I recently came across a clipping from The Times of April 17, 1990 describing another "accidental" death of a person who was "walking" on the tracks ... at 4:15 AM.
This time it was not on underground tracks but on tracks elevated above the Bronx streets and the man, who was homeless, was "walking" barefoot.
For anyone not familiar with them those portions of the New York transit rail system that are elevated present a risk not present in the underground section; in addition to the possibility of being struck by a train, a "walker" could be killed by falling to the streets below.
Although I do not doubt that this man was barefoot when he was killed, I simply do not believe he was walking on the tracks. I suspect that is a falsehood intended to convince by implication that "there is no evidence of foul play."
Here is an image of The Times clipping.
This time it was not on underground tracks but on tracks elevated above the Bronx streets and the man, who was homeless, was "walking" barefoot.
For anyone not familiar with them those portions of the New York transit rail system that are elevated present a risk not present in the underground section; in addition to the possibility of being struck by a train, a "walker" could be killed by falling to the streets below.
Although I do not doubt that this man was barefoot when he was killed, I simply do not believe he was walking on the tracks. I suspect that is a falsehood intended to convince by implication that "there is no evidence of foul play."
Here is an image of The Times clipping.
No comments:
Post a Comment