+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: GO Transit (/showthread.php?tid=12)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
RE: GO Transit - robdrimmie - 01-29-2020
(01-29-2020, 01:15 PM)KevinL Wrote: The woman involved in the November collision at Lancaster has received an official charge. I imagine it is due to the child involved being under her care on her job at the time.
https://www.therecord.com/news-story/9834853-woman-hit-by-train-charged-by-transport-canada/
From the article, the charges are:
Quote:"Jenna Armstrong, 30, is charged with failing to give way to railway equipment at a road crossing."
A CTV article [1] specifies the exact charge:
Quote:The charge: "did fail to give way to railway equipment at a road crossing, Railway Safety Act sec 26.2," police say.
A charge is not a conviction. This is not a criminal charge. It more strongly suggests wrongdoing on Armstrong's part but until she is actually convicted of negligence we really don't have any more information than we did in November.
[1] https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/charge-laid-after-woman-child-hit-by-go-train-in-kitchener-1.4787379
RE: GO Transit - white_brian - 02-19-2020
I tried reading the train schedule but couldn't differentiate between train and bus
RE: GO Transit - Bytor - 02-19-2020
(02-19-2020, 12:18 AM)white_brian Wrote: I tried reading the train schedule but couldn't differentiate between train and bus
In the legend at the top, schedule shows boxes of how to distinguish between bus and trains. IIRC it's always the coloured box for the train. On the Kitchener line full schedule that is a green background.
RE: GO Transit - jeffster - 02-19-2020
(01-29-2020, 01:21 PM)robdrimmie Wrote:(01-29-2020, 01:15 PM)KevinL Wrote: The woman involved in the November collision at Lancaster has received an official charge. I imagine it is due to the child involved being under her care on her job at the time.
https://www.therecord.com/news-story/9834853-woman-hit-by-train-charged-by-transport-canada/
From the article, the charges are:
Quote:"Jenna Armstrong, 30, is charged with failing to give way to railway equipment at a road crossing."
A CTV article [1] specifies the exact charge:
Quote:The charge: "did fail to give way to railway equipment at a road crossing, Railway Safety Act sec 26.2," police say.
A charge is not a conviction. This is not a criminal charge. It more strongly suggests wrongdoing on Armstrong's part but until she is actually convicted of negligence we really don't have any more information than we did in November.
[1] https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/charge-laid-after-woman-child-hit-by-go-train-in-kitchener-1.4787379
I might imagine that other charges could be added at some point. I believe that likely the police have other charges already, but up to the prosector to decide to which charges to go on. A charge like child endangerment is most likely, which in an indictable offence.
I did notice that about a week before these charges, the family had closed down their GOFUNDME page.
RE: GO Transit - white_brian - 02-19-2020
(02-19-2020, 12:28 PM)Bytor Wrote:Perfect thank you, I was looking at the wrong schedule as well lol(02-19-2020, 12:18 AM)white_brian Wrote: I tried reading the train schedule but couldn't differentiate between train and bus
In the legend at the top, schedule shows boxes of how to distinguish between bus and trains. IIRC it's always the coloured box for the train. On the Kitchener line full schedule that is a green background.
RE: GO Transit - danbrotherston - 02-19-2020
(02-19-2020, 01:44 PM)jeffster Wrote:(01-29-2020, 01:21 PM)robdrimmie Wrote: From the article, the charges are:
A CTV article [1] specifies the exact charge:
A charge is not a conviction. This is not a criminal charge. It more strongly suggests wrongdoing on Armstrong's part but until she is actually convicted of negligence we really don't have any more information than we did in November.
[1] https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/charge-laid-after-woman-child-hit-by-go-train-in-kitchener-1.4787379
I might imagine that other charges could be added at some point. I believe that likely the police have other charges already, but up to the prosector to decide to which charges to go on. A charge like child endangerment is most likely, which in an indictable offence.
I did notice that about a week before these charges, the family had closed down their GOFUNDME page.
Why do you think a charge of child endangerment is likely? I'd be surprised if you can find even a single instance where a HTA charge leads to an additional criminal indictment of child endangerment. Parents who drive distracted with a child in their car and end crashing as a result are endangering their children as well, but that's not the charge that ever gets applied. Whether I agree with it or not, this is the same situation, police would be applying a very substantial double standard here.
RE: GO Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2020
(02-19-2020, 05:01 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Whether I agree with it or not, this is the same situation, police would be applying a very substantial double standard here.
As a pedestrian, she is not entitled to the protection of that double standard.
It would be funnier if it weren’t so serious.
RE: GO Transit - jeffster - 02-20-2020
(02-19-2020, 05:01 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(02-19-2020, 01:44 PM)jeffster Wrote: I might imagine that other charges could be added at some point. I believe that likely the police have other charges already, but up to the prosector to decide to which charges to go on. A charge like child endangerment is most likely, which in an indictable offence.
I did notice that about a week before these charges, the family had closed down their GOFUNDME page.
Why do you think a charge of child endangerment is likely? I'd be surprised if you can find even a single instance where a HTA charge leads to an additional criminal indictment of child endangerment. Parents who drive distracted with a child in their car and end crashing as a result are endangering their children as well, but that's not the charge that ever gets applied. Whether I agree with it or not, this is the same situation, police would be applying a very substantial double standard here.
I guess though in Jenna's case it would be Abandoning Child:
Abandoning child
218 Every one who unlawfully abandons or exposes a child who is under the age of ten years, so that its life is or is likely to be endangered or its health is or is likely to be permanently injured,
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Further to that:
Proving Abandoning a Child under s. 218 should include:
☐ identity of accused as culprit
☐ date and time of incident
☐ jurisdiction (incl. region and province)
☐ the culprit abandons or exposes a child;
☐ the culprit intended to abandon or expose the child;
☐ the child is under the age of 10;
☐ the culprit was aware of the child's age;
☐ the act causes the child's life likely to be endangered or health likely to be permanently injured; and
☐ the endangerment to the child was reasonably foreseeable to the culprit.
In this case, you can check off everything.
It's not a HTA offence, obviously, but a criminal code charge. It's not hard to prove as obviously she intentionally (disobeyed) went around the barricade and warnings and the child was seriously injured. I can't imagine that charges won't occur but time will tell.
RE: GO Transit - danbrotherston - 02-20-2020
(02-20-2020, 07:11 PM)jeffster Wrote:(02-19-2020, 05:01 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Why do you think a charge of child endangerment is likely? I'd be surprised if you can find even a single instance where a HTA charge leads to an additional criminal indictment of child endangerment. Parents who drive distracted with a child in their car and end crashing as a result are endangering their children as well, but that's not the charge that ever gets applied. Whether I agree with it or not, this is the same situation, police would be applying a very substantial double standard here.
I guess though in Jenna's case it would be Abandoning Child:
Abandoning child
218 Every one who unlawfully abandons or exposes a child who is under the age of ten years, so that its life is or is likely to be endangered or its health is or is likely to be permanently injured,
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Further to that:
Proving Abandoning a Child under s. 218 should include:
☐ identity of accused as culprit
☐ date and time of incident
☐ jurisdiction (incl. region and province)
☐ the culprit abandons or exposes a child;
☐ the culprit intended to abandon or expose the child;
☐ the child is under the age of 10;
☐ the culprit was aware of the child's age;
☐ the act causes the child's life likely to be endangered or health likely to be permanently injured; and
☐ the endangerment to the child was reasonably foreseeable to the culprit.
In this case, you can check off everything.
It's not a HTA offence, obviously, but a criminal code charge. It's not hard to prove as obviously she intentionally (disobeyed) went around the barricade and warnings and the child was seriously injured. I can't imagine that charges won't occur but time will tell.
That wasn't the point I was making. This is even more ridiculous.
RE: GO Transit - jeffster - 02-21-2020
(02-20-2020, 08:48 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(02-20-2020, 07:11 PM)jeffster Wrote: I guess though in Jenna's case it would be Abandoning Child:
Abandoning child
218 Every one who unlawfully abandons or exposes a child who is under the age of ten years, so that its life is or is likely to be endangered or its health is or is likely to be permanently injured,
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Further to that:
Proving Abandoning a Child under s. 218 should include:
☐ identity of accused as culprit
☐ date and time of incident
☐ jurisdiction (incl. region and province)
☐ the culprit abandons or exposes a child;
☐ the culprit intended to abandon or expose the child;
☐ the child is under the age of 10;
☐ the culprit was aware of the child's age;
☐ the act causes the child's life likely to be endangered or health likely to be permanently injured; and
☐ the endangerment to the child was reasonably foreseeable to the culprit.
In this case, you can check off everything.
It's not a HTA offence, obviously, but a criminal code charge. It's not hard to prove as obviously she intentionally (disobeyed) went around the barricade and warnings and the child was seriously injured. I can't imagine that charges won't occur but time will tell.
That wasn't the point I was making. This is even more ridiculous.
Well, we won't know until final charges, if any, are filed. What Jenna did wad disgusting though, and she should have known better, especially with a youngster with her. Most likely the parents of the child will sue Jenna and her employer.
RE: GO Transit - danbrotherston - 02-21-2020
(02-21-2020, 03:12 AM)jeffster Wrote:(02-20-2020, 08:48 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: That wasn't the point I was making. This is even more ridiculous.
Well, we won't know until final charges, if any, are filed. What Jenna did wad disgusting though, and she should have known better, especially with a youngster with her. Most likely the parents of the child will sue Jenna and her employer.
I guess we get the two minutes of hate on WRC as well.
RE: GO Transit - jeffster - 02-21-2020
(02-21-2020, 09:50 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(02-21-2020, 03:12 AM)jeffster Wrote: Well, we won't know until final charges, if any, are filed. What Jenna did wad disgusting though, and she should have known better, especially with a youngster with her. Most likely the parents of the child will sue Jenna and her employer.
I guess we get the two minutes of hate on WRC as well.
Not really. So here is a question: If you had a special needs child, or any child really, would you be letting her walk your child across railway tracks? Or anywhere, really? I know I wouldn't be OK with her. But perhaps you'd need to be a parent first to understand. The little child injured in this was not at fault.
RE: GO Transit - MidTowner - 02-21-2020
(02-21-2020, 05:14 PM)jeffster Wrote:(02-21-2020, 09:50 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: I guess we get the two minutes of hate on WRC as well.
Not really. So here is a question: If you had a special needs child, or any child really, would you be letting her walk your child across railway tracks? Or anywhere, really? I know I wouldn't be OK with her. But perhaps you'd need to be a parent first to understand. The little child injured in this was not at fault.
I couldn't help but laugh when I read this. What, he's disqualified from making any comments if he doesn't happen to be a parent? And when did anyone say anything about the little child being at fault?
RE: GO Transit - danbrotherston - 02-21-2020
(02-21-2020, 09:29 PM)MidTowner Wrote:(02-21-2020, 05:14 PM)jeffster Wrote: Not really. So here is a question: If you had a special needs child, or any child really, would you be letting her walk your child across railway tracks? Or anywhere, really? I know I wouldn't be OK with her. But perhaps you'd need to be a parent first to understand. The little child injured in this was not at fault.
I couldn't help but laugh when I read this. What, he's disqualified from making any comments if he doesn't happen to be a parent? And when did anyone say anything about the little child being at fault?
And who says I'm not a parent anyway.
I have no doubt that the person did not intend to harm the child, I have no idea why she crossed when she did, I would not use the word "disguisting" to describe them unless I was trying to instill anger and hate. How that means I am blaming the child is certainly confusing.
Honestly, it's just been a bizarre interaction.
RE: GO Transit - robdrimmie - 02-21-2020
(02-21-2020, 09:29 PM)MidTowner Wrote: when did anyone say anything about the little child being at fault?
Many autistic children run suddenly and without warning, including my son when he was younger. On very rare occasions. Which makes it very difficult for any of his caregivers, including myself, to predict. Given that there's no publicly visible evidence of what actually happened so far, and no public information as to why the two were on the tracks, just that they were, it's still plausible that the child bolted.
It's unlikely, granted. But until there's an actual trial with evidence entered into the public record, we're all just speculating.