Jump to content

People too stupid to ride the L!


strictures

Recommended Posts

I saw that story on one of the local outlets' website. I'm surprised that either one of them survived because I really did read the story thinking they'd say one or both idiots would be dead. That was extremely stupid to hop on the tracks just to take a picture. Besides electrocution, they risked being hit by a train. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dailycommuter62 said:

Security cam footage of the incident found its way online and news reports doesn't do justice of how idiotic they we're at what they were doing.

7mm079o.png

Sitting on the track with your back to the third rail. I put a link to the footage, fair warning its graphic.

 

Only place like that on the CTA is in Austin or Oak Park on the Lake St L.   The power must have been off for them to do that, so I'm betting this was some sort of student film being shot there & the CTA took the cash & allowed them to do it.  The tiny video monitors under the "Play", "Fast Forward" & "Rewind" labels appear to indicate that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Illinois Appellate Court opinion reported in the Sun-Times that CTA was not liable for the death of a woman who went down from the 69th-Red Line platform to the tracks to retrieve her dropped cell phone and was struck by a train. Main lesson here is that while someone on the platform is an invitee, someone who intentionally goes onto the tracks is a trespasser and CTA employees only owe a duty to refrain from wanton and willful  conduct, and there was evidence that while the operator was a bit inattentive, and was fired, he engaged the deadman and tried to stop.

Like the Yellow Line NTSB report, there was extensive discussion of video evidence and the three braking systems.. Unlike this situation, all injured persons on the Yellow Line train were where they were supposed to be and I don't see CTA having a defense. In both cases. the operator should have engaged the track brake, but, in the exigencies of the situations, I don't know if CTA should expect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

Illinois Appellate Court opinion reported in the Sun-Times that CTA was not liable for the death of a woman who went down from the 69th-Red Line platform to the tracks to retrieve her dropped cell phone and was struck by a train. Main lesson here is that while someone on the platform is an invitee, someone who intentionally goes onto the tracks is a trespasser and CTA employees only owe a duty to refrain from wanton and willful  conduct, and there was evidence that while the operator was a bit inattentive, and was fired, he engaged the deadman and tried to stop.

Like the Yellow Line NTSB report, there was extensive discussion of video evidence and the three braking systems.. Unlike this situation, all injured persons on the Yellow Line train were where they were supposed to be and I don't see CTA having a defense. In both cases. the operator should have engaged the track brake, but, in the exigencies of the situations, I don't know if CTA should expect that.

But didn't the CTA lose the case where a drunk crossed onto the Ravenswood tracks, despite the angled wood guard & died on the third rail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, strictures said:

But didn't the CTA lose the case where a drunk crossed onto the Ravenswood tracks, despite the angled wood guard & died on the third rail?

Yes, CTA did. The distinction in Lee v. CTA  was "A possessor of land who maintains on the land an artificial condition which involves a risk of death or serious bodily harm to persons coming in contact with it, is subject to liability for bodily harm caused to trespassers by his failure to exercise reasonable care to warn them of the condition if (a) the possessor knows or has reason to know of their presence in dangerous proximity to the condition, and (b) the condition is of such a nature that he has reason to believe that the trespasser will not discover it or realize the risk involved." Restatement (Second) of Torts § 337, at 195 (1965).

There was also evidence that CTA was on notice based on 10 prior accidents on CTA tracks where third rail was at grade, and that CTA was the only transit authority "in the United States or Canada where an electrically charged grade-level third rail is unguarded, uncovered or unfenced."

The possible rationalizations are either the Illinois Supreme Court will reverse or CTA didn't have notice that passengers were jumping off the platform at 69th.

Based on the last statement quoted above, I'm surprised that CTA removed the gates at Maple and Isabella in Wilmette, nor installed them on the Yellow Line when that went to third rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2025 at 2:15 PM, Busjack said:

Illinois Appellate Court opinion reported in the Sun-Times that CTA was not liable for the death of a woman who went down from the 69th-Red Line platform to the tracks to retrieve her dropped cell phone and was struck by a train.

Press Release CTA Will Pilot Automatic Detection System on Rail Right-of-Way . It illustrates the legal rule barring evidence of subsequent remedial acts in stating, "The CTA receives approximately 2,000 reports every year of people entering the right-of-way, one of the most common being riders who jump off a platform to retrieve a dropped mobile phone." On the other hand, this may prove notice.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...