PHIL MAXWELL

Last month Martin Zee, a train guard working for Merseyrail was found not guilty of “endangering safety by wilful omission” by a jury at Liverpool Crown Court. The jury’s unanimous verdict concludes two years of hell for Martin and his family during which he faced the possibility of being sent to prison.

In July 2015, a passenger fell onto the tracks after attempting to board Martin’s train at Hamilton Square station. He immediately rushed to her aid, correctly carried out his safety duties and thankfully the passenger survived, albeit having sustained injuries.

However two years after the incident Martin found himself in court being forced to defend himself and seeing his reputation put under the microscope in public. The case was brought to court by the Crown Prosecution Service despite the fact that he had been exonerated following investigations by his employer and the railway regulator. The charge against Martin centred around his decision to reopen the train doors for a late passenger which the prosecution argued contributed to the injuries of the passenger. But expert witnesses slammed the charge: “In 25 years of working in the rail industry, I’ve never once encountered someone falling from a train because of opening or closing doors”, said one.

So what lay behind the decision to prosecute Martin, who had clearly done nothing wrong? The RMT are currently in the middle of a fight for the very future of guards on trains. The government and rail bosses are attempting to rewrite the safety rules so that they can cut costs by eliminating the second person on board.

The rail unions, spearheaded by the RMT, argue that a guaranteed second person on board is a crucial safety issue which also means that vulnerable and disabled people have access to public transport. A growing strike campaign is spreading across the country involving more and more train companies in defence of the guard’s position. Had Martin Zee been found guilty, the state would have landed a serious blow against the RMT’s argument that trains are safer when operated with a guard on board and thus made it easier to get rid of guards. Questions need to be asked about how this case came to court at great cost with no obvious public interest.

These photographs show the strong support for Martin outside the court during his unnecessary trial.

Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square. Liverpool March 2017.

RMT banner from Leeds. Liverpool 2017.

Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square. Liverpool March 2017.

A member of the RMT. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square. Liverpool March 2017.

RMT banner from Liverpool. Liverpool 2017.

Tony Mulhearn (right) from the Merseyside Pensioners Association. Liverpool March 2017.

RMT banner from London. Liverpool 2017.

RMT members. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square.

A member of the RMT. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square. Liverpool March 2017.

RMT members. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square.

RMT banner from London. Liverpool 2017.

A member of the RMT. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square. Liverpool March 2017.

A member of the RMT. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square. Liverpool March 2017.

RMT members. Demonstration in support of Martin Zee. Derby Square.

RMT banner from Doncaster. Liverpool 2017.

You can support a feature length film I’m helping to make here: ‘Austerity Fight’