• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Man who died after restraint by Metrolink contracted security staff is ruled to have been unlawfully killed.

Status
Not open for further replies.

ANDREW_D_WEBB

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2013
Messages
865

No-one was prosecuted over the death of a man who was restrained in the street by public transport workers despite the case being reviewed three times.
Jack Barnes, 29, shouted "I can't breathe" repeatedly while being restrained in a street in Manchester.
A coroner ruled on Friday that Mr Barnes had been unlawfully killed.
Four men were arrested following his death but the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute.
The CPS said it had "carefully considered" the evidence provided by police and the same decision was reached after two further reviews, which were carried out under the Victims' Right to Review Scheme following requests from the family.
The Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, has described the bodycam footage as "one of the most distressing things you could see".
"What we've got to do is look carefully at the coroner's ruling and ensure all of what he is saying is understood and that action is taken to prevent any possibility of any repeat of anything of this kind," he said.
The inquest heard father-of-one Mr Barnes, from Hull, became aggressive after being confronted by a Metrolink customer service representative (CSR) in October 2016 before he and a friend ran off.
Metrolink's policy was that their representatives should walk away from such encounters, alerting the police if necessary.
But four workers - Paul Fogarty, Brian Gartside, Matthews Sellers and Stephen Rowlands - decided to chase the fleeing pair, two on foot and two in a taxi.
Manchester Coroner's Court heard after a nine-minute chase across almost a mile of the city centre, Mr Barnes was caught by Mr Gartside and bundled to the ground on Deansgate.
Bodycam footage from a camera worn by Mr Sellers showed that within moments of being caught, while being held down with his left cheek on the pavement, Mr Barnes asked for help and shouted out: "I can't breathe."
Over the course of about 90 seconds, Mr Barnes said he was struggling to breathe on eight separate occasions.
Just before the camera moved away to focus on Mr Barnes' friend, Mr Rowlands was recorded telling him: "If you struggle, I will put you to sleep.
"It won't kill you but you will go to sleep for a while."
The inquest heard Mr Barnes suffered a cardiac arrest and died seven weeks later on 2 December 2016.
Mr Rowlands declined to speak to the BBC when approached for comment.
Concluding his death was unlawful, coroner Nigel Meadows said the workers' actions amounted to manslaughter and the exertion of the chase and the pressure on Mr Barnes's neck more than minimally contributed to the heart attack.
Speaking after the hearing, Mr Barnes's mother Tricia Gerrard told the BBC the men had "hunted him down like an animal".
She said the family refused to believe he had attacked the CSRs, as at "any sign of trouble, any sign of violence, he'd run".
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ANDREW_D_WEBB

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2013
Messages
865
A further update

Jack Barnes 'let down again' as manslaughter charges not considered​

Published
Share
Jack Barnes
IMAGE COPYRIGHTFAMILY HANDOUT
image captionJack Barnes, 29, suffered a cardiac arrest and died several weeks later in hospital
A man who was unlawfully killed after public transport staff restrained him has been "let down again" as no-one will face manslaughter charges.
Jack Barnes, 29, shouted "I can't breathe" as Metrolink workers held him in Manchester in 2016. He suffered a cardiac arrest and died weeks later.
His mother Patricia Gerrard was "hugely disappointed" after prosecutors said there was no new medical evidence from the inquest to reconsider manslaughter.
Assault charges are being considered.

'Life didn't matter'​

Despite three case reviews by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) no-one has ever been charged over the death of Mr Barnes from Hull.
Four men were arrested but the CPS said there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute.
Ms Gerrard said the news that no manslaughter charges would be brought felt like her son was "being let down again" and that "his life didn't matter to others".
Australasia restaurant on Deansgate
IMAGE COPYRIGHTGOOGLE
image captionBodycam footage captured what happened outside Australasia restaurant
The inquest at Manchester Coroner's Court in February heard four Metrolink workers gave a nine-minute chase to Mr Barnes after a row with him at Manchester Victoria station.
Bodycam footage from a camera worn by one of the four workers showed while being held down with his left cheek on the pavement, Mr Barnes asked for help, repeatedly shouting out: "I can't breathe."
The inquest was told the father-of-one's life effectively ended while being held face down outside the Australasia restaurant in Deansgate.
Concluding his death was unlawful, coroner Nigel Meadows said the workers' actions amounted to manslaughter.
"Following new evidence arising out of the inquest, prosecutors are considering whether charges of assault can be brought in relation to this tragic incident," the CPS said.
"However, we are unable to reconsider manslaughter charges because there is no new medical evidence that establishes a clear link between Mr Barnes's death and the actions of the suspects."
The CPS said the "standard of proof required for criminal proceedings is higher than that of an inquest".

'Another step back'​

Ms Gerrard said: "It took more than four years to finally feel people would be held accountable for what happened to Jack, and when the coroner announced his findings and agreed to the release of the video footage, it was a real step forward as finally people could see what really happened that day."
She said the CPS's decision "feels like another step back".
Lawyers representing her said the CPS had made a "fundamental error" saying manslaughter charges cannot be brought.
They said it had written to the CPS asking it review the coroner's findings, adding if the decision was not reconsidered, the family would launch their own proceedings either through a judicial review or by pursuing a private prosecution.
 

Trackman

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2013
Messages
2,923
Location
Lewisham
I'll tell you what, if there was a funder raiser for a private prosecution I'd happily chip in.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
I wonder to what extent the review was prompted by yesterday's news from the US
 

shredder1

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2016
Messages
2,687
Location
North Manchester
Private security in the UK is sadly full of ignorant thugs, many who are out of control, they are badly trained and paid a pittance, the adage you pay peanuts and you get monkeys comes to mind, more worryingly this ethic appears to be contaminated elements our professional police force also, many of my family were in the Police at one time and now cringe at some of the things that go on.
 

185

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
4,971
Private security in the UK is sadly full of ignorant thugs, many who are out of control, they are badly trained and paid a pittance, the adage you pay peanuts and you get monkeys comes to mind, more worryingly this ethic appears to be contaminated elements our professional police force also, many of my family were in the Police at one time and now cringe at some of the things that go on.
Interesting how the BBC (NW), despite having access to a number of documents confirming the agency firm security staff's rules, policies and procedures STILL are coming out with statements in news bulletins such as:


"This was contrary to their safety policy which meant they should have disengaged and walk away from confrontational situations"
(BBC)


---

....which contradicts with verbal comments made by Metrolink's manager in 2014 stating...


"We are unable to have GMP to assist on operations as often" (ie £££, so..) "These staff will be hands on and able to intervene in violent or dangerous situations" and "all staff will be Doorsafe (ie SIA) trained and thus subject to CRB (ie DBS) checks".
(Metrolink Head of Revenue & Security)

---

Police and coroner are now aware of these and other documents including one memo (29 November 2016) which states

"In line with the companies drink and drug testing as of tomorrow Palladium Late Teams will also be included on random testing"
(Metrolink Team Leader, sent on instruction of H of R&S Manager, seven weeks after the incident, three days before the death)

There was some suggestion beforehand that D&D tests were already taking place, which this disproves.

---

- Should those Palladium security employees who caused the death face prison? Of course.

- Should the Metrolink & Palladium managers & directors who hired the staff and created the situation (just coincidentally three fellow senior ex GMP coppers, one is a fellow member of Lodge 1083 East Lancashire Freemasons with Palladiums owner) be also facing jail too? Definitely.
 
Last edited:

shredder1

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2016
Messages
2,687
Location
North Manchester
Yes absolutely agree 185, the SIA badge is a farce anyway, I deal with many companies who offer the training and tests, which are very poor at best, in fact in recent years one company was giving clients the answers to get them through the door and con a few more quid from the funding agency. Professional standards need raising, even if it means getting rid of some of the dead weight that presently works in the sector. Older members may be away of the issues I had with Merseyrail and a company they employed call Carlisle Security when I was pulled for taking photographs at Birkenhead North with all sorts of aggravation, Carlisle Security lied through their teeth in a statement. I got all sorts of people involved including then then Mayor of Liverpool, rail regulator and the press, and eventually received a full apology from Merseyrail and the then board also had a full change of policy, this was ca 10 years ago, and it would seem they still haven't cleaned the industry up.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The worst thing about it is that SIA (and its local predecessor, Manchester Doorsafe) did clean up the industry. It's hard to imagine that it used to be much, much worse - it wasn't just about rude staff telling you you can't do stuff you are allowed to, it was serious corruption, drugs, violence etc.

The problem is now being caused by contract security staff being used in customer service roles, which is just inappropriate. Skimping on customer service staff in that manner (RPIs, gateline staff etc are customer service staff, even if the non-paying customer might not want the service) says everything about the company that's doing it.

As for this case, the simple fact is that they should not have pursued someone out of the station, regardless of any of the rest of it. Their responsibility ends once the person leaves. If your job is to provide security guard services in a given building, you stay in that building, not head off across town to chase someone down, because while you're doing that you're not providing security guard services in the building you're being paid to provide them in. If someone has committed a crime and runs away, calling 999 (or 101) is what you do.
 
Joined
31 Jan 2020
Messages
345
Location
Inverness
I think there's an assumption among some people that if you're hiring an SIA you're effectively getting a private cop to stand at your door, that they're professionals who don't need oversight.

Neither of these things are true. SIA training isn't always that great and the individuals vary a lot in terms of their quality. They're also often outside of the normal chain of responsibility and they're given a very broad remit that sometimes allows them to use force. All in all it's a situation that's not that great.
 

185

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
4,971
The ones they hired didn't even have SIA, as was promised. At least with SIA, there was some semblance of checks and balances. What happened with Palladium, was new starters were observed filling in the application & bank details form during lunch breaks ...three hours into their first shift. This was reported repeatedly by the CSRs.

As I mentioned above the real crime here isn't necessarily what the security men did in terms of killing the bloke, it is those bosses running Palladium, Metrolink and TfGM, often profiting from contracts being awarded to their friends, who knew this was going on and did nothing.
 

NorthernSpirit

Established Member
Joined
21 Jun 2013
Messages
2,184
Interesting how the BBC (NW), despite having access to a number of documents confirming the agency firm security staff's rules, policies and procedures STILL are coming out with statements in news bulletins such as:


"This was contrary to their safety policy which meant they should have disengaged and walk away from confrontational situations"
(BBC)


---

....which contradicts with verbal comments made by Metrolink's manager in 2014 stating...


"We are unable to have GMP to assist on operations as often" (ie £££, so..) "These staff will be hands on and able to intervene in violent or dangerous situations" and "all staff will be Doorsafe (ie SIA) trained and thus subject to CRB (ie DBS) checks".
(Metrolink Head of Revenue & Security)

---

Police and coroner are now aware of these and other documents including one memo (29 November 2016) which states

"In line with the companies drink and drug testing as of tomorrow Palladium Late Teams will also be included on random testing"
(Metrolink Team Leader, sent on instruction of H of R&S Manager, seven weeks after the incident, three days before the death)

There was some suggestion beforehand that D&D tests were already taking place, which this disproves.

---

- Should those Palladium security employees who caused the death face prison? Of course.

- Should the Metrolink & Palladium managers & directors who hired the staff and created the situation (just coincidentally three fellow senior ex GMP coppers, one is a fellow member of Lodge 1083 East Lancashire Freemasons with Palladiums owner) be also facing jail too? Definitely.

The ones they hired didn't even have SIA, as was promised. At least with SIA, there was some semblance of checks and balances. What happened with Palladium, was new starters were observed filling in the application & bank details form during lunch breaks ...three hours into their first shift. This was reported repeatedly by the CSRs.

As I mentioned above the real crime here isn't necessarily what the security men did in terms of killing the bloke, it is those bosses running Palladium, Metrolink and TfGM, often profiting from contracts being awarded to their friends, who knew this was going on and did nothing.


That's interesting but not unexpected. Its also likely that it happens at other companies too.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
As is sometimes the way, we’re going to post an update but keep the thread locked for now for obvious legal reasons.
Metrolink staff are to face manslaughter charges:
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said Jack Barnes was allegedly held by four "customer service representatives" who were monitoring passengers on Manchester's Metrolink in October 2016.
The 29-year-old from Hull died almost two months later.
Stephen Rowlands, 67, Brian Gartside, 59, Paul Fogarty, 50, and Matthew Sellers, 29, will face charges.
The father-of-one died on 2 December, several weeks after the incident in Manchester city centre outside Victoria Station on 11 October.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top