After Amtrak had made the mistake of allowing the girl passage, it would seem to me that when the conductor discovered the situation, they would then be bound to ensure the girl's safe passage to her final destination.
It seems to me that Amtrak is lucky that they aren't being sued because of this. If Amtrak (or the conductor) wanted to do something about the situation, they should deal with either the person who put them on the train or the ticket agent who sold the ticket.
Amtrak didn't allow passage for the girl. Either that girls parents or her friends improperly brought her a ticket without paying attention to the rules. My guess is that they figured that she was OK with the 16 year-olds, but 16 year-olds aren't considered as being proper chaperones for a 15 year-old under Amtrak policies. She boarded the train of her own accord, and probably either had her friend get the tickets or went to a Quik-Trak machine.
Upon presenting her ticket to the conductor after the train left the station, he discovered that she was 15 and without proper escort.
The failure came when they got to the next station, and based upon several different accounts that I've seen, this is where it becomes unclear where things went wrong. The conductor appears to be claiming that he put the girl in the control of the station agent. I haven't seen anything from the station agent, but the girls are claiming that he basically ignored them. Which is why they went for a walk on the town.
But the questions that remain is, did the conductor indeed ensure that the girl was safely under the station agents supervision? If he didn't do that, then why? If he did do that, then why did the station agent not assume the supervision role of the girl. And why did that station agent not hold on to her until the next train back to her origination point and turn her over to that conductor?
Last edited by a moderator: