Senior engineer's `error contributed to rail crash'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A SENIOR railway engineer's alleged gross act of negligence was blamed yesterday for contributing to the October 2000 Hatfield rail crash in which four people died.
Nicholas Jefferies, Balfour Beatty's civil engineer, had done nothing to implement safety recommendations sent out after another broken rail incident a year earlier, an Old Bailey court was told. Had the guidelines been properly applied, the Hatfield crash would not have happened, said Richard Lissack QC, for the prosecution.
"A 20mph speed limit would have been applied and the track been replaced in 36 hours," Mr Lissack told the court. "For a man of his standing and experience, he just did not do what he was meant to have done. He made an error - of some considerable gravity, we suggest."
The broken rail in the earlier incident had been found on the east coast main line and replaced. Afterwards, Railtrack's head of track, David Ventry, sent out an urgent letter highlighting gauge corner cracking (GCC) - a metal fatigue which was known to cause broken rails - and recommending that checking procedures should be stepped up. The letter was discussed at a civil engineering conference where Mr Jefferies was present, said Mr Lissack.
"What did he do with the Ventry letter? He did nothing ... He was sufficiently senior to be regarded as `mind of the company'. On receipt of the Ventry letter, he had a clear duty to advise track engineers of its implications: that there was a potential for existing GCC sites to be in a dangerous position and all such sites should be revisited forthwith."
Mr Lissack was outlining the prosecution case in the trial of five rail executives, including Mr Jefferies, accused of manslaughter following the Hatfield crash.
The trial continues.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments