NJT Conductor Gets Ticket in Red Bank

We are single tracking between Hazlet and Middletown weekdays, between rush hours just now, while they do track work. Trains wait at Red Bank or Matawan for opposing trains to clear. Yesterday morning an eastbound was being held in Red Bank and the conductor had trouble keeping the crossing gates up while he was waiting. The Red Bank cops got excited and gave him a ticket. It is unusual but has happened to conductors tying up traffic at various locations before.

MODERATOR'S NOTE: Edited thread title.

Hah! Interesting story, but I hope NJT is going to have them toss it in short order. How did the cops "give" it to him? Did he let them on the train?

I initially got the story off my scanner because the dispatcher was getting the information via the radio. He and the guys behind him were very interested and I presume they are taking action on behalf of the conductor. The next day I talked to the ticket agent at Red Bank and he said there had been a lot of police activity there connected with this tie up. The conductor had to be on the platform to try to key the gates up, and talking to cops.

In Red Bank they actually block at least two crossings at the same time. The gates north(east) of the station go down before the gates south(west) do. I saw that a couple of weeks ago. A north bounder got to the west crossing first but did not approach station. The gates were down on both streets as this was happening. A south bounder came in and then the north bound picked up a large group of passengers,further tying up traffic. After it departed it took probably 5 minutes for the traffic to clear.

CNJ Fan 4evr wrote:In Red Bank they actually block at least two crossings at the same time. The gates north(east) of the station go down before the gates south(west) do. I saw that a couple of weeks ago. A north bounder got to the west crossing first but did not approach station. The gates were down on both streets as this was happening. A south bounder came in and then the north bound picked up a large group of passengers,further tying up traffic. After it departed it took probably 5 minutes for the traffic to clear.

Train being neither a "vehicle" nor "street car" under NJ law, this summons (presumably issued under the below) and complaint should be dismissed.

N.J.S.A. 39:4-67. Obstructing passage of other vehicles or street cars prohibited; clearance of intersections
No vehicle or street car shall be permitted by the owner or driver thereof to so occupy a street as to interfere with or interrupt the passage of other street cars or vehicles, nor shall the driver of a vehicle or street car drive such vehicle or
street car into an intersection if preceding traffic prevents immediate clearance of the intersection.

The dispatcher sometimes tells trains that are going to be held, to lay back so as not to tie up the crossings.
I posted a former NJ state trooper at Morgan years ago and he told me that he had thought of giving a ticket to a train that had things tied.

On any single day, a lawyer might argue that his child is an orphan, if he thinks that will further his case.

Yes, Conrail does run a few freight trains a month through Red Bank station, and the crossings involved, on trackage rights, to get to its Southern Secondary, just west of the station, from Perth Amboy, and the Chemical Coast.
So, if I understand Trainlawyer correctly, the ticket should be dismissed because that section of NJT is common carrier.

Doesn't New Jersey Transit run to Penn Station in NYC? Isn't that another state?

Dave M

Doesn't New Jersey Transit run to Penn Station in NYC? Isn't that another state?

Dave M

Did anyone mention why the conductor had trouble keeping the gates up? Usually the police have sense to ask what's going on before they "write someone up." It may or may not be a right ticket. Better to argue with facts than just suppositions from any side.

F40 wrote:Did anyone mention why the conductor had trouble keeping the gates up?

I got it off my scanner, the dispatcher asking the engineer, and I was not paying close attention.

There is a statue under the 39.4 section that states it is specifically for trains blocking traffic

njsteelersfan wrote:There is a statue under the 39.4 section that states it is specifically for trains blocking traffic

Interesting.

philipmartin wrote:

njsteelersfan wrote:There is a statue under the 39.4 section that states it is specifically for trains blocking traffic

Interesting.

39:4-94 No employee of a steam or electric railroad company shall operate a locomotive, train or crossing gate in such a manner as to unnecessarily prevent or interfere with the use of a highway for the purpose of travel.

The question is whether or not the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the blocking was "unnecessarily" which is not an easy burden.