# Bugged at Newark by train crew, sorta.



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 28, 2009)

As some may know, I often train watch at Newark Penn. I do not take photographs, but I do consist record in a small Moleskine or Black 'n Red.

Yesterday I was recording the Consist of the Southbound _Silver Meteor_. Audrey, my girlfriend, was feeling tired from the heat and instead of following me during my walk of the train, sat near the head end on a bench while I walked the length of the consist. When I got back to the front end, Audrey was talking to a woman, who I am going to assume was the AC on the _Silver Meteor_. I make this guess because of the way she was dressed (including radio), and by the way she interacted with a man who was clearly the conductor.

According to my girlfriend, this AC took my picture with her cellphone and then pointed me out to the conductor. I found this out after the train had departed.

Interested in why my girlfriend was talking to a train crew member on the train (she puts up with my railfanning- she isn't one herself), I walked up to see what was going on. The AC in a almost semi threatening way told me "You're a rail fan, right? You should be careful what you do around here, I know of some people like you who have gotten in to trouble." Before I could ask her what she meant, the actual conductor came over, brushed her into the train, said "Don't worry about that," and things like it several times, at which point the train departed.

I know the conductor by sight. He often works LDs, and we usually wave or nod at each other, familiarly, so I think he knows me by sight by now, too. I recall having a few words with him at some point. Big older black guy with a friendly manner. (I know that describes half of Amtrak's conductors, but yeah.) The AC was an older white woman, with whispy greying blonde hair and a generally grumpy manner.

My girlfriend told me that the AC had told her there had been "reports" about me. Huh?

I know a bunch of people at the station, although not by name. I know a few conductors who work LDs the same way I know the one above. I often chat with the baggage handlers while waiting for LDs to pull in. I'm sure a bunch of other people know me by sight. I have never been told even one word of "don't do this" in the long time I have been railfanning there by anyone with authority at the station itself. Even the police have long since stopped giving me hairy eyeballs.

I can't imagine any real trouble because I do follow general railfanning guidelines- 1) do not, at any time, trespass on non-public railroad property, 2) do not get in the way of any operating crews. But one never knows. Do any of you have suggestions on how I should CMA?


----------



## nr272 (Apr 28, 2009)

I wouldn't let it get to you. Sounds like she is on a power trip - hopefully you won't have to see here again.


----------



## Rail Freak (Apr 28, 2009)

AC = again?


----------



## MrFSS (Apr 28, 2009)

Rail Freak said:


> AC = again?


Assistant Conductor


----------



## caravanman (Apr 28, 2009)

I guess if a member of the public is hanging about on the platform or walking up and down beside the train, it might cause a bit of hassle for the train crew if they don't know that persons intentions, are they boarding, what are they doing, etc, etc. The assistant probably was just having a bad day, seems like the conductor wanted to excuse her behavior towards you.

Perhaps you too could adopt a fez as headwear, that should mark you out as a genuine eccentric rail fan....

Ed B)


----------



## Shotgun7 (Apr 28, 2009)

Rail Freak said:


> AC = again?


Assistant Conductor

I've noticed alot of the newer ones down here in Florida act like real PITA's because they're trying to prove something. The regular conductors I've met are typically all easy going since they're at the seniority level they want to be at and only have to worry about the job at hand.


----------



## Rail Freak (Apr 28, 2009)

caravanman said:


> I guess if a member of the public is hanging about on the platform or walking up and down beside the train, it might cause a bit of hassle for the train crew if they don't know that persons intentions, are they boarding, what are they doing, etc, etc. The assistant probably was just having a bad day, seems like the conductor wanted to excuse her behavior towards you.Perhaps you too could adopt a fez as headwear, that should mark you out as a genuine eccentric rail fan....
> 
> Ed B)


That, my friend, is a hell of a REPLY!!!!!! :lol:  !!!!


----------



## Rafi (Apr 28, 2009)

I agree with nr272. Don't let it get to you, GML. It was most likely an overzealous AC (Assistant Conductor, RF). Amtrak has made it clear to all employees through various memos that RailFans are friends of the company and employees are to be courteous to them; only to intervene with railfanning activities when it compromises safety or represents trespassing in restricted areas.

Rafi


----------



## sunchaser (Apr 28, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> As some may know, I often train watch at Newark Penn. I do not take photographs, but I do consist record in a small Moleskine or Black 'n Red.
> Yesterday I was recording the Consist of the Southbound _Silver Meteor_. Audrey, my girlfriend, was feeling tired from the heat and instead of following me during my walk of the train, sat near the head end on a bench while I walked the length of the consist. When I got back to the front end, Audrey was talking to a woman, who I am going to assume was the AC on the _Silver Meteor_. I make this guess because of the way she was dressed (including radio), and by the way she interacted with a man who was clearly the conductor.
> 
> According to my girlfriend, this AC took my picture with her cellphone and then pointed me out to the conductor. I found this out after the train had departed.
> ...



GML,

I wouldn't let it worry you. If you are following the rules & out of their way, it shouldn't be an issue.

What you can do if it happens again, is break out the biggest, friendliest sincere smile you can manage.

You could always ask if she would allow a photo w/ your girlfriend & the AC. She may not agree, but it may ease her concerns about you. It is easy to see from their perspective why they would be concerned about photos being taken, but if you say something to them like, "I hope you don't mind me taking a photo of....... train" it may smooth things over.

The Conductor must have recognized you & may have told her not to worry about you.

You should start carrying a copy of the Amtrak policy & follow it. If you run into staff that do not follow it, don't make a major fuss, it could cause problems for you. You could point out to them the correct policy, but it is not a good idea to argue.

It is better to remain very calm.


----------



## RRrich (Apr 28, 2009)

You might also take HER pic with YOUR cell phone and ask her how you are interfering with "business" as you know that all Amtrak personnel have been advised to be nice to friends of Amtrak ie railfans. And get her name


----------



## RailFanLNK (Apr 28, 2009)

Last year the AC took me to the rear of the coach car I was sitting in and told me that there's "no taking pictures on Amtrak". When I questioned her about it, she then backpeddaled and said, "if there's a Sightseer Lounge Car" than its ok! :blink: :unsure: When I told her that I have taken numerous photos on Amtrak, she backpeddaled again. What frustrated me the most was that others in the same coach car were taking pictures too and continued to take pictures while I lost the opportunity to get pics of my vacation on the Carolinian.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Apr 28, 2009)

Rafi said:


> I agree with nr272. Don't let it get to you, GML. It was most likely an overzealous AC (Assistant Conductor, RF). Amtrak has made it clear to all employees through various memos that RailFans are friends of the company and employees are to be courteous to them; only to intervene with railfanning activities when it compromises safety or represents trespassing in restricted areas.
> Rafi


she must not have got the memo.must have been her day off.


----------



## Hamhock (Apr 28, 2009)

If you run into her again, you can always try one of 3 basic responses:

1) "Uh huh... Tell me, do the voices in your head say anything else?"

2) "Oh....okaaay" *making the twirling-finger-at-temple-means-you're-crazy gesture*

3) Say nothing, but do the 8-fingers "oooooh, I'm scared" wiggle-waggle.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 28, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Yesterday I was recording the Consist of the Southbound _Silver Meteor_.


You should file a FOIA request asking Amtrak to publish all of the consist data that's in ARROW on the web.


----------



## MattW (Apr 28, 2009)

RailFanLNK said:


> Last year the AC took me to the rear of the coach car I was sitting in and told me that there's "no taking pictures on Amtrak". When I questioned her about it, she then backpeddaled and said, "if there's a Sightseer Lounge Car" than its ok! :blink: :unsure: When I told her that I have taken numerous photos on Amtrak, she backpeddaled again. What frustrated me the most was that others in the same coach car were taking pictures too and continued to take pictures while I lost the opportunity to get pics of my vacation on the Carolinian.


I'm not sure they can legally remove you from your coach seat if you're not participating in an illegal activity. If it'd had been me, I'd have ignored her and continued snapping away if others were continuing to do so (if not, I'd have contacted the head conductor). If she made a grab at me or my camera, she'd be under citizen's arrest for felony attempted assault.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 28, 2009)

MattW said:


> If she made a grab at me or my camera, she'd be under citizen's arrest for felony attempted assault.


And then where would you be if the court threw out your attempted assault charges?


----------



## Steve4031 (Apr 28, 2009)

Hope you all mean these suggestions in jest. While some Amtrak employees do not understand the photography policy, it is best to be professional and polite. Ask probing questions, etc. But I would advise against insinuating that they are incompetent or crazy. This only escalates the situation, and could lead to an unnecessary removal from the train or station, and an unnecessary arrest. I'm not advocating giving up first amendment rights, etc, but only suggesting that one assert their rights diplomatically. For your safety, the crews safety, and the convenience of the rest of the passengers.


----------



## tp49 (Apr 28, 2009)

Just for my own knowledge how is platform access handled at Newark Penn? Is it the same as at NYP where platform access is restricted to tickethokders at the time the train is announced or is it open access in that let's say you had a ticket on NJT you could wait on the platform until the NJT train came in? I've only ridden through Newark and never been off the train or in the station.


----------



## tp49 (Apr 28, 2009)

MattW said:


> RailFanLNK said:
> 
> 
> > Last year the AC took me to the rear of the coach car I was sitting in and told me that there's "no taking pictures on Amtrak". When I questioned her about it, she then backpeddaled and said, "if there's a Sightseer Lounge Car" than its ok! :blink: :unsure: When I told her that I have taken numerous photos on Amtrak, she backpeddaled again. What frustrated me the most was that others in the same coach car were taking pictures too and continued to take pictures while I lost the opportunity to get pics of my vacation on the Carolinian.
> ...


A ticket is a revocable license they can boot you for doing anything that voilates their rules. It doesn't have to be illegal. However, seems like the train staff was violating company policy there.



Joel N. Weber II said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> > If she made a grab at me or my camera, she'd be under citizen's arrest for felony attempted assault.
> ...


Fixed that under the scenario described it would just be an assault as by the definition of the crime alone you cannot attempt an assault. B)


----------



## Acela150 (Apr 28, 2009)

I was reading the editorial is Railpace Magazine today, and it says that Amtrak has "banned" photography. It mentioned that a Japanese tourist was arrested for taking pictures of the beautiful Long Island sound. The poor guy most likely didn't understand what the guy was saying. But Amtrak still has the "Photo Contest". Go figure! The only way to photograph is if you have a letter of "permission".

Stephen


----------



## Acela150 (Apr 28, 2009)

I should also add this:

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServe...&ssid=11134

http://nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2009/03/amtrak01.html

Stephen


----------



## AlanB (Apr 28, 2009)

MattW said:


> RailFanLNK said:
> 
> 
> > Last year the AC took me to the rear of the coach car I was sitting in and told me that there's "no taking pictures on Amtrak". When I questioned her about it, she then backpeddaled and said, "if there's a Sightseer Lounge Car" than its ok! :blink: :unsure: When I told her that I have taken numerous photos on Amtrak, she backpeddaled again. What frustrated me the most was that others in the same coach car were taking pictures too and continued to take pictures while I lost the opportunity to get pics of my vacation on the Carolinian.
> ...


A conductor can throw you off the train for any reason at all, and the local police have to comply with the conductor's request. The conductor could later be facing a law suit, and even possible loosing their job if they don't have a valid reason for ordering your removal. But that will be of little consolation to you when your dropped at the next grade crossing or station and turned over to the police.

There is a story buried here about a person from another country who didn't speak English and didn't understand what the conductor was trying to tell them. The conductor was trying to get him to stop taking pictures and when the person didn't stop because they didn't understand, the conductor had that person removed at New Haven by the police. I seem to recall that no charges were ever filed against the person, but he didn't get where he wanted to go, at least on that train.

Regarding your response that you'd keep snapping away, you would be in violation of Amtrak's policy. They may not have had a valid reason to ask you to stop taking pictures, but if they do according to Amtrak's policy you must comply and sort it out later. If you fail to comply, expect to be removed by the police somewhere down the line.

As for your idea of a citizen's arrest, good look with that one. Even touching the conductor could be considered an assault, and under Federal law you can and most like will find yourself spending some time in a Federal prison. It's basically the same as attacking a flight attendant. You'll go to jail no question asked. And the odds are not good that you'll prevail when you get to trial, so you could be spending a few years in a Federal jail cell.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 28, 2009)

tp49 said:


> Just for my own knowledge how is platform access handled at Newark Penn? Is it the same as at NYP where platform access is restricted to tickethokders at the time the train is announced or is it open access in that let's say you had a ticket on NJT you could wait on the platform until the NJT train came in? I've only ridden through Newark and never been off the train or in the station.


I would tend to think that's correct Tom, that one must have a valid ticket to be on the platform. It could get a bit more confusing at Newark, since you've also got Path mixed into the middle of things. But there are a couple of platforms that one would never be on, if one were riding Path. Unlike NYP though, there are no stairs/escalators that are controlled by employees who check tickets.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 28, 2009)

Acela150 said:


> I was reading the editorial is Railpace Magazine today, and it says that Amtrak has "banned" photography. It mentioned that a Japanese tourist was arrested for taking pictures of the beautiful Long Island sound. The poor guy most likely didn't understand what the guy was saying. But Amtrak still has the "Photo Contest". Go figure! The only way to photograph is if you have a letter of "permission".
> Stephen


Most likely an editorial that was written before the current policy was released. Or perhaps the editor just has no clue.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 28, 2009)

AlanB said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> > I was reading the editorial is Railpace Magazine today, and it says that Amtrak has "banned" photography. It mentioned that a Japanese tourist was arrested for taking pictures of the beautiful Long Island sound. The poor guy most likely didn't understand what the guy was saying. But Amtrak still has the "Photo Contest". Go figure! The only way to photograph is if you have a letter of "permission".
> ...


The current policy is rather.. generous. I don't know how to approach a conductor with it though. I mean I would comply but in the back of my mind I'd always think "wait a second, I know more about this policy than you do?" I'd raise my eyebrow and wait until after the crew change to resume my photography, or move to a more public area like a sightseer. Nobody in their right mind would object in that car as long as it wasn't disturbing pax or crew.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 28, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> The current policy is rather.. generous. I don't know how to approach a conductor with it though. I mean I would comply but in the back of my mind I'd always think "wait a second, I know more about this policy than you do?" I'd raise my eyebrow and wait until after the crew change to resume my photography, or move to a more public area like a sightseer. Nobody in their right mind would object in that car as long as it wasn't disturbing pax or crew.


Well I'd carry a printed copy of the policy with me, preferably one with the Amtrak logo and URL at the bottom of the page, and politely present it to him/her with a statement like, "Well here's the current Amtrak policy from the website that I printed just before leaving home. Can you please point out to me or explain to me what section I'm violating?" Above all, remain calm and polite. Don't call them names, don't insist that they are wrong and you're right, or accuse them of anything, and certainly don't touch them or make an moves that could be considered threatening.

If they get mad and/or refuse to discuss it or even read it, then just be sure to remember their name and comply with their request, regardless of how you feel about them being right or wrong. As soon as they've moved on, immediately write down their name, train #, car # (if you know it), date, time, nearest station, and a description of what you were doing, what was said by both of you. You can even ask around after the employee has moved on, if any fellow passengers would agree to be a witness.

When you get home, use that information to report them. Send a polite email/letter to Amtrak with that info and request that they please properly educate that employee on the photography policy. I don't recommend the phone, as you're more likely to get emotional and you're also relying on the person on the other end of the phone to get things right. With a printed letter or email, it can properly make it's way through the inter-offices of Amtrak to reach the offending employee's supervisor's.


----------



## Steve4031 (Apr 29, 2009)

I'm glad I go first class . . .When I'm on the Crescent, Sunset, or Chief this summer I'll close my curtian and door and shoot away. I don't think they will even know. LOL. Now for those shots out the back window, I'll have to be more sneakly. LOL


----------



## ns4eva (Apr 29, 2009)

AlanB said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > The current policy is rather.. generous. I don't know how to approach a conductor with it though. I mean I would comply but in the back of my mind I'd always think "wait a second, I know more about this policy than you do?" I'd raise my eyebrow and wait until after the crew change to resume my photography, or move to a more public area like a sightseer. Nobody in their right mind would object in that car as long as it wasn't disturbing pax or crew.
> ...


If sending the letter via USPS mail, you might consider certifying it so someone has to sign for it.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 29, 2009)

AlanB said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > The current policy is rather.. generous. I don't know how to approach a conductor with it though. I mean I would comply but in the back of my mind I'd always think "wait a second, I know more about this policy than you do?" I'd raise my eyebrow and wait until after the crew change to resume my photography, or move to a more public area like a sightseer. Nobody in their right mind would object in that car as long as it wasn't disturbing pax or crew.
> ...


Most cell phones have a function to record voice conversations (where you don't have to be talking into the phone). I wonder if they would get more upset if you said "One moment, please," turned on the recorder, then showed them their own policy.


----------



## caravanman (Apr 29, 2009)

Apologies if this story has already been discussed?

Amtrak police arrest Amtrak photo contestant!

Ed B)


----------



## Shanghai (Apr 29, 2009)

tp49 said:


> Just for my own knowledge how is platform access handled at Newark Penn? Is it the same as at NYP where platform access is restricted to tickethokders at the time the train is announced or is it open access in that let's say you had a ticket on NJT you could wait on the platform until the NJT train came in? I've only ridden through Newark and never been off the train or in the station.


Platform access at Newark Penn Station is open. The train number and destination is posted on a board in the station and also by the entrance to the platform stairs.

I think anyone can walk up the steps and have access to the train. There are also small waiting rooms next to the tracks.


----------



## sunchaser (Apr 29, 2009)

caravanman said:


> Apologies if this story has already been discussed?
> Amtrak police arrest Amtrak photo contestant!
> 
> Ed B)


I think it has, but it is still being discussed. I understand the confusion about photography for a contest, but if you reread the 2nd paragraph of the rules, you will find that the policy appliees to contests as well.

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServe...&ssid=11134

At least it's consistant, even if you don't agree with the policy. I can understand why there are certain areas that should not be photographed. But I also realize many of these areas have already been photographed many times over the years.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 29, 2009)

Steve4031 said:


> Now for those shots out the back window, I'll have to be more sneakly.


I have to wonder if being sneaky is the best way to approach that.

I think if you stay inside the car (not the vestibule), there's really no safety problem with being there. If you make the crew nervous that you might wander into the vestibule, I suspect they'll be less comfortable with you being near the vestibule. If you've been being sneaky, that might make the crew less inclined to trust you if you say you're not going to wander into the vestibule.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 29, 2009)

ns4eva said:


> If sending the letter via USPS mail, you might consider certifying it so someone has to sign for it.


In this situation, I'm not sure how much that really helps. What specific actions are you proposing to take to follow up after this letter is sent where proving that Amtrak had recieved it would be helpful?


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 29, 2009)

VentureForth said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> ...


Recording somebody's conversations without knowledge is a crime in some (but to my knowledge not all) states/jurisdictions.


----------



## printman2000 (Apr 29, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> As some may know, I often train watch at Newark Penn. I do not take photographs, but I do consist record in a small Moleskine or Black 'n Red.
> Yesterday I was recording the Consist of the Southbound _Silver Meteor_.


When you say recording, do you mean writing it down or were you video/picture taking?

I assumed you meant writing down, but then this topic went off talking about photography rules and such, it has confused me.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 29, 2009)

printman2000 said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > As some may know, I often train watch at Newark Penn. I do not take photographs, but I do consist record in a small Moleskine or Black 'n Red.
> ...


He writes it down. Just engine and car numbers, helps us keep track of what Amtrak is doing with our precious cars


----------



## PRR 60 (Apr 29, 2009)

For the record, the Amtrak policy, when read carefully, is quite restrictive.



> 3. Ticketed Passengers on platforms may photograph or video record during the time they are preparing to board or immediately after alighting from a train. Equipment is limited to hand-held devices. Such photography, including equipment set-up will be done in a reasonable, safe and timely manner.
> 4. Ticketed passengers on board trains may take photos or video record on a train when it does not interfere with passengers or crew and in accordance with any directions given by Amtrak onboard train personnel.


Reading that word-for word tells you that:

- The policy does not grant permission to take pictures on train platforms unless you are getting on or off a train. Now, Newark NJ is not an Amtrak station (it's owned and controlled bu NJ Transit), but even if the Amtrak policy is applied, it does not provide an expectation that photography is permitted on the platform.

- The policy gives train crews wide latitude to control photography on an Amtrak train. The wording "...and in accordance with any directions given by onboard train personnel" literally means that the crew can direct you in any way whatsoever. The policy very clearly does no obligate train crews to permit photography on trains.

In practice, photography on train platforms and on trains is commonplace and is not normally an issue. But, the new policy, advertised as a breakthrough for photographers rights, in fact documents Amtrak right to prohibit prohibit photography pretty much whenever they would like. This policy is like a politician's speech. You cannot just assume you know what it is trying to say. You have to read the words, and only the words, and see what it actually says. What this policy actually says regarding the protection of the right to take pictures near or on Amtrak trains is much, much less than assumed.


----------



## ns4eva (Apr 29, 2009)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> ns4eva said:
> 
> 
> > If sending the letter via USPS mail, you might consider certifying it so someone has to sign for it.
> ...



I guess it's just personal preference. I have had things disappear and never arrive at the destination and always like reassurance it made it there.


----------



## jackal (Apr 29, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


New Jersey is a one-party-consent state. I don't know if these laws apply to just telephone calls or to personal conversations as well, but here's a list of which states allow recording with only one party's consent (it's actually most states):

http://www.aapsonline.org/judicial/telephone.htm


----------



## Shanghai (Apr 29, 2009)

I have take photographs on the platforms at Fort Lauderdale, Tampa and Indianapolis without incident.

I was not aware there were any restrictions. I have also taken photos on the train in the dining car.


----------



## tp49 (Apr 29, 2009)

PRR 60 said:


> For the record, the Amtrak policy, when read carefully, is quite restrictive.
> 
> 
> > 3. Ticketed Passengers on platforms may photograph or video record during the time they are preparing to board or immediately after alighting from a train. Equipment is limited to hand-held devices. Such photography, including equipment set-up will be done in a reasonable, safe and timely manner.
> ...


3 is there due to the controlled access nature of the platforms at NYP and other stations and directly relates to Kerzic's case. Amtrak claimed he was trespassing because there was no train on the platform at the time the police made contact with him. This just puts it into plain enough english. Consider it a valid "place" restriction.

4 is there as a "time, place or manner." restriction.

The US Supreme Court declared that for First Amendment purposes that Amtrak is considered a government entity. What does this mean? Glad I asked. What it means is that when the government takes to restrict First Amendment rights they can do so if the regulation is "content neutral" and is a legitimate "time, place or manner" restriction. Here, what they are doing is restricting all photography which would be content neutral. They are not restricting a specific type of photography (i.e., nudes). What 4 says is that the crew can restrict photography if the circumstances warrant.

I think the most important thing to realize is that First Amendment rights are not absolute and can be legitimately restricted. This is what the policy is trying to clarify.


----------



## ourlouisiana (Apr 29, 2009)

We've never had a problem taking photos on Amtrak, (can't say the same of PATCO) of the coaches, the diner, and sleepers. In fact on Donna's first trip, our sleeper attendant even allowed us to photo and see both the family bedroom and handicapped bedroom on Superliner. ( We have a handicapped friend that would like to take a train ride with her family )

Not that we HAVE to, but we always ask on-board personnel if we can take photos, it NEVER hurts. On our recent trip on the Crescent, comiing into DC we asked about taking photos at the station. The conductor said it would be OK, but don't take any wierd photos. We asked what he considered wierd - he said someone was trying to take a photo of the traction motors.

On as earlier trip on the Crescent, I wanted to take photos out of the rear of the train. When I asked the conductor, he said he'd be glad to go back with me, the last coach was locked and he would have to open it for me. On the way we talked about photography, railfanning, and Amtrak.

A friendly smile, a friendly demeanor, and an attitude of respect never hurts, and will most of the time get you what you want, except a cab ride.

Whatever you do, if accosted, be respectful, they are doing their job - maybe wrongly informed, or in a dominance over you situation.

Politely get theit name and the other circumstances, and report it by certified mail or e-mail to Amtrak.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Apr 29, 2009)

I put my camera away and obeyed her command! :lol: I'm more travel savvy then my girlfriend and her two daughters. I wasn't going to push my luck and have me sitting somewhere in NY state while they were sitting in DC. I did call Amtrak and filed a complaint. If no one else was able to take pics, then so be it, but when I was the only one told "you can't photograph" on Amtrak, and saw others clicking away, that is what really pertubed me.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 29, 2009)

RailFanLNK said:


> I put my camera away and obeyed her command! :lol: I'm more travel savvy then my girlfriend and her two daughters. I wasn't going to push my luck and have me sitting somewhere in NY state while they were sitting in DC. I did call Amtrak and filed a complaint. If no one else was able to take pics, then so be it, but when I was the only one told "you can't photograph" on Amtrak, and saw others clicking away, that is what really pertubed me.


And that was the right choice Al; to put the camera away avoid trouble that could well have left you standing on some platform along the way.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 30, 2009)

tp49 said:


> Just for my own knowledge how is platform access handled at Newark Penn? Is it the same as at NYP where platform access is restricted to tickethokders at the time the train is announced or is it open access in that let's say you had a ticket on NJT you could wait on the platform until the NJT train came in? I've only ridden through Newark and never been off the train or in the station.


Newark is totally open platformed. There are no valid ticket requirements, although I have never stood on their platforms without my very valid ticket home, and a charged and valid Metrocard which I can validly use to enter PATH platforms. I might not have a valid ticket for the train currently sitting on the platforms, but during some times of the day, 5 different minutes at Newark can see 5 different trains occupying the Tracks 3+4 platform.



printman2000 said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > As some may know, I often train watch at Newark Penn. I do not take photographs, but I do consist record in a small Moleskine or Black 'n Red.
> ...


Yes, I write it down in my notebook, car numbers. Then later I transfer that data to a larger nmotebook containing consists in the order of "Car Class- Car Type - Car Number - Car Name"

So in the small notebook, the Silver Meteors Consist page reads:

4/27/09

97- S Met

FP-657

H-Bag-1735

AIIC-116

"-20

"-75

"-81

AIID-20

HDin-8507

VS-11

"-25

"-31 NR

AC-bug

L 2min

Because thats all I can write down while walking and avoiding people

Then later I'll go to the Raymond Blvd concourse, sit down at a table, check my car notes, and create the following note in my bigger notebook:

4/27/09

#97 Silver Meteor

HHP-8 637

Heritage Baggage 1735 Coach/Conversion

Amfleet II Coach 25110

Amfleet II Coach 25020

Amfleet II Coach 25075

Amfleet II Coach 25081

Amfleet II Diner/Lite 28020

Heritage Diner 8507

Viewliner Sleeper 62011 "Gulf View"

Viewliner Sleeper 62025 "Northern View"

Viewliner Sleeper 62031 "Prairie View" *

Notes:

1) Assistant Conductor bugged me.

2) Train left 2 minutes late.

3) * 62031 "Prairie View" not carrying name.

Oh, by the way, FP stands for "Flying Phallus" because thats what my girlfriend calls the HHP-8. The letter code for the AEM-7 is SM for "Swedish meatball".


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 30, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> AIIC-116


I'm a little confused by the conversion function here



Green Maned Lion said:


> Amfleet II Coach 25110


----------



## Steve4031 (Apr 30, 2009)

GML. What you do is a common practice in the UK. It is called train spotting. When I was over there, I saw people with notebooks writing stuff down. Usually they focus on the engine numbers, and try to see if they can record all of the numbers of a certain class of engine. In England, they have something called platform tickets, which for a few pounds one could by a ticket for the day.

When I was on the OTOL railfest in Tampa last year, we got a tour of the streetcar line shops. While there, I saw a sign explaining behaviors that could help one profile a terrorist. I forgot the exact wording, but I could clearly see that some rail fanning activities fit the profile. The one phrase that caught my attention said something like, "showing unusual interest in operations . . ." I think photographing was in there too.

Later in the day, I was on the silver star headed to Miami with our group of wanted the car number of the baggage car which was in front of my sleeper. He texted me to see if I could do this. I agreed, walked up to the front of the car, and looked through the window at the end of the car for the car number of the baggage car. I got the info, and stood there and texted it back to my friend. I turned around to walk back my room. The HC room was righ there, with the AC or Conductor sitting right there watching me the whole time. I remembered the sign from the tour of the street car place, and was somewhat embarrassed. I explained what I was doing, and apologized for not asking her permission first. She stared at me for a moment, and then I went on my way.

So after reading that sign, I have been discrete about my interests. I usually take pictures, carry a scanner, and use employee timetables to determine the location of the train. But I only do this in my room. Though I have taken pictures from other parts of the train in the past.

The new policy gives the on board crew a lot of discretion. Hopefullly, they will not be too pesky this summer when I am on 1 and 19, because I want some good pics of the Huey P Long bridge, and the one across Lake Pontchartrain.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 30, 2009)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > AIIC-116
> ...


Thats because I mistyped. It was 25116.


----------



## jackal (Apr 30, 2009)

Steve4031 said:


> GML. What you do is a common practice in the UK. It is called train spotting. When I was over there, I saw people with notebooks writing stuff down. Usually they focus on the engine numbers, and try to see if they can record all of the numbers of a certain class of engine. In England, they have something called platform tickets, which for a few pounds one could by a ticket for the day.


That's actually what made me post this post, wherein I mentioned that railfanning appeared to be slightly more respected in the UK than in the U.S. Also, the number of British railfans who help write Wikipedia articles on all things railroad seems to be a very much greater number per capita than in the U.S.--that is, given that they have 20% the U.S. population, it sure seems like they make more than 20% of the edits on Wikipedia! (You can always tell when a Brit is doing the edit, because they always write "railway" instead of "railroad," "points" instead of "switch," and [of course] "colour" instead of "color"!) Heck, we had some very heated discussions about what to call the Railway Signalling article, which started out with a UK-centered focus.

As well, some high-profile Brits are confirmed trainspotter. Not only was there a film with that title, Monty Python member Michael Palin is (despite a Monty Python sketch ridiculing a camel spotter :lol: ). Of course, there are several notable American railfans, too.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 30, 2009)

jackal said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


I tried to imply that the cop knew that I would be recording our conversation. Not a phone conversation, but using the phone to record the conversation between cop and suspect. No cop should be upset with you collecting evidence. My point is, most folks carry a personal recording device on their cell phone. If confronted by the authorities, be super kind, respectful and compliant, and let the officer know that you're recording the conversation.

And, yes, in most states, only one person involved in a conversation _needs_ to know the coversation is being recorded (anti wiretapping laws), but I don't think that even applies when not recording a _phone_ call.


----------



## frj1983 (Apr 30, 2009)

sunchaser said:


> caravanman said:
> 
> 
> > Apologies if this story has already been discussed?
> ...


That's my point exactly,

Most of this stuff has been photographed "ad naseum" over the years and can be found plastered all over the internet. You can even look at how trackage is set up when you use Google Map or any other mapping type function. This whole policy thing is silly and reminds me of "closing the barn door after the horses have already gotten out!"

Perhaps Amtrak should just simply be honest and stop the contest for "security reasons!" h34r:


----------



## had8ley (Apr 30, 2009)

Steve4031 said:


> GML. What you do is a common practice in the UK. It is called train spotting. When I was over there, I saw people with notebooks writing stuff down. Usually they focus on the engine numbers, and try to see if they can record all of the numbers of a certain class of engine. In England, they have something called platform tickets, which for a few pounds one could by a ticket for the day.
> When I was on the OTOL railfest in Tampa last year, we got a tour of the streetcar line shops. While there, I saw a sign explaining behaviors that could help one profile a terrorist. I forgot the exact wording, but I could clearly see that some rail fanning activities fit the profile. The one phrase that caught my attention said something like, "showing unusual interest in operations . . ." I think photographing was in there too.
> 
> Later in the day, I was on the silver star headed to Miami with our group of wanted the car number of the baggage car which was in front of my sleeper. He texted me to see if I could do this. I agreed, walked up to the front of the car, and looked through the window at the end of the car for the car number of the baggage car. I got the info, and stood there and texted it back to my friend. I turned around to walk back my room. The HC room was righ there, with the AC or Conductor sitting right there watching me the whole time. I remembered the sign from the tour of the street car place, and was somewhat embarrassed. I explained what I was doing, and apologized for not asking her permission first. She stared at me for a moment, and then I went on my way.
> ...


The Huey Long bridge is an easy one. I like to take pictures from the lower level of the lounge car at the table just forward of the bathroom. You can always end of train because all the cars are open. The Crescent is a different story. They have been shutting down the last two cars between Atlanta and New Orleans since the mail contract was lost (they would cut the two coaches off and tacked them back on at night to #20 with the loaded mail cars.) If you are a good diplomat you may be able to coach the conductor into letting you get to the rear of the train. I have seen a couple of conductors get pretty nasty to some pax about wanting to go to the rear "just to take pix."


----------



## ns4eva (Apr 30, 2009)

For on board issues you might run into with the crew about photography, you might tell them that Amtrak even made suggestions on how to photograph from in the train. 

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServe...d=1178293990840


----------



## wayman (Apr 30, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Newark is totally open platformed. There are no valid ticket requirements, although I have never stood on their platforms without my very valid ticket home, and a charged and valid Metrocard which I can validly use to enter PATH platforms. I might not have a valid ticket for the train currently sitting on the platforms, but during some times of the day, 5 different minutes at Newark can see 5 different trains occupying the Tracks 3+4 platform.


Oh, relatedly... So I took 66 last week from NWK, which meant wandering from one of the lower platforms (Track 4?) to one of the upper platforms (Track 1?), which in a nearly deserted station at 1:00am entailed a bit of wandering and getting lost before I got to the correct place 

I didn't see any security.

Then, having half an hour before 66 arrived and having an empty platform on which I wouldn't be disturbing anybody, I did what any morris dancer would naturally do: I pulled out my accordion and started to play.

The sound apparently carried: five minutes later three uniformed police came up the stairs, wandered up the platform to look at me, smiled and laughed and left after a minute without saying anything  I kept playing, since they pretty clearly didn't mind :lol: I suppose they might have cared if I were busking (asking for money), but it was extremely clear I wasn't (I mean, there was nobody around, and I didn't have a hat or instrument case open in front of me).

I was a little surprised that, having bothered to come up to Track 1 platform, they didn't actually say anything or ask me to show a ticket, but obviously I could have shown them I was exactly where I was supposed to be (for 66) had they asked, and if they'd told me to stop I would have.

I'm sure the situation would have been very different at 1:00pm than at 1:00am.


----------



## GG-1 (Apr 30, 2009)

Seconds after reading the prior message I opend mail from the History Channel.



> We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union establish Justice, insure Domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America


To Bad they don't include the instruction on how to read this for most people. The people of this country are forgetting about what we stand for.

I have been annoyed by an uninformed security guard in Fort Worth, Texas. What I did was tell her she was wrong and just walked away from her. She tried to escalate this, but several other passengers and I on the Platform just ignored her and continued to take pictures, in full view our car attendant, who also offered to take some pictures of his passengers in front of their train.

Wish I knew what else to say but I intend to enjoy my life, and not let those uninformed/uncaring bother me.

Aloha/Mahalo

Eric


----------



## Neil_M (Apr 30, 2009)

GG-1 said:


> I have been annoyed by an uninformed security guard in Fort Worth, Texas. What I did was tell her she was wrong and just walked away from her. She tried to escalate this, but several other passengers and I on the Platform just ignored her and continued to take pictures, in full view our car attendant, who also offered to take some pictures of his passengers in front of their train.
> Wish I knew what else to say but I intend to enjoy my life, and not let those uninformed/uncaring bother me.
> 
> Aloha/Mahalo
> ...


Fair play to you. These minimum wage security monkies deserve to be ignored and ridiculed at all opportunity.

Despite the nonsense they come out with, taking photos of trains is not a bad thing and is not a crime.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 30, 2009)

GG-1 said:


> Seconds after reading the prior message I opend mail from the History Channel.
> 
> 
> > We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union establish Justice, insure Domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America
> ...


I hate to say this...

But were they uniformed or uninformed? Or does it really make a difference... h34r:


----------



## p&sr (Apr 30, 2009)

GG-1 said:


> I have been annoyed by an uninformed security guard in Fort Worth, Texas. What I did was tell her she was wrong and just walked away from her. She tried to escalate this, but several other passengers and I on the Platform just ignored her and continued to take pictures, in full view our car attendant, who also offered to take some pictures of his passengers in front of their train.


Excellent! Strength in numbers. That's how we won our Rights in the first place, and that's how we'll keep them. Everybody take a stand, and everybody stand together.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 30, 2009)

wayman said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Newark is totally open platformed. There are no valid ticket requirements, although I have never stood on their platforms without my very valid ticket home, and a charged and valid Metrocard which I can validly use to enter PATH platforms. I might not have a valid ticket for the train currently sitting on the platforms, but during some times of the day, 5 different minutes at Newark can see 5 different trains occupying the Tracks 3+4 platform.
> ...


You're confusing me. All the intercity/Commuter platforms are on the same level. Then in the basement (below concourse level) run the Newark City Subway and Newark Light Rail trains (which don't run that late) and above 3/4 is platform "H" from which arriving PATH passengers disembark. The other tracks, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, P, and A are on the same level.


----------



## wayman (Apr 30, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> You're confusing me. All the intercity/Commuter platforms are on the same level. Then in the basement (below concourse level) run the Newark City Subway and Newark Light Rail trains (which don't run that late) and above 3/4 is platform "H" from which arriving PATH passengers disembark. The other tracks, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, P, and A are on the same level.


... Well, I toldja I got turned around! :unsure: Guess I came out on the same level as I started in the end


----------



## jis (May 1, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> You're confusing me. All the intercity/Commuter platforms are on the same level. Then in the basement (below concourse level) run the Newark City Subway and Newark Light Rail trains (which don't run that late) and above 3/4 is platform "H" from which arriving PATH passengers disembark. The other tracks, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, P, and A are on the same level.


H is above 2 and P. There is a pedestrian ramp from H that goes down to 3,4. Other than that there is nothing significant above 3,4 or 5.

And yes, I am confused by the mention of 1 being higher than 3,4 too.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 1, 2009)

Since earlier on there was a discussion of "assault", and since the Media insists on using the word incorrectly, here are the definitions of "assault" and "battery" (which are NOT the same thing):

Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.

So when you are threatened with being touched in a manner which is offensive to you, coupled with the apparent current capability to do so, you have been "assaulted". You have not actually been touched in an offensive manner. When you HAVE been touched, grabbed, shoved, hit, punched, whatever, including having had someone grab one of your possessions that you are holding on to or is attached to you by a strap or belt, in any manner that you found offensive, and was without your prior consent, you have been battered. Assault and Battery are two separate things, usually confused and lumped together by the Media, when they say someone was, for instance, "assaulted". What they almost always meant, and should have said, was "battered".

Generally speaking, each of these is both a crime, for which the State may prosecute them, and a "tort", a tort being a "civil" crime, which means the victim may have the ability to sue the offender for damages in civil court. There are obvious defenses in the situations we have been discussing, where to one extent or another the "authorities", police or Amtrak employees, may have the authority under some circumstances to do what otherwise would not be allowed.

Personally I would rather not have my camera confiscated or destroyed, and be black and blue, and /or be left even for a short time in a jail cell in the middle of nowhere, even if I were later vindicated, simply because I knew that my behavior was in fact lawful ,simply on principle. A photo is not worth a major disruption of my life, and a record of an arrest, and likely several thousand dollars' of legal bills.

And the sending of a complaint letter by Certified or Registered mail, return receipt, is a good idea because it will be taken more seriously to start with, and it can't as easily simply be tossed in the trash can and "What letter?" be said later. It is a paper trail that is documented. Even better is if you send it to at least two different offices at the company, like Legal, or the office of the President of the company, or whatever, as well as Customer Services, or whatever, and you prominently put, at the bottom, "cc:" (name and title of other recipients), "By Certified Mail #" (Certified mail document receipt #). This gives an incentive to the recipient to NOT just toss your letter for fear of a query from the other listed recipients possibly inquiring as to how the primary recipient responded to the query, especially since they will know, because it was sent Certified mail to everybody, that there is a record.

Completely OT, my other major beef with the Media on crime reporting is their insistence on referring to "the suspect(s)" when reporting a crime for which the police as yet have no particular person(s) that they believe are the likely perpetrators. A perpetrator is the person who has committed a crime. You may or may not know, or suspect, who that person(s) is/are. Until you have a particular party or parties identified that you suspect committed the crime(s), you don't have any suspects.

My two cents' worth.


----------



## tp49 (May 1, 2009)

AmtrakWPK said:


> Since earlier on there was a discussion of "assault", and since the Media insists on using the word incorrectly, here are the definitions of "assault" and "battery" (which are NOT the same thing):
> Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.


You are correct in that assault and battery are not the same thing; however, your definition of assault is deficient. It is deficient in that you are missing the key element in any assault (or battery) either in tort or criminally. That element is intent. This is why in tort assault and battery are referred to as "intentional torts."

At common law Criminal Assault is "The intentional creation (other than by mere words) of a reasonable apprehension of imminent bodily harm." Crimainal assault can also be "An attempted battery." The former is a general intent crime while the latter is a specific intent crime. Of course these definitions can vary by state statute and there is no federal assault statute.

In both cases words alone are not sufficient there has to be conduct as well.

Criminal Battery is a bit different from it's tort counterpart in that criminally battery is "An unlawful application of force to the person of another resulting in either bodily injury or an offensive touching."

The term offensive touching is generally referred to as offensive to one of "normal" sensitivity and not offensive to one who is "overly" sensitive.

I took issue in the discussion with the use of the term "Attempted assault" as by it's very definition you cannot attempt an assault, though as previously stated an assault can be an "attempted battery."



> So when you are threatened with being touched in a manner which is offensive to you, coupled with the apparent current capability to do so, you have been "assaulted". You have not actually been touched in an offensive manner. When you HAVE been touched, grabbed, shoved, hit, punched, whatever, including having had someone grab one of your possessions that you are holding on to or is attached to you by a strap or belt, in any manner that you found offensive, and was without your prior consent, you have been battered.


Your example lacks any showing of the key element of intent. In order for there to be an assault/battery the actor had to have intentionally committed the act.



> Generally speaking, each of these is both a crime, for which the State may prosecute them, and a "tort", a tort being a "civil" crime, which means the victim may have the ability to sue the offender for damages in civil court.


There is no such thing as a civil "crime." Crimes are criminal. A tort is a civil wrong for which there is a remeday available at law. This is why people are guilty of crimes but civilly liable.



> Completely OT, my other major beef with the Media on crime reporting is their insistence on referring to "the suspect(s)" when reporting a crime for which the police as yet have no particular person(s) that they believe are the likely perpetrators. A perpetrator is the person who has committed a crime. You may or may not know, or suspect, who that person(s) is/are. Until you have a particular party or parties identified that you suspect committed the crime(s), you don't have any suspects.


Sure you do. The suspect/perpetrator is an "unknown" person who fits a particular description. You can have general suspect descriptions and it happens a lot. You don't have a defendant until you have a named person in custody.

Though, my major beef with the media is when they say an indictment is handed down. Indictments are never handed down. They're handed up from the grand jury (jury box) to the bench.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 1, 2009)

Intent is inferred from "threatened". I didn't say "imminent", "possible," or" likely". A threat carries with it the necessary element of intent. A threat to knock you into the middle of next week is certainly an intentional offer of physical violence sufficient to qualify.

While I suppose it may well vary from state to state, and certainly this is not intended as legal advise, as we are speaking hypothetically, not using anybody's actual facts, my Florida Civil Litigation Handbook gives as elements:

(1) (A)n intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to plaintiff by force, or force unlawfully directed toward plaintiff's person, (2) (T)hose actions created a fear of imminent peril, and (3) (T)here was the apparent present capability to carry out the threat.

A 400 lb 6'2" bouncer comes up, looks at you menacingly, and tells you he's going to kick your (deleted) into next week. That is an assault. He doesn't have to actually take a swing at you to qualify.

No, of course there is no such thing as a "civil crime". On the other hand, I think that conveys what it actually is with a higher likelihood of being understood by laypersons than to say it gives you a Cause of Action, or that it is an intentional tort, torts being, to laypersons, something you eat. Yes I know it's spelled differently.

As to "suspects", here are a couple of immediately available definitions, not made by me:



> In criminal law, a suspect is someone who is under suspicion, often formally announced as being under investigation by law enforcement officials.


and from another source entirely,



> someone who is under suspicion





> somebody who might be guilty: somebody who is suspected of a wrongdoing





> suspect (plural suspects)
> 1. A person who is suspected of something, in particular of committing a crime.
> 
> Round up the usual suspects. — Casablanca





> murder suspect n.
> 1. Someone suspected of committing murder.





> suspect n. ['sʌspɛkt] suspects
> 1. One who is under suspicion.



A suspect is a specific person. A "someone". Suspects are specific individuals. You can talk about a perpetrator, but not a "suspect" until you actually have at least one particular person you suspect committed the crime. Not that the Media takes any notice of the distinction. Although it would be interesting, after listening to a reporter talk about the suspect, to ask them point blank who that person is.

Another instance from the idiom (actually quoted from _Casablanca_, apparently), which I'm sure we've all heard: "Round up the usual suspects."

Hard to do that if you don't know who they are, isn't it? You can't "suspect" *somebody* committed a crime until you have a "somebody". You can believe that a crime was committed, and from witness reports, you can believe that a person of a particular description perpetrated the crime, but that in itself doesn't give you a suspect.

Agreed on True Bill or No True Bill. Indicted or not indicted is also more useful than up or down.

And yes, once arrested and charged, you have a defendant. They arrested the, or a, "suspect" in order to do that.


----------



## tp49 (May 1, 2009)

AmtrakWPK said:


> Intent is inferred from "threatened". I didn't say "imminent", "possible," or" likely". A threat carries with it the necessary element of intent. A threat to knock you into the middle of next week is certainly an intentional offer of physical violence sufficient to qualify.
> While I suppose it may well vary from state to state, and certainly this is not intended as legal advise, as we are speaking hypothetically, not using anybody's actual facts, my Florida Civil Litigation Handbook gives as elements:
> 
> (1) (A)n intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to plaintiff by force, or force unlawfully directed toward plaintiff's person, (2) (T)hose actions created a fear of imminent peril, and (3) (T)here was the apparent present capability to carry out the threat.
> ...


Absolutly, not legal advice just working in hypotheticals, and dealing with the flashbacks from being grilled in class B) .

It does vary from state to state. I pulled out my CACI (California civil jury instructions) book and California's instruction (CACI 1301) is a two part instruction. The first part is (1) That (defendant) acted, intending to cause harmful (or offensive) contact. (2) That (plaintiff) reasonably believed that (he/she) was about to be touched in a harmful (or offensive) manner. OR the part regarding threats is (1) That (defendant) threatened to touch (plaintiff) in a harmful (or an offensive) manner. (2) That it reasonably appeared to (plaintiff) that (defendant) was about to carry out the threat. (3) That (plaintiff) did not consent to (defendant's) conduct. (4) That (plaintiff) was harmed; and (5) That (defendant's) conduct was a substantial factor in causing (plaintiff's) harm. The instruction further states "A touching is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity." and "Words alone do not amount to an assault."

In California your example is an assault because the menacing look combined with the threat implies immediacy under the 2d part of the instruction. We come to the same conclusion with a different route to get there.



> No, of course there is no such thing as a "civil crime". On the other hand, I think that conveys what it actually is with a higher likelihood of being understood by laypersons than to say it gives you a Cause of Action, or that it is an intentional tort, torts being, to laypersons, something you eat. Yes I know it's spelled differently.


After reading that I'm craving some dessert. Tortes are best when chocolate  .



> Agreed on True Bill or No True Bill. Indicted or not indicted is also more useful than up or down.


It's easy to mix up lawyers who practice here with the terminology as in one building you deal with preliminary hearings and information while a couple of blocks away you have grand juries (true bill; no true bill) and indictments.

To make this germaine to trains and not hijack too much we do have a whole set of jury instructions pertaining to railroad crossings which I've never actually read but now think I will as it's raining and there's nothing to watch on tv.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 2, 2009)

And to further buttress the link between this discussion and trains, there is always the reference about "having been railroaded". :lol:

and, again completely, OT, a Yogi-ism: "If you come to a fork in the road, take it." :lol: :blink:


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 2, 2009)

Enough with the legal technicalities!


----------



## PetalumaLoco (May 2, 2009)

AmtrakWPK said:


> And to further buttress the link between this discussion and trains, there is always the reference about "having been railroaded". :lol:
> and, again completely, OT, a Yogi-ism: "If you come to a fork in the road, take it." :lol: :blink:


2 guys out hunting come to a fork in the trail.

There stands a sign reading BEAR LEFT.

So they went home.


----------



## sky12065 (May 2, 2009)

AmtrakWPK said:


> And to further buttress the link between this discussion and trains, there is always the reference about "having been railroaded". :lol:
> and, again completely, OT, a Yogi-ism: "If you come to a fork in the road, take it." :lol: :blink:


If there was also a spoon and a knife there, should you also take them? :huh:


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (May 2, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> I can't imagine any real trouble because I do follow general railfanning guidelines- 1) do not, at any time, trespass on non-public railroad property, 2) do not get in the way of any operating crews. But one never knows. Do any of you have suggestions on how I should CMA?


Were you and your girlfriend ticketed passengers for the train (the Silver) of which you were taking pictures? If I am reading your posting correctly, I think not.

IMHO, Amtrak's rules are pretty clear. You must be a ticketed passenger to take pictures on the platform. Anyone without a ticket is prohibited from restricted areas, which include platforms, right of way, and track areas

Plus, I think Amtrak's own corporate guidelines trump any railfanning guidelines.


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (May 2, 2009)

AmtrakWPK are you a lawyer?


----------



## Ryan (May 3, 2009)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > I can't imagine any real trouble because I do follow general railfanning guidelines- 1) do not, at any time, trespass on non-public railroad property, 2) do not get in the way of any operating crews. But one never knows. Do any of you have suggestions on how I should CMA?
> ...


Not at Newark:



Green Maned Lion said:


> tp49 said:
> 
> 
> > Just for my own knowledge how is platform access handled at Newark Penn? Is it the same as at NYP where platform access is restricted to tickethokders at the time the train is announced or is it open access in that let's say you had a ticket on NJT you could wait on the platform until the NJT train came in? I've only ridden through Newark and never been off the train or in the station.
> ...


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 3, 2009)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Were you and your girlfriend ticketed passengers for the train (the Silver) of which you were taking pictures? If I am reading your posting correctly, I think not.
> IMHO, Amtrak's rules are pretty clear. You must be a ticketed passenger to take pictures on the platform. Anyone without a ticket is prohibited from restricted areas, which include platforms, right of way, and track areas
> 
> Plus, I think Amtrak's own corporate guidelines trump any railfanning guidelines.


You didn't read my post correctly because you think I was taking pictures. I was writing down consist numbers. Thats number one.

Number two is, Newark is open platform. There are too many trains flying through there for too short a time to close platforms to anyone. I had a valid ticket Little Silver to Millburn changing at NWK via Path or Newark Light Rail, so I had justification to be there.

Number three is: Newark is not an Amtrak station. Newark is owned, operated, and policed by New Jersey Transit. That means that NJ Transit policy prevails there, and due to the highly unstaffed nature of many of their stations, everything in NJT's system is open platform, excluding only NYP and PHL. Even the big stations like Secaucus and Hoboken are open platform assuming you have a ticket for travel via Secaucus. (which has its own fee)


----------



## Caboose (May 3, 2009)

Yes, strange...but I think you should just ignore it,


----------



## Karl (May 9, 2009)

I've travelled extensively in Europe by rail, just got back from Italy. No one stops anyone from taking pictures on platforms, whether you have a ticket or not. The police don't even object if you include them in the photos! And no one stops anyone from taking pictures either of the interior of the cars or out the windows while moving. When I asked a policeman in Rome's Termini whether I could take photos, he said, "Of course, why not? Enjoy your trip!"

What a pity that the powers that be in this country have become so paranoid and even more pathetic that the public puts up with such stupid policies.


----------



## jis (May 10, 2009)

Karl said:


> I've travelled extensively in Europe by rail, just got back from Italy. No one stops anyone from taking pictures on platforms, whether you have a ticket or not. The police don't even object if you include them in the photos! And no one stops anyone from taking pictures either of the interior of the cars or out the windows while moving. When I asked a policeman in Rome's Termini whether I could take photos, he said, "Of course, why not? Enjoy your trip!"
> What a pity that the powers that be in this country have become so paranoid and even more pathetic that the public puts up with such stupid policies.


I wouldn'i go so far as to say nobody ever stops you. At least on two occasions I have been stopped from taking pictures of TGVs at Paris Montparnasse. And UK has progressively been becoming more and more photographer unfriendly.

Italy is of course an entirely different and hilarious ballgame. It has got to be the only country where I saw the Police and the Gendarme get into a fight while the perp walked away.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 10, 2009)

jis said:


> It has got to be the only country where I saw the Police and the Gendarme get into a fight while the perp walked away.


Is that sort of like how competing fire companies once operated in New York City?


----------



## Crescent ATN & TCL (May 11, 2009)

had8ley said:


> The Huey Long bridge is an easy one. I like to take pictures from the lower level of the lounge car at the table just forward of the bathroom. You can always end of train because all the cars are open. The Crescent is a different story. They have been shutting down the last two cars between Atlanta and New Orleans since the mail contract was lost (they would cut the two coaches off and tacked them back on at night to #20 with the loaded mail cars.) If you are a good diplomat you may be able to coach the conductor into letting you get to the rear of the train. I have seen a couple of conductors get pretty nasty to some pax about wanting to go to the rear "just to take pix."


Well as of late, just before the recent consist change, instead of closing the end coaches on the Crescent they have been seating all ATL-NOL in the rear of the train. ATL-NOL passengers are now seated as close to the last coach as possible, with the NOL passengers in the last coach. I'm not particularly sure of how things are handled for seating south of ATL to result in everyone ending up in the end and coaches progressively emptying from front of the train to the back as the train gets closer to NOL. I presume at NYP they look at the number of passengers exiting at each stop and determine how many seats are needed to accommodate the passengers for each station and break up the 26 discharge stations between the 4 coaches, so there are roughly 6 stops per car. Of course as seats turn over throughout the trip this system gets skewed to a point. One reason I decided this was the seating plan was when i noticed ,over the course of a few trips, the conductor started loading from the first coach in the NE and by NOL he/she had migrated from that first coach to the last coach over the course of a trip. I assume this was done to be a courtesy for coach passengers from the NE who would like to sleep with as little disturbance as possible. Once the train reached Lake Ponchartrain, the diner, the cafe, and the first 3 coaches were completely empty. The crews from the cafe, diner, and the attendants from the empty coaches had started gathering trash in the empty cars starting with the diner and working toward the end putting all the trash in the kitchen to put out at the large door in the side of the diner. When they got to the coaches they also collected the headrest covers and pillows, reset the seats, tray tables, calf rests, and foot rests. The reason I could see all of this was that they had gone through the entire train opening the doors between the cars and flipping the switch to keep them open. I'm not sure if that's any kind of violation, but it gave a very interesting perspective for the passengers in the NOL coach to be able to see down the inside of the train through 5 cars. Now I'm not sure if the clean-up process I saw happens on every trip into NOL or just when there is a conductor or OBS chief who wants to give the clean-up crew a head start. I'm not particularly sure when a OBS staff's job ends and the turn-around staff's starts so I'm not sure who's normally responsible for this.

Also I wanted to note that the train arrived a full 45minutes early into NOL. That also brings me to ask, what do the crews do when a train arrives significantly early? Do they go home or to their overnight accomodations, or do they stick around and help turn the train, or does it just make up for the late-arrivals?

I know I've gone off-topic with this post, but this seems to happen a lot here. I guess this topic really has more to do with what Amtrak's policies are and whether they are followed or not, so i guess in a way all this fits.

Writing this has given me the frame of mind to finally write a trip report for my 2 most recent train adventures into NOL, so look for those soon. And I once again apologize for this long-winded slightly off-topic post.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (May 11, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Number three is: Newark is not an Amtrak station. Newark is owned, operated, and policed by New Jersey Transit. That means that NJ Transit policy prevails there, and due to the highly unstaffed nature of many of their stations, everything in NJT's system is open platform, excluding only NYP and PHL. Even the big stations like Secaucus and Hoboken are open platform assuming you have a ticket for travel via Secaucus. (which has its own fee)


That's the biggest point right there IMHO.

Amtrak's photography policies ONLY apply to Amtrak owned stations. Just because Amtrak uses it, doesn't mean it owns it. Most of its stations are owned by the state, private real estate, or by local commuter rails. In this case NWK is owned by NJT. My home station, ALC, is owned by NS (They have a regional office building right behind the platform and a short-haul freight yard. The platform at ALC is totally open, Amtrak pax or not. You can go there, any time of the day or night and take photos, consists, videos, whatever. Many old railroaders sit out on lawnchairs in the summer with scanners and watch the freights and chew the fat with the NS employees.

Now if you were at NYP (a station owned by Amtrak) and were an LIRR pax then you would NOT be allowed to take pictures on any of Amtrak's platforms. Again, not the case here.


----------



## VentureForth (May 11, 2009)

Where does the LIRR and NJT get off banning photography?


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (May 11, 2009)

NJT has nothing clear. It really depends, it seems to vary by the day and the people and the weather. My dad flips out when I am editiing NJT videos or pictures insisting its going to get me arrested. Will it? I have no idea. My one rule is if you see NJT Police just put the camera away. Oh and don't take picutes inside New York Penn.


----------



## ruudkeulers (May 11, 2009)

Long Train Runnin said:


> Oh and don't take picutes inside New York Penn.


What's the problem here? There are tens of videos on Youtube that are shot inside NYP, platforms and all! Is there a difference between pictures and videos taken?


----------



## jis (May 11, 2009)

VentureForth said:


> Where does the LIRR and NJT get off banning photography?


NJT does not ban photography. There are some overzealous busybody NJT employees running around thinking that it does.

There is a published notification from George Warrington stating the NJT photo policy, which is basically a rational one - as long as you take photos from public areas and are not trespassing on railway property or getting in the way of operations or being a safety hazard, you;re OK. We are trying to get Mr. Sarles to issue one of his own so that the few know-nothing NJT staff do not have the excuse that the rules have changed under Sarles, which they in fact haven't.

If in doubt send an email to NJT Customer Service (you can find the address on NJT web page somewhere like "Contact Us" or something like that I presume, asking them what their photography policy is. They are usually pretty good at responding.


----------



## VentureForth (May 11, 2009)

OK - I was just wondering because a lot of the argument that was in the thread was "It's not Amtrak property" blah blah blah... Well, if the owner of the property has essentially the same rules as Amtrak, that's a weak retort.


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (May 11, 2009)

ruudkeulers said:


> Long Train Runnin said:
> 
> 
> > Oh and don't take picutes inside New York Penn.
> ...


I mean I guess you can I just see it as a risk not worth taking since thats where the one guy got arrested plus I just hate being down on the platforms at NYP its like a tomb.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 11, 2009)

VentureForth said:


> OK - I was just wondering because a lot of the argument that was in the thread was "It's not Amtrak property" blah blah blah... Well, if the owner of the property has essentially the same rules as Amtrak, that's a weak retort.


It's not a weak retort. Lets both you and your neighbor have personal no-smoking policies on your properties, ok? And your neighbor sees your son smoking in your backyard. Is it ok for your neighbor, who is not tasked with enforcing your rules, to vault over your fence, and start insisting that your son is to stop smoking or he is going to call the police on him? Of course not. By being on your property in an unauthorized capacity, he's trespassing. Same with the Amtrak conductor, who has no authority to enforce NJ Transit rules on NJ Transit property. He has the authority to inform NJ Transit of the violation, nothing more. Just as your neighbor has the authority to inform you of your sons misbehavior, and nothing more.


----------



## VentureForth (May 11, 2009)

Yeah, but in your case, there were no "no smoking" rules for them to improperly enforce.


----------



## Karl (May 11, 2009)

From what I understand, photography is permitted at all times on NJT platforms, so you should be OK at Newark Penn Station.


----------

