Wellington Quay Bus Verdict

shltter · 21-02-2007 4:05pm

dub_commuter wrote:

Does anybody else feel this has set a dangerous precedent?

If I drive my car tommorow and run into the back of someone, I can just say I have a power surge? I would point to other cars, even if they are totally different have had the same thing and the same issue, therefore I could not be found guilty if we are going to apply the law the way it has been in this case?

So basically anyone who now knocks anyone down could in theory point to this case to their defence.

If you can find an expert witness that can back up your claim as possible and you can show that these surges do happen then you may well get off if you can get the jury to believe that there is a reasonable doubt.

dub_commuter wrote:

The fact that the driver has been freed, must mean that the bus was at fault, according to the jury. In that case, AV32 must be withdrawn and never used in public service again. Harsh? Yes, but if it wasn't the driver it must be the bus....

And again, if this one is faulty, some would argue the whole load of AV's must also be pulled out. Now I am not suggesting they do this, but this is the questions that the verdict now raises.

No the jury did not find that the bus was at fault the bus was not on trial.

The jury merely found that the prosecution had not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a power surge could not have happened that does not mean that the jury have found that a power surge did happen
They are 2 completely separate things.

shltter · 21-02-2007 4:12pm

Red Alert wrote:

I agree that a lot of people on the jury probably didn't know exactly what an automatic gearbox was, or how it worked. Some people for instance mightn't get the fact that you can (safely) leave the handbrake on when in drive and it won't go anywhere.

Not safely and the bus will not move as long as the handbrake does not fail.

Red Alert wrote:

Volvo should have also taken more care I think in the way they presented their facts. We have an almost 100% volvo bus fleet (apart from the 10 Dennis Tridents) in dublin, so Dublin Bus and Volvo should have made sure that the facts are reported right and nothing is hidden, embellished or processed carelessly.
.

Volvo should not have been allowed near the bus they clearly would have a vested interest in hiding any possible fault. After the evidence for the trial and investigation had been gathered then they can have access to the bus but to allow an interested party to gather "evidence" on behalf of the prosecution was madness.

Pansy Potter · 21-02-2007 5:13pm

I don't accept the power surge theory at all. I think its a fudge created by the driver's defense to create reasonable doubt, and it worked. And that's what they're paid for. I know that Mr Henvey's life will never be the same again, but at least he still has one. Are the families of the people who went into town that day and never came home now expected to accept those deaths as a faultless act of God, or as some kind of death by natural causes. The judge instructed the jury that if they felt that the accident might have been caused by a malfunction that caused the bus to go out of control then Mr Henvey should be found not guilty. I still believe that if Mr Henvey wasn't on duty that day that those people would still be alive.

A bit like the Stardust all over again. Sweep it under the carpet.

KC61 · 21-02-2007 6:03pm

Whilst I understand that people are focussing on whether the bus or driver was at fault, I am somewhat surprised that the fundamental issue of the bus terminus location and that of other stops in Dublin has been ignored by many posters.

If the number 66 bus had been able to pull into the stop correctly on that day, i.e. against the kerb and not out on the road, then I firmly believe that the effect of the sudden acceleration of the other bus would have been completely different, as it would in all probability have knocked into the back of the 66, rather than ploughing into all those people.

Why could the 66 not pull in? Because of a total lack of interest from all the public bodies in reviewing bus stop locations from both a safety and a customer service perspective, resulting in a bus terminus at a location completely unsuited to it. This has now been changed, but even now we have multiple examples of potential accidents waiting to happen. Another example would be that whilst we have articulated buses in operation in Dublin, not a single bus stop had the reserved road space lengthened to take account of this!

These are the sort of detailed issues that appear to be ignored by those in authority, even after the unnecessary deaths of five innocent victims.

shltter · 21-02-2007 6:06pm

Pansy Potter wrote:

A bit like the Stardust all over again. Sweep it under the carpet.

It's nothing like the stardust Mr Henvey has stood trial and been judged innocent by a jury of his peers.

Butterley nor anyone else ever stood trial in fact Butterly received compensation for the damage to his property. Despite the fact that the exits were chained.

You may not agree with the outcome but the fact is that power surges do happen and the jury felt that based on the evidence presented to them that they could not convict Mr Henvey of any crime.

purple'n'gold · 21-02-2007 6:22pm

Red Alert wrote:

On RTE news today, in case anybody hadn't seen:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0220/bus.html

I hope the man can now get on with his life, whether or not he's able to return to work. It can't be easy for him or his family, especially given his exemplary service record which was rightly heard about in court.

My thoughts are also with the people who died that day. May they rest in peace.

What lessons if any should/could be learned from that day?

Lessons, it’s all down to what the jury decides. IMO they realised that the guy made a terrible mistake, he put his foot on the accelerator instead of the brake. But they, the jury decided that there was no point in convicting him i.e., they didn’t think he had actually committed a crime. Just made an awful mistake, of course it helped his cause that the waters were muddied by all that power surge business.
So the lesson is, if the jury has pity on you, your half way there.

Hagar · 21-02-2007 6:22pm

It would be interesting to know how many of these surges were officially put on record by drivers prior to the accident, specifically are there any on record from those who testified in court in the driver's defence? Are there any records of drivers who experienced these surges refusing to take the bus out, again prior to the incident ?

purple'n'gold · 21-02-2007 6:27pm

Hagar wrote:

It would be interesting to know how many of these surges were officially put on record by drivers prior to the accident, specifically are there any on record from those who testified in court in the driver's defence? Are there any records of drivers who experienced these surges refusing to take the bus out, again prior to the incident ?

Do drivers have to fill in a log? Do they have to report anything out of the ordinary with the engine etc? I would think so.

lostexpectation · 21-02-2007 7:07pm

purplengold wrote:

Do drivers have to fill in a log? Do they have to report anything out of the ordinary with the engine etc? I would think so.

did you tv3 news last night it had several bus drivers talking about surges and copies of reports from cie with drivers experiences surges bringing the bus in repair and then the bus been giving to someother driver 5 mins later and then he had to bring it back because it was faulty too, and other bus drivers who called in the health safety on the buses.

so tiredness wasn't a factor?

Wishbone Ash · 21-02-2007 7:32pm

jman0 wrote:

Why are so many feeling relieved the driver got off?

That's a disgraceful statement. He was aquitted of the offence he was charged with. You seem to be implying that the driver somehow got away with something. He has not been proved guilty of any offence. He was innocent and remains innocent. It's the cornerstone of our legal system.

Red Alert wrote:

Some people for instance mightn't get the fact that you can (safely) leave the handbrake on when in drive and it won't go anywhere

Yes, probably 99.9% of the time it will remain stationery but it's considered to be very bad practice.

Calina · 21-02-2007 8:09pm

Alright.

I have not yet handed out any bans but I see quite a few posts suggesting that posters here have opinions which are more valid than that of a jury in the court system.

If you are questioning the outcome of this case, please do make sure that you do not also attribute guilt where none has been found by a jury.

jman0 and PanseyPotter, please take note.

dowlingm · 21-02-2007 9:27pm

there may be a civil case and the burden of proof on the plaintiffs will be lower.

Wishbone Ash · 21-02-2007 9:36pm

dowlingm wrote:

there may be a civil case and the burden of proof on the plaintiffs will be lower.

Presumably against Dublin Bus as opposed to the driver??

dowlingm · 21-02-2007 10:33pm

wishbone

or both - depends on insurance law, however the rule of thumb is sue everybody.

I thought there was a corp manslaughter charge on the books but obviously DPP didn't think he could make it stick?

Victor · 22-02-2007 12:43am

jman0 wrote:

Why are so many feeling relieved the driver got off?
No fault was found on the bus. Sounds to me as though his concentration slipped for a moment which resulted in his killing loads of people.

He was found to be not guilty.

Victor · 22-02-2007 3:00am

AlekSmart wrote:

If anybody here is a closet "Anorak" (Bus Spotter) then surf some of the many excellent Photographic websites such as http://londonbuspageinexile.wordpress.com/ Disregarding the pictures of lovely curvy Buses on many of the sites,take a good hard look at the BACKGROUNDS. In most of the UK urban bus operation shots one will see Pedestrian Barriers or other physical means of controlling the waiting passengers or of directing passenger flow.

Where?

This sort of inherent carelessness used to be addressed by the likes of Eugene Lambert and Judge via safety films on RTE many decades ago but it appears our national genetic makeup is now of sufficient quality to make such commonsense redundant.

Judge may be making a comeback.

There were some short-lived rumours at the time that the Wellington Quay site was allocated by "executive decision" of the Gardai (whatever that implies) rather than by the time-honoured DCC/DB/Gardai committee system.

Ultimately the location of bus stops is for the Garda.

Red Alert wrote:

As an elec engineer, I'm a bit confused as to what exactly they are calling a 'power surge' - whether they mean an electrical one, or that the bus just 'surged forward'. Either way it was never really explained simply what they were actually talking about.

As I understand it, at certain voltages, the throttle would open too much.

I'm a bit disturbed too that others such as a garda who ran over an old woman in clonskeagh at high speed in a car that was beyond doubt fully functional wasn't even made stand trial, and yet this man was.

Weren't the tyres threads below the manufaturer's requirements but above the legal requirement?

Pansy Potter wrote:

I still believe that if Mr Henvey wasn't on duty that day that those people would still be alive.

You are wishing something for the past, which is impossible.

KC61 wrote:

Whilst I understand that people are focussing on whether the bus or driver was at fault, I am somewhat surprised that the fundamental issue of the bus terminus location and that of other stops in Dublin has been ignored by many posters. If the number 66 bus had been able to pull into the stop correctly on that day, i.e. against the kerb and not out on the road, then I firmly believe that the effect of the sudden acceleration of the other bus would have been completely different, as it would in all probability have knocked into the back of the 66, rather than ploughing into all those people.

I wonder if there will be prosecutions by the Health & Safety Authority.

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Presumably against Dublin Bus as opposed to the driver??

From day 1, Dublin Bus said they would look after the victims. I'm not sure what this has meant in practical terms.

AlekSmart · 22-02-2007 1:25pm

Sorry bout the pics Vic,but my point is that when browsing the Pic sites the background tends to show far more evidence of Pedestrian management in Urban Bus Stop areas then we seem to be prepared to consider.

The Wellington Quay tradgedy was largely responded to VERY comprehensively by CIE.
My memory tells me that Dr John Lynch very early on had the Board of CIE accept financial responsibility for the entire thing.

That was in Civil terms,in the meantime the company covered ALL funeral expenses and made ex-gratia payments to alleviate immediate hardship.

I would imagine that there will be Civil cases before the courts to allow the disbursement of funds to minors for example or to siblings or non related companions.
However these will be purely legal in nature and will not have any requirement for Legal actions to establish blame etc.

The situation prevailing between Volvo and CIE however may well be quite different and I shoud imagine quite some legal midnite oil is currently being spent poring over reams of court related paperwork and not all generated in No Ceithre Cuirtenna either.... :cool:

Time Magazine · 22-02-2007 1:38pm

dub_commuter wrote:

Does anybody else feel this has set a dangerous precedent?

If I drive my car tommorow and run into the back of someone, I can just say I have a power surge? I would point to other cars, even if they are totally different have had the same thing and the same issue, therefore I could not be found guilty if we are going to apply the law the way it has been in this case?

Generally speaking jury decisions carry no precedent.

I could be up in court with a murder victim's blood on my clothes, the knife in my dishwasher and my DNA at the incident and the jury can find me innocent. Says nothing about the validity of DNA in identifying someone though. Conversely, I can be convicted by a jury with no evidence at all against me.

Basically what I'm saying is that the Frog Ward case does not change Irish law one bit, nor does this. It was an isolated jury decision.

Wishbone Ash · 22-02-2007 3:11pm

AlekSmart wrote:

Sorry bout the pics Vic,but my point is that when browsing the Pic sites the background tends to show far more evidence of Pedestrian management in Urban Bus Stop

I'm open to correction but, from looking through those pictures I can only see one barrier. That barrier appears to be one of those London busy street corner barriers at the entrance/exit of a Tube station and not at a bus stop.

Pansy Potter wrote:

I still believe that if Mr Henvey wasn't on duty that day that those people would still be alive.

.....and if he was rostered on a different route......if there only had been roadworks at the stop......if Mr Henvey had only chosen a different career...........if JFK's limmo hadn't made that irregular right and then left turn into Dealy Plaza.......:rolleyes:

You can't change history so "what if's" are totally pointless.

SickCert · 22-02-2007 3:13pm

Another bus going forwards.

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=149235&command=displayContent&sourceNode=149218&contentPK=16167489&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch

seamus · 22-02-2007 4:41pm

In terms of barriers, I can't see any reason why they couldn't insert the steel bollards which are placed in a lot of places in the city - most notably around St. Stephen's green.

The spacing of the bollards eliminates the "What if a car is parked in the way" argument, but would be close enough together (and strong enough IMO) to stop a bus if this incident occured again, or something similar such as being rear-ended by a lorry.

cast_iron · 22-02-2007 5:07pm

seamus wrote:

but would be close enough together (and strong enough IMO) to stop a bus if this incident occured again, or something similar such as being rear-ended by a lorry.

Alot of foundation work would have to be done to ensure one of these actually stopped a double decker bus. Quite frankly, they wouldn't be worth it.

jman0 · 22-02-2007 5:13pm

immediately after the bus rode up onto the path and over pedestrians people could see the driver sitting in the drivers seat with his head in his hands.
Now if the bus lurched forward due to defect then surely he'd be out of that bus helping the wounded instead of being overcome with guilt like that.
In my mind, the driver (with the help of Dublin Bus) is just a petty coward, not man enough to take responsibility for his actions, who'd would rather save his own skin thru legal wrangling.
I wish i were on the jury, i'd really give them a piece of my mind.

Wishbone Ash · 22-02-2007 5:17pm

jman0 wrote:

immediately after the bus rode up onto the path and over pedestrians people could see the driver sitting in the drivers seat with his head in his hands.
Now if the bus lurched forward due to defect then surely he'd be out of that bus helping the wounded instead of being overcome with guilt like that.
In my mind, the driver (with the help of Dublin Bus) is just a petty coward, not man enough to take responsibility for his actions, who'd would rather save his own skin thru legal wrangling.
I wish i were on the jury, i'd really give them a piece of my mind.

Another disgraceful post. Have you never heard of "shock".

Post Reported.

HelterSkelter · 22-02-2007 5:18pm

jman0 wrote:

immediately after the bus rode up onto the path and over pedestrians people could see the driver sitting in the drivers seat with his head in his hands.
Now if the bus lurched forward due to defect then surely he'd be out of that bus helping the wounded instead of being overcome with guilt like that.
In my mind, the driver (with the help of Dublin Bus) is just a petty coward, not man enough to take responsibility for his actions, who'd would rather save his own skin thru legal wrangling.
I wish i were on the jury, i'd really give them a piece of my mind.

So what do you think happened then brains? DO you think he drove over those people on purpose? Do you think he didn't want to help them? Have you never heard of someone going into shock before?

EDIT: Yeah post reported here also

Wishbone Ash · 22-02-2007 5:25pm

cast_iron wrote:

Alot of foundation work would have to be done to ensure one of these actually stopped a double decker bus. Quite frankly, they wouldn't be worth it.

I agree cast iron. Even very heavy duty posts would not be totally effective as the front/nearside corner of most buses are like one big crumple zone (plastic/fibreglass/light metal etc.). Depending on the speed involved, the bus could travel a considerable distance into the post before coming to a stop.

cast_iron · 22-02-2007 5:35pm

jman0 wrote:

I wish i were on the jury, i'd really give them a piece of my mind.

Thankfully, juries judge people on the facts shown during a trial, and don't arrive in with their minds made up like you.

seamus · 22-02-2007 5:37pm

jman0 wrote:

immediately after the bus rode up onto the path and over pedestrians people could see the driver sitting in the drivers seat with his head in his hands.
Now if the bus lurched forward due to defect then surely he'd be out of that bus helping the wounded instead of being overcome with guilt like that.
In my mind, the driver (with the help of Dublin Bus) is just a petty coward, not man enough to take responsibility for his actions, who'd would rather save his own skin thru legal wrangling.
I wish i were on the jury, i'd really give them a piece of my mind.

"He's a witch! Burn him!"

(Just pointing out a similar argument to yours).

Calina · 22-02-2007 5:59pm

jman0 banned for two weeks.

Ham'nd'egger · 22-02-2007 6:45pm

Calina wrote:

jman0 banned for two weeks.

At the risk of being warned...

HOORAY!!!!!

Wellington Quay Bus Verdict

Comments