21, 2014)

The article in the first post has been updated, a Deputy Sheriff says that they had CSX permission.

We'll have to wait and see how the facts play out in this one.


----------



## FriskyFL (Feb 21, 2014)

RyanS said:


> The article in the first post has been updated, a Deputy Sheriff says that they had CSX permission.
> 
> We'll have to wait and see how the facts play out in this one.


If that's indeed the case (which I'd seriously doubt), then a whole herd of plaintiff's lawyers will be descending on SE Georgia real soon.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Ispolkom (Feb 21, 2014)

Then there's this article where it says that the incident is being investigated "as a homicide."


----------



## Karl1459 (Feb 21, 2014)

A similar incident near Seattle on January 18. http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/kats-report/2014/jan/19/jeff-ray-member-jersey-boys-band-killed-after-bein/

Trains are becoming more mainstream and tracks seem to be viewed as "sexy". Look at the numbers of music videos that feature people on tracks. Unfortunatly this leads to a mindset of complacency for those who view the videos who do not have any realizaton of the dangers of being in the operating area of railroads.


----------



## MrFSS (Feb 21, 2014)

Ispolkom said:


> Then there's this article where it says that the incident is being investigated "as a homicide."


And, the interesting quote from that article is: _*The sheriff's office was also able to confirm that the crew had both companies permission to film. *_ Both being _*CSX Railroad*_ and _*Rayioner.*_


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2014)

RyanS said:


> The article in the first post has been updated, a Deputy Sheriff says that they had CSX permission.
> 
> We'll have to wait and see how the facts play out in this one.


CSX gave them permission to put props, like a bed, across their active tracks? If true, I hope their families end up owning CSX.


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2014)

Why not wait until the facts are in before assigning blame for this event? It is astonishing how quick people are to condemn both the victims and the media that are trying to get a breaking story out.


----------



## Henry Kisor (Feb 21, 2014)

It's also possible that the incident is being investigated as a negligent homicide. As one of many possible instances, someone may have blown off the responsibilty of telling the film crew that a third train had been added to the mix.

Homicide does not always involve murder.


----------



## VentureForth (Feb 21, 2014)

This is indeed a tragedy. Greg Allman lives near me, and though I don't think he was on location at the time, I'm sure he's very distraught.

The information being slowly regurgitated inlcude the following:

There was a 20 person crew with permission by CSX and Rayonier to film a biopic about Greg Allman's life. They were advised by CSX that there would be two trains coming through. After the two trains came through, the film crew set up a bed and/or mattress on the trestle to film a "dream sequence". At that time, a third train that nobody on the crew seemed to know about, came through and 1 female camera assistant was killed, two more were critically injured, one being airlifted to Savannah, and 5 more injured that weren't quite as bad.

Rayonier is the landowner of most of that area - A papermill, if I recall correctly. Access to where they filmed would require permission from Rayonier, but that's the limit of Rayonier's involvment. The contact with the train was solely CSX and the film crew's responsibility. Why no one seemed to know a third train would be coming through at presumably 50 MPH is beyond me.

I think everyone here has it figured right - There was no tresspass, there was an accident, and unfortunately, there will probably NEVER be filming on CSX's track allowed ever again.

The trestle that they were on is in and of itself very interesting. It's a drawbridge, but only draws over a very small trickle of the river. I guess the river has rerouted since the bridge was installed...

I think a better place to have filmed would have been on the Shortline trestle over the Jerico River. It only sees one train, twice a day. A bit harder to get to, but with good coordination, they could have probably Hi-Railed it out there.


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 21, 2014)

MrFSS said:


> GG-1 said:
> 
> 
> > Aloha
> ...


Aloha

My concern about the work-comp insurance being valid is due to what I have seen on movie shoots I have been involved with. I also have been involved with Labor Payroll. Also I wrote sporting when I meant Supporting Insurance. I corrected My bad typing..

So the reason I am worry about the workers is the way insurance companies use technicalities to ad void paying claims. A friend was denied a claim when he slipped and fell on lava rock, he was 2 feet off the authorized path. Another time a Hollywood Camera operator died from a freak accident of a wave being larger than expected.

So that is why I am concerned. However the information now coming out, seems to say the were following all rules, so I am now less concerned.


----------



## MattW (Feb 22, 2014)

I think this can go here, in relation to the post about rails becoming more attractive for filming. This was posted on another forum and was apparently filmed not far from where I live on the same line that runs through my town.

http://www.mtv.com/videos/misc/958195/alexs-it-can-wait-stoy.jhtml

Regardless of any shooting permissions they may have gotten, the video basically says "hey don't do something dangerous" by showing someone doing something dangerous. I think with this latest incident, I may e-mail the local news agencies about this, not to embarrass or cause the girl to be charged (though personally, I'd like that), simply to see if one will run a PSA about not being on tracks, I'm seeing too much of it here lately.

[EDIT]

New article on Variety says they only had permission to be on the property around the tracks, but not necessarily the tracks themselves. I can see the railroad wanting to tell the crew about the trains as a courtesy so the crew can keep the trains and horns out of their shots. Though if I were the railroad, I would not provide such a courtesy, too much chance of something like this happening with people thinking they will always know when any train is going to come.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/investigator-midnight-rider-crew-wasnt-supposed-to-be-on-tracks-1201115835/


----------



## VentureForth (Feb 22, 2014)

...and that is reiterated in this DailyMail.co.uk article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565388/They-did-not-permission-train-tracks-Investigators-say-film-crew-involved-deadly-accident-never-heavily-trafficked-line.html

So either CSX is backpedaling because they are freaking out or they are in the right. I have been up for about an hour and have heard no fewer than 3 trains go by. This is a busy line. Of course when I want to railfan, I could sit for hours with nothing...

I guess we'll have to see how this all hashes out.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3 using the Android Amtrak Forums mobile app


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 23, 2014)

Aloha

From reading messages from film and movie sources I learned the production studio has a web site. What I read, seems to me, is not good. It appears that the permissions for the shoot were inadequate, Also seems that insufficient safety standards were not met. i.e. no safethy meeting with cast and crew before entering track area. Also the track was not flagged. Some said that PA's (Production Assistants) were sent down the track to watch for trains. Comments seem to suggest they were 1/4 mile from the bridge. Depending on the allowable speed of the train this would be way to close it allow enough time for the crew to clear the bridge.

Another thing that bothers me is from the reports I read that while CSX gave some kind of permission to Film their tracks, no rail Representative was at the filming site. This, to me, suggest that CSX was not expecting the crew would be on the tracks, just near the tracks.


----------



## MattW (Feb 23, 2014)

The 2005 CSX Timetable lists the speeds as 79, passenger, 70 intermodal, and 60 other freight. The site (at least back then) was decently in the middle of that speed zone so that even though there are slower zones around it, trains would likely be able to accelerate out of them by the time they reached the bridge. I think the closest lower speed zone was 8 miles from the Doctortown control point.


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 23, 2014)

Aloha

Pasted Below is from an I.A.T.S.E. site on the situation. What is said is shocking to say the least.



> Heath Hood
> This is an updated from my 491 union president.
> 
> Status Update
> ...


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 24, 2014)

Aloha

Another article, This one from Variety, an entertainment daily. http://variety.com/2014/film/news/investigator-midnight-rider-crew-wasnt-supposed-to-be-on-tracks-1201115835/


----------



## Ispolkom (Feb 25, 2014)

Now, apparently, CSX is maintaining that the film crew was denied permission to film on the trestle.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 25, 2014)

> In the incident report, released to local reporters on Monday, Wayne County Sheriff Sergeant Ben Robertson writes that he witnessed a conversation between executive producer Jay Sedrish and and employee of CSX. “In my presence, Mr. Sedrish was asked by an employee of CSX if he had permission to be on the trestle or tracks and Mr. Sedrish replied, ‘That’s complicated.’


In other words, "No, but I can't really say that right now".


----------



## Bob Dylan (Feb 25, 2014)

Round up the Lawyers and the PR Flacks and as Betty Davis said: "Hold onto your Hats, it's gonna be a Bumpy Ride!"


----------



## Ryan (Feb 25, 2014)

Guest said:


> Now that it has been established that the film crew DID have permission to be on the bridge, perhaps certain posters would like to modify their initial remarks.


I wonder if our anonymous guest would like to come back and revise his remarks.


----------



## Suzy (Feb 27, 2014)

I'm from the area, and a rail historian. So I'm familiar with that bridge. All I know is CSX didn't want to get involved with a bridge down the river from there in Everett when a bike trail was being proposed on the abandoned right of way. They just didn't want to claim ownership or be liable in anyway. So why would they let an Indy film crew on a high old bridge, over the deep and swift Altamaha which has been in flood stage this winter due to heavy rains, AND on a busy main line, a straight shot from the HUGE CSX yard in Waycross to Savannah and the port? Also, what I don't get it, it's a straight line from Waycross to Savannah, we're talking 95 miles. HOW DID THEY NOT SEE IT COMING?! It's like impossible to not hear, see, feel a train that long, that fast, that heavy way in advanced. It's not a monorail or high speed eurotrain. I'm wondering if they wanted to film the train hitting the stuff on the track for the movie? Or did they get tied up removing all the props and cameras, and lights? The other thing, if they where trespassing, how'd he plan to get away with it? It's on film. CSX was gonna get wind of it eventually. Or is it easier to say your sorry later than to ask for permission now? Lawsuit-o-rama. I really think CSX should press charges, Rayonier too, the DNR, Coast Guard, the Georgia Conservancy, and GADOT. They need to make an example of this.


----------



## Suzy (Feb 27, 2014)

Could anyone get me the particulars about the trains themselves. 98(20) and 52(20) I'm doing my own rail research map into the incident and would like the time frames, starting locations, any stops along the way. Where do I find those time tables? Thanks.


----------



## Suzy (Feb 27, 2014)

"The trestle that they were on is in and of itself very interesting. It's a drawbridge, but only draws over a very small trickle of the river. I guess the river has rerouted since the bridge was installed..."

I think the Altamaha has been in flood stage or was a month or so ago.

It's the largest river in GA.



MattW said:


> The 2005 CSX Timetable lists the speeds as 79, passenger, 70 intermodal, and 60 other freight. The site (at least back then) was decently in the middle of that speed zone so that even though there are slower zones around it, trains would likely be able to accelerate out of them by the time they reached the bridge. I think the closest lower speed zone was 8 miles from the Doctortown control point.


Do you know if this was intermodal or other? Looks like stacked containers.

Thanks


----------



## FormerOBS (Feb 27, 2014)

I think I can reply to Suzy's questions.

First, the track is not as straight as suggested. If you pull up a map of the area, you can lay a straightedge across your screen from the point where the track enters your view to the point where it exits. You will see that there is an almost imperceptible jog in the track at the point south of the bridge, where the double track merges into single track and the Rayonier spur comes in from the west. I wondered whether this was just some kind of anomaly in the GPS, but I have talked with railroad operating personnel who have told me that the curve is there. So the approach track is not perfectly straight. Keep that in mind.

The bridge has generally been called a trestle, but this is not quite right. One characteristic of a trestle is the lack of a support structure above the deck. The relevant portion of this bridge was evidently built as a drawbridge. A steel truss structure, made of girders in a sort of lattice configuration, surrounds the track. Keep that in mind.

This train carried intermodal freight. If the train was 100% intermodal, its speed limit was 70 mph. If there were any other types of freight cars in the consist, its speed limit was 60. Not knowing details of the consist, we can surmise that the speed was probably somewhere in the range of 55 to 70 mph. Keep that in mind.

The film crew placed a bed or mattress on the track as a prop. At least one source says it was a gurney as used in hospitals or ambulances. The bed was on the bridge, between the film crew and their only "safe" and practical escape route. Keep that in mind.

Here's my theory:

When the train crew approached the bridge and saw it from a distance, they probably could not see all the way through the truss structure because the slight curve put them at an angle to it. Shadows might have also affected their view. They blew their horn for the nearby grade crossing, probably beginning less than 1/2 mile (30 seconds at 60 mph) from the bridge. Their first clear view through the bridge was when they went through the curve, only a few hundred yards from the point of impact, probably less than 15 seconds from the bridge. They would have initiated an emergency brake application at this point, far too late to avoid the collision.

The film crew scrambled to get clear, but their equipment, the bed, and possibly the bridge itself impeded their movements. The rest, you know. It's possible that this scenario may be incorrect on one or two minor points, but I am convinced this is the most likely sequence of events. We'll see what comes out in the investigation.

Why they thought nobody would ever notice their little prank is anybody's guess.

The other trains mentioned were Amtrak 98(20), which means train 98, the Silver Meteor, from Miami to New York, originating on the 20th of the month. and 52(20), the Auto Train, train 52 from Sanford FL to Lorton VA, originating on the 20th of the month.


----------



## FriskyFL (Feb 27, 2014)

CNN posted a story about the camera assistant that was killed. No mention of the dubious circumstances that led to her demise.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/26/showbiz/slates-for-sarah-elizabeth-jones/index.html?c=us

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Suzy (Feb 28, 2014)

FormerOBS said:


> I think I can reply to Suzy's questions.
> 
> First, the track is not as straight as suggested. If you pull up a map of the area, you can lay a straightedge across your screen from the point where the track enters your view to the point where it exits. You will see that there is an almost imperceptible jog in the track at the point south of the bridge, where the double track merges into single track and the Rayonier spur comes in from the west. I wondered whether this was just some kind of anomaly in the GPS, but I have talked with railroad operating personnel who have told me that the curve is there. So the approach track is not perfectly straight. Keep that in mind.
> 
> ...


This helps a lot! I've only been to that location once, but the fence keeps you pretty far back from the bridge. I couldn't even see the bridge because of trees. I'm trying to map the accident. I'm assuming the train came from Waycross for a straight shot to Savannah. I see that at Rayoneir the tracks do bend northward slightly. Is this what you mean? And thanks for explaining the difference between trestle and bridge. I'm a rail sleuth, but I've got a lot to learn as far as actual rail terms.

So they only had 30 seconds after hearing the horn? No visual, sound of an oncoming train, of vibrations on the track? Or could that have been confused with the sounds from the Rayoneir paper mill and mill pond?


----------



## Suzy (Feb 28, 2014)

Here's some updates, but you guys really have such in-depth knowledge of railroad functions that it's really helped me in my research. How can I find out the trains actual log or time table? How to Railroaders follow trains? How did you know what train it is? Ect.

Thanks!

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/midnight-rider-homicide-probe-focusing-on-who-put-crew-on-bridge-1201122646/


----------



## FormerOBS (Feb 28, 2014)

For Amtrak trains, check Amtrak schedules online. For the freight trains, some folks use a radio scanner to pick up RR conversations, but I don't know the frequencies. Freight trains generally follow an approximate schedule, but there are also extra movements that would be added to the schedule.


----------



## CHamilton (Feb 28, 2014)

Allman film 'shutting down' after Ga. train crash



> SAVANNAH, Ga. —
> 
> Filmmakers have shelved production on a movie about the life of Gregg Allman a week after a freight train killed one crew member and injured seven others, a Savannah city official said Thursday.


----------



## Ispolkom (Mar 6, 2014)

Another story. I'm pretty case-hardened, but this seems appalling to me.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Mar 7, 2014)




----------



## MattW (Apr 19, 2014)

Here's an interesting if off-topic development from the incident: http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/04/18/facebook-crew-boycott-midnight-rider/?hpt=hp_t3

The big story for me from that article though is the comments at the bottom. They run from infuriating to entertaining with some logic in there.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 19, 2014)

Suzy said:


> FormerOBS said:
> 
> 
> > I think I can reply to Suzy's questions.
> ...


Pretty close. Only, train from the south comes in from Jacksonville via the Folkston Funnel then at Jesup rather than Waycross, not that it makes a whole lot of difference...


----------



## MrKenFL (Apr 20, 2014)

Forrest Gump was a genius !

Stupid is as stupid does !

Trains can't stop very easily - I was brought up right near railroad tracks with 40-50 trains per day !

Never had an issue ! Don't know what I was more scared off , a train or Dad's belt if he caught us

playing on the tracks !


----------



## FormerOBS (Apr 21, 2014)

VentureForth: I understand the intermodal freight train was coming from Memphis to Savannah via Waycross. It joined the mainline at Jesup. It did not come up from Jacksonville/Folkston, unless my sources are incorrect


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 21, 2014)

Big oops for me. You are all 100% correct. My brain was on Amtrak and the Silver Meteor that was inconvenienced rather than the train that hit the crew. My apologies.


----------



## FormerOBS (Jul 3, 2014)

The Grand jury returned indictments Wednesday in the death of assistant camera operator Sarah Jones on the set of "Midnight Rider". Announcement was made today that charges of involuntary manslaughter and criminal trespass were filed against Director Randall Miller, and Producers Jody Savin and Jay Sedrich. My sources are news items in VARIETY and the HOLLYWOOD REPORTER.


----------



## Alice (Jul 3, 2014)

LA Times article to augment FormerOBS's post.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 7, 2015)

Filmmakers going to trial

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/allman-filmmakers-stand-trial-fatal-ga-train-crash-29465708


----------



## Ryan (Mar 7, 2015)




----------



## Guest (Mar 7, 2015)

In this day and age of CGI why would anyone go to the trouble to fim at such a location?


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 8, 2015)

Let's see.......Lots of reasons: It's cheaper to do it wrong than right; .......It's quicker; ......less pesky paperwork; ......nobody's going to find out anyway;...... proper procedures are for wimps;......guerrilla filmmaking is macho;...... being a hotshot filmmaker means never having to say you're sorry;......your question indicates a serious lack of a sense of humor.

I'm still wondering whether they ever paid for the hospital bed, which was probably rented.


----------



## KmH (Mar 9, 2015)

Director of Gregg Allman film pleads guilty in train crash death



> As part of the plea deal, Director Randall Miller will spend two years in the county jail and another eight on probation on involuntary manslaughter and criminal trespassing charges. He also will pay a $20,000 fine.


----------



## FriskyFL (Mar 20, 2015)

ABC'S 20/20 airing a program this evening about this incident and the resulting trial.


----------



## CHamilton (Oct 27, 2015)

A Train, a Narrow Trestle and 60 Seconds to Escape: How 'Midnight Rider' Victim Sarah Jones Lost Her Life


----------



## GG-1 (Oct 29, 2015)

CHamilton said:


> A Train, a Narrow Trestle and 60 Seconds to Escape: How 'Midnight Rider' Victim Sarah Jones Lost Her Life


Aloha

This article is old and does not jive with other industry stories, nor with procedures usually followed in the industry. A conviction in this case does show that at least some standards were not followed..


----------



## VentureForth (Jul 10, 2017)

Resurrecting an old thread here...

Sarah Jone's Family is taking CSX to a Jury Trial. They say that two trains that passed through should have warned the train about the crew being near the tracks. CSX (imho, correctly) states that the previous trains were under no obligation to warn other trains.

Anyway, the Jone's have received much cash for the untimely loss of their daughter. It was a tragedy. At this point, they're really looking like gold diggers.

http://news.wabe.org/post/ga-trial-decide-if-railroad-shares-blame-film-crew-death


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jul 10, 2017)

"..First we kill all the Lawyers.."

William Shakespeare

Apologies to the good ones like Penny,tp49 etc.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 10, 2017)

It would appear that their overly trusting daughter wasn't raised with a keen sense for danger or a strong will for self preservation. I was fine with them going after the director but I disagree with them going after CSX. Chances are their lawyers will find a way to appeal to the jury's emotional connection with their own clueless offspring and receive a big sappy payday based on emotional guilt rather than rational liability.


----------



## VentureForth (Jul 11, 2017)

My thought is that if they saw two trains pass, that should have been their red flag that it was an active track

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Jul 11, 2017)

This is the kind of stuff that burns me up. They are trying to blame the train crews for their daughter's ill-fated decision to trust her director. I can't remember the last time i read about someone wandering on to an airport runway/tarmac or interstate, getting run over and suing. Yet, everyone that walks along a railroad track somehow thinks it is a good idea and their loved ones sue.

Unbelievable. :angry2:


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Jul 26, 2017)

According to the jury, CSX is 35% responsible for Sarah Jones' death. As such, they must fork over 3.9 million dollars. If was a member of the crew, I would turn the tables sue the estate of Ms. Jones for damages.

'Midnight Rider' Trial: Railroad Company to Pay $3.9M to Sarah Jones' Family



> A railroad owner must pay $3.9 million to the family of a movie worker killed on a Georgia railroad trestle in 2014, a jury decided Monday in civil verdict that found the company shared in the blame for the deadly freight train collision even though the film crew was trespassing.
> 
> The parents of Sarah Jones sued CSX Transportation in Chatham County State Court, saying the railroad shared in the blame for their daughter's death. The 27-year-old camera assistant died in the crash on Feb. 20, 2014, during the first day of shooting Midnight Rider, an ill-fated movie about Gregg Allman of The Allman Brothers Band.
> 
> "This trial disclosed a number of exceptionally poor judgments and ignored opportunities by CSX Transportation to prevent this tragedy," Jones' parents, Richard and Elizabeth Jones of Columbia, South Carolina, said in a written statement.CSX plans to appeal the jury's decision, said Rob Doolittle, a spokesman.


Here's an ignored opportunity for Elizabeth Jones. Tell people to stay the hell off the railroad tracks.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 26, 2017)

CSX isn't the only victim in this frivolous lawsuit. Railfans and train spotters will now encounter even more adversity in an already hostile relationship. It's not our fault this woman wasn't raised with enough street smarts to look after herself and avoid being hit by a freaking train. If I were the engineer or conductor I would absolutely consider suing her irrational guilt tripping estate for emotional pain and suffering caused by her lack of foresight and lax attitude toward personal safety.




Sarah Jones apparently had 0% responsibility in keeping herself alive according to this jury.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 27, 2017)

Devil's Advocate said:


> CSX isn't the only victim in this frivolous lawsuit. Railfans and train spotters will now encounter even more adversity in an already hostile relationship. It's not our fault this woman wasn't raised with enough street smarts to look after herself and avoid being hit by a freaking train. If I were the engineer or conductor I would absolutely consider suing her irrational guilt tripping estate for emotional pain and suffering caused by her lack of foresight and lax attitude toward personal safety.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The problem is that in some states, assigning _any _responsibility to the victim will void out an award (comparative versus contributory negligence). File it under "the law is an ass", and strange things like this are responsible for more than a few hyperbolic filings or unusual results.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Jul 27, 2017)

I'm mystified by the information Devil's Advocate has posted. The jury found the victim AND the Studio not liable. This is astounding when you consider a quote from the article Chamilton listed above:



> As the day wore on, director Randall Miller moved the shoot from the land beside the river onto the narrow gridwork of the trestle itself, which extends over the edge of the Altamaha. The trestle’s wood and metal bottom was covered with pebbles and had gaping holes in some places. The blustery wind rang through the girders, making it hard to stay steady, says Gilliard.
> 
> *From shore, several dozen yards away, a voice shouted to the crew that in the event a train appeared, everyone would have 60 seconds to clear the tracks. “Everybody on the crew was tripping over that,” says Gilliard. “A minute? Are you serious?” By now, she and two other crewmembers were nervous enough that before shooting, they gathered in an informal prayer circle. “Lord, please protect us on these tracks,” murmured Gilliard. “Surround us with your angels and help us, Lord.”*



An instruction like that didn't raise a alarm?? Furthermore, when confronted with the train, it seems she hesitated:



> While Gilliard prayed, Jones helped load film, monitor the cameras and transport gear. A fresh-faced South Carolinian with a passion for travel and books, Jones wasn’t really the type to fret much. The crew was filming a dream sequence, and they had placed a twin-size metal-framed bed and mattress in the middle of the tracks. Then, Gilliard looked up and saw a light in the distance, followed by the immense howl of a locomotive. It was a train — and it was hurtling toward them.
> 
> Two stories high, screaming with the sound of a blast horn and possibly brakes, the train was nearly as wide as the trestle. Gilliard says Miller yelled at everyone to run. *Jones, several bags slung over each shoulder, shouted something about what to do with the expensive camera equipment. “Drop it!” Gilliard and others yelled. “Just drop it!”*


I'm picturing this. You're on a narrow bridge and there is a train rapidly closing on your position. You've already been advised that you'd have a minute to clear and yet, you want to know what to do with the gear? If CSX is on the hook, there is no way the studio and victim are in the clear.

I expect CSX to play hardball with this.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 27, 2017)

Thirdrail7 said:


> I'm mystified by the information Devil's Advocate has posted. The jury found the victim AND the Studio not liable. This is astounding when you consider a quote from the article Chamilton listed above:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As I said, I can at least see them not finding the victim liable due to the issues with some negligence statutes. This may be a side-effect of the jury instructions. I'm surprised that they didn't hold the studio liable, however, for...oh, I dunno, _ordering the crew to trespass on an active railroad_. I'm also surprised that they _did_ find CSX liable in any significant fashion considering that these guys were, you know, trespassing, but I'm also reminded of the Love Canal case (the chemical company _told_ the city the land was contaminated but the city insisted on buying it for a school regardless).

(Also, am I the only one who noticed that the percentages don't add up to 100%?)


----------



## west point (Jul 27, 2017)

What else can we expect from a red neck jury ? Bull must have had a hand in picking the jury ?


----------



## LookingGlassTie (Jul 27, 2017)

I always thought that with a wrongful-death lawsuit, the plaintiff not only had to establish that the defendant's actions caused the death, but also that said actions were negligent or reckless?

Also, exactly what "duty of care" did CSX have? Not saying they didn't have one, just curious as to exactly what it was.

Granted, I don't know what the jury instructions entailed, and I realize that plays into it also.


----------



## VentureForth (Jul 27, 2017)

This is an OJ Simpson "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit" type of verdict. CSX lost because the plaintiff argued that that two previous trains should have warned the third train. If I were the defendant's lawyer, I would have said that two trains passing at full speed should have been enough evidence to warn ALL the staff that maybe they shouldn't be there.

The only part of the Plaintiff's case I can even remotely have difficulty defending is the fact that the engineer didn't even attempt to slow down until after impact.



west point said:


> What else can we expect from a red neck jury ? Bull must have had a hand in picking the jury ?


Watch it. And I mean it. I could have easily been in that jury pool as I live in the jurisdiction. The reality is that there is a better chance that the rail crew was more blue collar than the jury. Savannah isn't a backwards redneck town. Come here and I'll show you. This case was won against CSX for one reason ONLY - perceived cash cache and the emotional desire to tap into it. Quite frankly, if there were more "red necks" in the jury, CSX would likely have walked out without losing a penny.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 27, 2017)

VentureForth said:


> Watch it. And I mean it.


----------



## tricia (Jul 27, 2017)

I'm not a badass, but I too thought "redneck" was an offensive ethnic slur in this context.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 27, 2017)

That’s fine, but there’s a right way and a wrong way to express that displeasure. Threatening someone isn’t the right way.


----------



## LookingGlassTie (Jul 27, 2017)

VentureForth said:


> This is an OJ Simpson "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit" type of verdict. CSX lost because the plaintiff argued that that two previous trains should have warned the third train. If I were the defendant's lawyer, I would have said that two trains passing at full speed should have been enough evidence to warn ALL the staff that maybe they shouldn't be there.
> 
> The only part of the Plaintiff's case I can even remotely have difficulty defending is the fact that the engineer didn't even attempt to slow down until after impact.
> 
> ...


The engineer issue does make sense to me.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 9, 2019)

We must have missed this. The last settlement has been reached. I'd love to know what CSX copped to. Knowing them, they may have played hardball and said something like "Here's what we're offering. Take it or your grandchildren's grandchildren will still be in court over this."

Years of Litigation Over Allman Movie Train Wreck Ends in CSX Settlement

https://www.law.com/dailyreportonline/2019/01/30/years-of-litigation-over-allman-movie-train-wreck-ends-in-csx-settlement/?slreturn=20190208151943



> The undisclosed payment satisfies a $3.9 million judgment against the railroad resulting from apportionment of a total $11.2 million verdict in a 2017 trial. It’s the conclusion of litigation against the last of a series of defendants involved in the train crash on the set of a movie about musician Gregg Allman.
> 
> “It has truly been an honor to represent the Jones family and to work to secure justice on behalf of Sarah Jones,” lead plaintiffs’ counsel Jeff Harris of Harris Lowry Manton said in a statement released Wednesday. “We hope that no other family will endure the loss of a loved one due to unsafe conditions filming on location or on set.”


As usual, the engineer's actions were targeted.



> An important part of the case for the Jones family was asserting that the engineer of the train that hit the crew should have tried to stop. Instead, Harris said his expert testified the engineer did not apply the service brake or emergency brake until five seconds after he hit the movie set—with equipment flying and crew members trying to scramble off the high trestle.
> 
> CSX lawyers argued that the engineer didn’t apply the brakes because he feared the containers on the train would have tumbled off on the crew, or the train would have derailed, according to Harris, who countered that, after the crash, the engineer did hit the brakes, and the train did not derail or lose cargo.


I still hope the crew sues for PTSD.


----------



## flitcraft (Mar 9, 2019)

Thirdrail7 said:


> I still hope the crew sues for PTSD.


If they did, their lawyers would get sanctioned.  There is a cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress, but it's severely limited in Georgia. To win, the crew would have to prove all these elements: that the deceased should have foreseen that her negligence would result in severe emotional distress to them, that the plaintiffs suffered physical injury in the incident itself--the so-called "impact" rule, and that the emotional distress they have alleged caused physical harms that could be objectively proven.  As I read the various reports, there is no evidence that any of the crew suffered physical injury during the accident. So the lawsuit would be dismissed even before it started for complete lack of evidence as to one of the required elements. A lawyer who filed a suit without any evidence to support each necessary element would be subject to paying sanctions under Rule 11. 

Even if you could somehow overcome that total lack of evidence as to physical injury caused to the crew in the accident, there's still the collateral estoppel matter--the crew would be likely be barred from re-litigating the matters already decided in the first case, which includes the proportion of liability assigned to the movie production crew, CSX, and the deceased worker. It isn't clear to me what proportion, if any, was assigned to the deceased worker, but given that the movie production company is almost certainly bankrupt, the only other party who could pay damages to the crew would be CSX--depending on whether joint and several liability would apply here.

So...I hope the crew doesn't sue, because that would be the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 9, 2019)

Can you show me all of the reports regarding the  mental health of the crews and can you show me the where they litigated the mental health of the crew in the first case? I must have missed those reports. 

Since things like PTSD can take quite some time to develop (and the trespassers getting hit by train is all of the physical evidence you need, particularly if it leads to issues at work), it would be premature for someone (particularly a person who isn't a lawyer) to define and dismiss something as frivolous.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997 (Mar 9, 2019)

I can't believe the family of the camera assistant killed won the trial!


----------



## flitcraft (Mar 9, 2019)

They almost certainly didn't litigate the mental health of the crew, but they did litigate the negligence issues. So the proportionate negligence findings will not be re-litigated. On the question of whether the case is frivolous, it would be under Georgia law. Georgia has a very restricted rule on negligent infliction of emotional distress--it requires physical injury in the incident itself--called the 'impact rule.'  No physical harm in the accident, no NIED.  The only exception is for a parent who witnesses the negligence-caused death of a minor child.   Like I said, Georgia has about the most narrow rule for NIED of any state that actually allows such suits.  It doesn't allow suits in cases like this, even if it denies recovery for late developing PTSD.  Other states--California, for one--are more generous in that regard. 

I'm pretty comfortable calling the case a frivolous one--even though I'm not licensed in Georgia, I've been licensed in two other states for close on 40 years. And I've taught  torts for the last 30 of them.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 9, 2019)

flitcraft said:


> I'm pretty comfortable calling the case a frivolous one--even though I'm not licensed in Georgia, I've been licensed in two other states for close on 40 years. And I've taught  torts for the last 30 of them.  ﻿





flitcraft said:


> They almost certainly didn't litigate the mental health of the crew, but they did litigate the negligence issues


Perfect...a tort lawyer. If you don't mind, can you explain a few things?

Here's the scenario:The family of the deceased litigated the negligence issues. 

What does that have to do with the potential for the OPERATING CREW to file claim if needed?  Wouldn't that represent a new or different case?

We are seeing this increase within the industry of crews suffering from PTSD related stress,  particularly when incidents drag on.  It isn't easy to forget an incident when you are in court talking about it for years.  So, while some of the traumatized employees have filed claims against the companies ( with extreme cases usually ending in occupational disability) is there ANYWAY  the employees can start going after the estates of the people that are contributing to these incidents or file a CIVIL claim against the estate?

An example is what is occurring in the



thread. A brief fair use quote



> PTSD from the crash
> 
> 
> Smalls' work day started at 10:14 a.m. when he took a train from Southeast into Grand Central. Train 659 left Grand Central at 5:44 p.m., his fourth run of the day.
> ...


Is there anything that would allow him to sue the estate as well? Can he file a civil suit against the estate? If the crew in Georgia had similar issues, could they go after the estate in addition to or instead of CSX?

You can send me a PM if it helps.

Thanks.


----------



## flitcraft (Mar 9, 2019)

My students always hate it when I say it depends, but the answer is, it depends. First off, on the jurisdiction. As I mentioned, Georgia is one of the stingiest states on actions like negligent infliction of emotional distress. Others make it easier to sue. I did think about worker's comp as a possible avenue of compensation for crew in this kind of case, but, checking on Georgia's workers comp rules, they again require that the on-the-job caused PTSD was caused by a physical injury that triggered the PTSD.  So that wouldn't work, either; and that wouldn't in any event result in recovery from the deceased person. 

In states that are more generous than Georgia in allowing negligent infliction of emotional distress claims, the plaintiff crew  would still have very much an uphill battle in suing the person killed.  For example, family members who see a loved one killed have the easiest time prevailing, as you might guess. But even then, there's a recent case in my comparatively generous jurisdiction where a parent raced to the scene of an auto accident, having been told that her son had been killed, and saw his dead body. She sued for negligent infliction of emotional distress, and the appeals court threw the case out, saying since she hadn't seen her son killed, just seeing the dead body was legally not enough.  It's a tough, tough cause of action to prevail upon.

Intentional infliction of emotional distress is a bit easier--there's a case where a guy committed suicide in the kitchen of an ex-friend, and the court said that the jury could properly find that his intent in doing it was specifically to cause the resulting emotional distress. But of course, in a train incident, there's unlikely to be evidence that the intent of the person hit was to cause distress to the crew. 

No one doubts that  the impact on crew of being involved in a fatal incident is horrible, and I can only imagine how awful that might be. ( I know a police officer who shot and killed someone in an absolutely justifiable case, but even many years later, he suffers terribly.)  But, as I often have to tell my students, the law does not provide remedies for every harm, even harms that are serious.  Cases of pure emotional distress--whether intentionally or negligently inflicted--have the least odds of prevailing, as compared to torts involved physical bodily harm or loss of property. 

PS I'm not and have never been a tort lawyer, though I was a litigator in my pre-teaching life, but having taught torts and advanced torts for so long, and having former students on both sides of the aisle in the tort world, I'm probably more opinionated about torts than most!


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 9, 2019)

flitcraft said:


> PS I'm not and have never been a tort lawyer, though I was a litigator in my pre-teaching life, but having taught torts and advanced torts for so long, and having former students on both sides of the aisle in the tort world, I'm probably more opinionated about torts than most!


You may not be a lawyer but I still appreciate your time and candor. I've just watched some people fall apart after incidents and they get dragged through the memories as the lawsuits progress. It seems quite unfair that if someone is standing on the tracks, they are forced to relive the events as they are questioned and often, faulted...and they don't have much of a remedy.

If I bring this up again (and I already did in the aforementioned Metro-North thread ^_^ ) feel free to bring me back to reality.

Thanks again.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 10, 2019)

They are  a Lawyer Third Rail, just not a practicing Tort Lawyer.

And as with all Lawyers,their first comment is always "It depends." ^_^

 Several of our members are Attorneys, but not Tort Lawyers as far as I know.( one is a Retired Tax Attorney who became a Yoga Instructor and gives Yoga Lessons on Trains and during Gatherings! :giggle: )


----------

