Yesterday I learned that when a train hits and kills anyone on the tracks, the engineer is charged with manslaughter. Is this true?
Please cite where you learned this “fact”.
"A railway engineer however who while running an engine runs over and kills a woman is doing a lawful act in running the engine and if it was done with due care and caution he cannot be held guilty of manslaughter but he would be guilty if he was careless. Com v Kubn
I found this notation in the Ohio Supreme Court annotations at this location…
I heard it in casual conversation. It didn’t sound Kosher to me, so that’s why I posted it here.
Yea, I dont think that’s the case, or my cousin, and uncle, both would have been charged. If I remember correctly, the odds of an engineer striking and killing someone on the tracks approach 100%.
[does some Googling]
Interesting, this article says three deaths per engineer.
The strategy of libel lawyers(all honorable men) is to paint the engineer as running a train as a mounted knight charging across a battlefield, hence the phrase, “charging down the track.” AN engineer could be charged with manslaughter and the railroad held libel if a jury ruled that the engineer did not do all possible to avoid hitting the person on the tracks. With the recording devices in modern locomotives, an application of “emergency” had better be recorded for the aftermath of any fatal accident. The decision of indicting or not indicting is with the local/county DA. and is obviously a decision that can be politically based.
Because of the financial robustness (massive assets/property) the railroads are, to some degree, held libel in nearly all accidents, but rarely criminal libel. Libel claims are formulated on percentage of fault, and judged by one , six, or eight jurors. None will have any RR experience.
Great Case. A carwith family inside, is sitting at a road crossing with its gates down and lights flashing while a Santa Fe train passes at a high rate of speed. A large truck rear-ends the car with sufficient force to push it into the moving train. Fatalities ensue.
Guess who was held libel???
Ed
So what would happen with a car load of nuns??
In the cited case the Truck Driver! He is the cause, following too close, to much speed, and inattention to driving. Couldn’t hang up the phone quick enough!
Paul
What about a car load of lawyers? 
How about a carload of Nuns driven by a Lawyer?
Andrew, After the horrible accident and loss of all lives, they parted company, never to see each other again.
Dan Padova said:
Yesterday I learned that when a train hits and kills anyone on the tracks, the engineer is charged with manslaughter. Is this true?
It has a ring of truth about it because the bloke at the front represents the money behind which can be obtained by suing . Simple really .
Mike
Dave Taylor said:
Andrew, After the horrible accident and loss of all lives, they parted company, never to see each other again.
Now that one is very, very, very subtle. 
Well if the person hit was walking on the tracks, or crossing the tracks, not at a crossing, they would be trespassing. That throws another wrinkle into the equation.
When I was a kid, there was a fatal accident at a grade crossing somewhere around here. I remember seeing on the news, police officers with their radar guns clocking trains. There was talk about the local municipalities putting up speed limit signs along the tracks and citing engineers who exceeded the posted speed limits. Even as kid I though that was ridiculous. First I didn’t think the municipalities had jurisdiction to regulate the speed of trains. Second, I would love to see a cop try and chase down a train around here, since so many tracks do not have roads adjacent to them. And, by the time the train stopped, if it were to stop, the train would be in the next municipality.
That was back in the Penn Central days, so, with the state of the tracks around here, trains didn’t go very fast anyway.
So I can believe that some crazy town did try and prosecute an engineer for manslaughter. I can also see where it would fall apart on appeal, if it even went that far.
While I never killed anyone while working as a hoghead, I had my fair share of close calls, but never once heard of a hoghead being charged. Normally what happens is the victims family sues the railroad and in a few rare cases the engineer as well. The railroad lawyers step in and handle the case with many the one big word called “Trespassing”… It usually ends with the RR paying some sort of claim to the victims family despite the trespassing. I guess the lawyers figure it’s cheaper to settle out of court than go through the legal process. One case that I know about (I worked with the guy quite a bit) is the the victims family first sued the RR, they settled, and then the family then sued the engineer. The RR lawyers had enough of this by now and went to trial. Took over a year for the court to work everything out, and guess what the outcome was?
Oh to add to Dave’s quote about police trying to ticket railroad employees… It still happens. They will try and ticket you for blocking grade crossings, or some other ridiculous charge. Then the proceed to ask the engineer for his Driver’s License… At least in WA state, the law stated that a locomotive engineer did NOT have to provide a DL to a uniformed officer because he was not operating a motor vehicle on public roads. The dumb police would then keep the line of questioning continuing and write ticket. By this time the local Trainmaster would be down, and some choice words would be exchanged between the two… I’ve heard of a few times when the special agents had to get involved…
Did the local constables ever get charged with trespassing? That would be hilarious.
Kind of tangential trivia, kind of not - and merely my opinion - between what is generally, on the average taught/not taught in school; and the honest lack of the majority of people being required to use such information in everyday life; most people have no idea how long in time and far in distance it takes trains and ships to stop. Something like a loaded train at track speed up to a couple miles to stop, and a loaded freight ship or tanker up to ten miles to stop.
Semi-trailers too don’t exactly stop in the same distance as a Smart Car.
In the daily driving of their cars, vans, and utility vehicles, they generally don’t have to plan their brake application an hour ahead of time, and the thought simply doesn’t occur that other vehicles are different, very different.
**Craig Townsend said:**Then the proceed to ask the engineer for his Driver’s License…
“Aw man, does that mean I’m getting ticketed for not using my blinker at that left switch back there?”
Forrest Scott Wood said:
Kind of tangential trivia, kind of not - and merely my opinion - between what is generally, on the average taught/not taught in school; and the honest lack of the majority of people being required to use such information in everyday life; most people have no idea how long in time and far in distance it takes trains and ships to stop. Something like a loaded train at track speed up to a couple miles to stop, and a loaded freight ship or tanker up to ten miles to stop.
Semi-trailers too don’t exactly stop in the same distance as a Smart Car.In the daily driving of their cars, vans, and utility vehicles, they generally don’t have to plan their brake application an hour ahead of time, and the thought simply doesn’t occur that other vehicles are different, very different.
Forrest, a loaded bulk oil carrier (ship) or or container ship can take a mile or two to stop, not ten. The largest ship ever built, weighing 550.000 tonnes took 5.5 miles to stop from a flank speed of 35 kts, though she never cruised that fast. Navy oilers take about a mile to stop from a flank speed of in excess of 30 kts (they have to keep up with the fleet, ya know). Both warships that I was permanent party on could come to a complete stop and be going backwards from a flank speed of in excess of 30 kts in less than a ship length. That was a wild ride, let me tell you.
Ed Halo said:
The strategy of libel lawyers(all honorable men) is to paint the engineer as running a train as a mounted knight charging across a battlefield, hence the phrase, “charging down the track.” AN engineer could be charged with manslaughter and the railroad held libel if a jury ruled that the engineer did not do all possible to avoid hitting the person on the tracks. With the recording devices in modern locomotives, an application of “emergency” had better be recorded for the aftermath of any fatal accident. The decision of indicting or not indicting is with the local/county DA. and is obviously a decision that can be politically based.
Because of the financial robustness (massive assets/property) the railroads are, to some degree, held libel in nearly all accidents, but rarely criminal libel. Libel claims are formulated on percentage of fault, and judged by one , six, or eight jurors. None will have any RR experience.
Great Case. A carwith family inside, is sitting at a road crossing with its gates down and lights flashing while a Santa Fe train passes at a high rate of speed. A large truck rear-ends the car with sufficient force to push it into the moving train. Fatalities ensue.
Guess who was held libel???
Ed
Other than applying the brakes, a risky decision in most cases I’m sure, what more can an engineer do? To me, that one action encompasses “all an engineer can do”.