So control calls him to ask why he stopped the train. He gives the all clear then kills a man on the exact spot he just gave the all clear? Then writes a book about it. Surely he would have been done for murder even if his book was liberal with the truth.
share
I just watched this and that was going to be the exact title and subject matter of my thread.
What kind of an investigation was there into this guy's death? The driver would have had to make a statement detailing his stop for the "animal" then why, in a couple of hundred yards, he managed to get up to speed without spotting a burly man in a suit standing on the line. Or if he wasn't up to speed, why he slowly drove over a man on the line.
Also - witnesses. There was a train full of them, albeit with retsricted views, but when the train stopped it stands to reason that some would have peered through to see what the hold-up was, seen a man on the line and probably started screaming at the driver to stop!
Other witnesses outside the train - it was in open country (conveniently for the film-makers - those dramatic scenes wouldn't have worked as well in a darkened tunnel!) so there was a good chance that someone - a worker, a dog-walker, anyone - would have thought "Oh, that train's stopped" then "Oh, there's a man on the line reciting The Lake Isle Of Inisfree!"
It was the perfect denouement to a lame, badly acted, implausible movie. In fact, the ease with which he got his book published was probably the perfect epilogue.
Awight we're The Daamned we're a punk baand and this is called Carn't Be Appy T'day!