Legal constraints on railway bloggers
Legal constraints do not often come to mind when writing about railway matters. I am a transport historian with an interest also in modern railways. The law rarely impacts on that interest. Although transport photographers have occasionally had issues over interpretation of photography rights by heavy handed security officers, and there is an obvious need to follow access and trespass guidelines, generally the law is unobtrusive. This year that has changed.
34067 Tangmere – Wootton Bassett and legal constraints
34067 Tangmere at Weymouth 9 September 2015 Image John New
It remains possible to talk about this locomotive in general terms and to share photographs like the one above. It also remains possible to mention that it is operated by the West Coast Railway Company (WCRC). However during 2013 and 2015 the combination were involved in incidents one of which is now subject to a pending court case. The debate on the Wootton Bassett incident of 7 March 2015 is therefore now sub judice. This court case means there are now legal constraints on what can be debated and blogged about regarding WCRC. As a result of that I am only including the link to the public Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) page with regard to background on the matter. The incident was heavily debated on national rail forums previously and also covered by BBC News until the related court cases were announced; however, nothing can now be added.
34067 Tangmere – Winchfield and Weymouth
Whether open debate on two other incidents involving the locomotive and WCRC is possible may now also be questionable, hence my mentioning only facts and reports.
The first was in November 2013 when a maintenance issue led to a very serious incident of equipment failure at Winchfield. The RAIB report has now been published, and no prosecutions have been announced.
The second was at Weymouth when some internet forum reports suggest Tangmere was apparently allowed to hit the buffers on 5th September 2015. That something did hit the buffers and move them is undeniable, as identified by the scrape mark visible in the photograph below taken four days later. The RAIB website has been checked and this incident is not on the currently under investigation list. It appears therefore that there are no legal constraints arising due to possible court action on either of these specific incidents. Despite that, there must still be a grey area for bloggers. Can we currently debate the competence of WCRC? This arises as an assessment of their competence will arguably form a key part of the forthcoming court cases arising from the 7th March incident. I have chosen not to take the risk, only adding links to previously published facts and showing my own photograph of the publicly visible trace evidence.
The buffers at Weymouth showing the scrape mark from impact. Image: John New.
Reports of disappearing society funds.
As I was preparing this post another grey area case came to light via an internet forum post. A name was mentioned for an individual leaving a society, together with reports of a police investigation into a substantial shortfall in the funds. In the absence of information regarding whether any arrests have been made etc., not something to debate further as it would be too easy to accidentally mention issues that have subsequently become sub judice.
As bloggers we know that fraud has happened before, for example in this 2010 case in Wimborne, but we also know that honest individuals do resign when money is found to have gone missing on their watch. The clear difference between the current and the former scenario is that the Wimborne situation is now closed and can be debated openly, the contemporary one, arguably, should not.
———————————————————–