The short version
- The driver testified he heard screams about a knifeman while traveling at 122 mph and decided to switch lines within ten seconds.
- Johnson remained in the cab to navigate the train to Huntingdon station, overriding systems to open doors at an unscheduled stop.
- Anthony Williams denies attempted murder charges related to incidents on the train and in Peterborough and London.
Andrew Johnson, the driver of a high-speed train involved in a mass stabbing incident last November, provided detailed testimony regarding his actions during the attack. Speaking at Cambridge Crown Court, Johnson described having approximately ten seconds to make a critical decision after receiving alarming reports from passengers. He explained that he chose to switch the train to a slow line rather than allowing it to continue on its scheduled high-speed route, a move designed to facilitate an unscheduled stop where emergency services could intervene.
The incident occurred on November 1 of last year while Johnson was operating a London-bound service for LNER. The train was traveling at approximately 122 miles per hour through the Abbots Ripton area of Cambridgeshire when an unusual alarm sounded in the cab. This alert indicated that someone was attempting to open one of the passenger doors, which is prohibited while the train is moving at speed. Johnson noted that he had five seconds to override the system before the train would automatically come to a halt, a process that would take about thirty seconds and cover roughly a mile.
Initially, Johnson attempted to contact the individual triggering the alarm via the intercom but received no response. He initially suspected that passengers were misbehaving, a common occurrence on weekend evenings. However, his assessment changed abruptly when another voice interrupted the communication channel. Johnson heard someone screaming that there was a knifeman stabbing people on board. This urgent report shifted his focus immediately from routine protocol to emergency response.
Johnson stated that he instinctively determined that getting the train to a platform was the safest course of action. He estimated he had only about ten seconds to execute the maneuver to switch lines. He pressed an urgent button and communicated with a signaller, requesting immediate diversion to Huntingdon station and calling for police assistance. Throughout this process, Johnson remained seated in the driver’s cab, maintaining his focus on navigating the train to safety despite hearing banging and screaming at the cab door.
The court heard that passengers were begging for the doors to be opened as the train approached Huntingdon. Upon arrival at 19:44 GMT, Johnson had to manually override the system to open the doors because the station was not a programmed stop on the route. This procedure took approximately fifteen seconds. Once the doors opened, Johnson observed passengers sprinting onto the platform with a speed and urgency he described as unprecedented in his experience.
Anthony Williams, 33, of Peterborough, is standing trial for these events. He denies ten counts of attempted murder related to the train attack. Prosecutors allege that Williams also attempted to kill three people in Peterborough on October 31 and a teenager on a Docklands Light Railway train in east London in the early hours of November 1. The defense does not dispute that Williams carried out the physical acts but argues regarding his intent.
Jurors are tasked with determining whether Williams intended to kill the victims or merely cause serious harm. This distinction is central to the charges of attempted murder versus other offenses. Johnson testified that he never saw Williams during the incident, as his attention was fixed on driving the train to the station. The prosecution maintains that the severity and nature of the attacks demonstrate a clear intent to take lives.
The trial continues with jurors considering evidence from multiple incidents spanning two days. The testimony highlights the split-second decisions made by railway staff during violent emergencies. Johnson’s account provides insight into the operational constraints faced by drivers, including automatic braking systems and communication protocols, when confronted with active violence on board. The outcome of the trial will clarify the legal characterization of Williams’ actions across all charged incidents.
Legal proceedings are ongoing as the court examines the sequence of events leading up to and during the attacks. The focus remains on establishing the mental state of the defendant at the time of each incident. Witnesses continue to provide accounts of their experiences, contributing to a comprehensive picture of the timeline and the responses of both victims and staff. The case underscores the complexities of prosecuting violent crimes involving multiple locations and victims.
As the trial progresses, additional details regarding the investigation and forensic evidence are expected to be presented. The jury must weigh the testimony of the driver against other evidence to reach a verdict on the charges. The outcome will have significant implications for understanding how such incidents are handled legally and operationally within the rail network. Attention remains fixed on the courtroom as the case moves toward its conclusion.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- BBC News↗Train attack driver's '10 seconds' to change line
