The UK's Daily Mail tabloid has posted an article about the video clip that was broadcast by ABC's 20/20 program:

Daily Mail: New footage reveals how camera-woman was left stranded on bridge and killed by oncoming train in chaotic scenes 'after being told to film on tracks without permission'

Quick question,

The video shows a signal facing the bridge. Would this signal have shown the occupancy of the mainline block or just the status of the switch? Not that it would have made a difference in this tragic event, but if you knew what to look for would the signal have shown that there was a train in the next section and therefore you should be vacating the bridge ASAP?

Ken

What'd the video look like? Did they show the crew scrambling to get off the bridge?

Yes, the video did show the film crew making a hasty retreat from the bridge. The video was fairly clear, too. -- Ray

I saw the same episode of 20/20 a few days ago. It was just basically a recap of everything thats already been said here with a little bit of Hollywood sprinkled on in some places.

Here's the footage from the camera mounted on the front of the locomotive:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQnX8QOfbG8

/Andrew

Your dealing with guys interested in the "Shot" anyway you can. They are not thinking in the true railroad sense. If a signal was there thats an easy check for occupancy, but what do they know...they were interested in the "Shot". I'm not viewing the video, its too obvious. The crew should have scouted better for another locale, you may have friendlier folks elsewhere with a bridge not so busy to use. Aside from that we have digital creation, the whole scene could have been done virtually, and 100% safe. Nope, not these guys, didnt think at all.

"Aside from that we have digital creation, the whole scene could have been done virtually, and 100% safe. Nope, not these guys, didnt think at all."

Yeah, what a terrible unavoidable tragedy. Given the history of the "filmmaker" he seemed to think that running around on other peoples property to "grab a shot" was OK.

So sad it cost somebody else their life. Hang em, hang em HIGH.

The railroad said in writing; "NO, STAY OFF OUR PROPERTY", no other explanation was necessary.

And the whole "well some crews may have seen them and them should have called the RR cops to warm them away" is nonsense (in a real legal system). It was RR property and the film crew was trespassing (although not properly informed of that fact by the "director").

This accident should never have happened, and the responsibility is totally with the "director" and management of this film project.

So sad a young woman lost her life because of these incompetent people.

Actually, that video looks deliberately fuzzied.

From the railroad's defense standpoint, video from the last couple of trains prior to the incident would be more valuable. If they showed nothing out of the ordinary then that's proof that the railroad was not negligent in their crews calling in unusual activity on their right of way. The fact that a crew is setting up at an adjacent property is not reason to call in the special agents.

I agree, what I was curious about is that there was mention that "the crew had 60 seconds to clear the bridge if a train approached". Not enough time to clear a bridge especially with props in place in any case. I also understand that even if they had noticed the signal they wouldn't have known what it meant. My tangential question was just to see if they actually did have the potential of knowing if a train was approaching if they had looked and understood the signal. The best course would be to not have trespassed but tragically they did.

The best course would have been for someone with both brains and balls, when told they would have sixty second to clear the track if a train came, to have said, "You're F---in' nuts! I'm not goin' out there. You SURE you have permission?" Not all these people were born yesterday, you'd think either the actors or the experienced cameramen would have known that someone was pulling a fast one when that statement was made. Just a shame the person with the least experience had to die.

Another twist in this mind-numbingly stupid tragedy:
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/filmmaker-prosecutors-broke-promise-allman-movie-crash-28194113

Apparently an assistant director's attorney was led to believe that his client would not be charged if she cooperated with the the investigation and she was charged anyway. If that is true then there are some ethics issues here and it would be a shame if those who made the decision to shoot anyway, knowing full bloody well that they did not have permission, were allowed to walk because a prosecutor screwed up.

GME

It's happened before - film-makers were just as capable of ignoring the risks 109 years ago: http://www.bromley-coppard.com/Stoatsnest/

Chris Cook
Wallington, UK

Oddly, another incident occured in the same area in 2011 with an MOW crew: http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/inv ... 162012.cfm

Regretfully, there seems to have been a similar incident this past weekend, in southern California while filming a fitness video on the Metrolink tracks near the Burbank station. http://www.seattlepi.com/news/us/articl ... 023958.php

Jeeze, a West Point graduate that was "unsure" which track the oncoming train was on ?? Holy bovine, seems like the smart move would be to GET OFF THE TRACKS when any train was approaching... Or even better, don't get on the tracks in the first place...

What a shame, condolences to his friends and family.

Remember, always expect a train from any direction when around the tracks....

Kevin