Stroller accident continues to baffle CTA, police

The case of the stuck stroller and catapulting toddler still has the CTA and Chicago police scratching their heads, wondering how it could have happened.

The CTA reports that the doors were functioning properly, and that the train’s motorwoman followed procedures of making sure the doors were closed before proceeding out of the Morse station.

The fact there were no direct witnesses to the accident complicates matters as well. Alos, the motorwoman said she went through the entire train at Granville looking for the stroller, but didn’t find it. Finally, a rider turned in the stroller at Berwyn.

This is truly a bizarre, baffling case.


Leave a comment
  • i have no first-hand knowledge of this incident, but just from logic it's possible the rider who turned in the stroller took possession of it right after the incident and intended to turn it in at Berwyn, his or her planned stop. The train driver could have walked through the train looking for an unattended stroller and the rider didn't realize what the driver was looking for.

  • That's possible Joe, but from what I read the operator was also askign for witnesses. I smell scam to be honest.

  • TKM I am starting to take that position as well. If the stroller was turned in at Berywn, how did that person get a hold of the stroller? When did he/she baord the train? If that person was on the train car at Morse why did he/she not contact the train operator to let them know of what happened. Was there any damage to the stroller indicating it was dragged and hit the railling at the end of the platform? One would think there would be significant damage to the stroller.

    While it is not possible, it seems odd that the baby ended up on the gravel in between the sets of tracks.

  • CTA employees are surely lying because that's what big organizations do when facing a lawsuit. The parent might be lying too. Nothing any of these people say should be trusted without some kind of verification.

  • I think it was a completely freak accident, that both the mother and the train operator were partially at fault, and that if we had conductors this might not have happened.

  • Where are the surveillance cameras? Most trains and platforms have them.

  • The stroller thing is key.

    If the stroller was dragged along the platform, and the baby thrown from it down next to the tracks, how does the stroller wind up inside the train. I could see that maybe the stroller continued to be dragged outside the train till the Loyola stop, at which point someone brings it in. But that someone would be very aware that there had been a stroller caught, which suddenly fell when the doors reopened. So I don't understand how they could ignore the stopped train and the conductor walking through twice asking if anyone noticed anything unusual.

    There's also the idea of the baby lying "left of the inside rail." Is that a typo, or a witness saying something backwards? Even if the person means "left" looking back towards the station, rather than looking from the station towards the baby, then this is between the two rails. What it really sounds like is that the baby is on the other side of the tracks from the platform. But how does that happen if the baby was flipped out of a stroller caught in the doors? Was it flipped all the way over the top of the train? Otherwise, it would have to land on the platform side, not across the tracks.

    I'd like to think a mother wouldn't lie about this, but I'm having trouble squaring the scenario with my common sense.

  • Nothing about this makes any sense. I see no way for the physics involved to somehow toss the baby out onto the tracks but still propel the stroller into the train. And honestly, its not like when a train starts moving, it goes from zero to running speed so fast that the mother could not have either made a grab for the baby, or flat yanked the stroller out of the doors. I'm calling scam.

  • Another weird article on this story ... the Sun-Times piece has photos of stroller and supposedly of guardrail. But either they reversed the negative, or they took a picture of the wrong guardrail. The train wasn't running southbound on the northbound track, was it? They've got the guardrail to the left of the train in their picture.

Leave a comment