I guess I’ll take your word for it but an investigation doesn’t have to be in response to a crime.
Civil matters can have investigations too and I am having a difficult time imagining a car insurance claim involving a train wreck not requiring a police report, which I am guessing normally involves an investigation.
Oh, the police can report and investigate all they want. They just can't walk away with the train data recording. But the police aren't going to "investigate" a crossing accident. They'll make a report. The car insurance company may choose to investigate, I suppose, but that's unlikely. An ambulance chaser may demand the evidence in court. That should be fun to watch.
What usually happens when a crossing accident lawsuit is filed (last I heard) is the carrier shows the video and data to the plaintiff's side, and the lawsuit goes away. The reason this evidence is so powerful is partly because of the documented strict chain of custody regarding the hard drive. There are unusual exceptions where maybe there was a signal failure and someone actually has a case, but the vast majority of these incidents are cut and dried cases of trespassing. Yes. Every time you cross the tracks you are trespassing. Permission is implied, except when you get hit by a train. You (as a car or truck driver) are required to be vigilant and to obey the traffic controls at the crossing. The basic railroad crossbuck sign is a legal traffic control that has a definition and attached requirements. Same as stop signs and yeild signs. No one has a right to be on the tracks in front of an approaching train. Cut...and...dried.
Train operation is so closely controlled and monitored that the odds of a crossing accident showing any fault of the carrier or crew are extremely low, but it has happened. The carrier can be liable if there is a claim and the carrier fails to prove the claim has no grounds. The video and data record is irrefutable proof, precisely because of how closely it is guarded.
Funny thing about police reports. That's just another one of those things they're so used to that some of them can't wrap their mind around exceptions either. My last incident, the responding deputy handed me a report form to fill out. He said he was required by the Idaho State Police to have me fill it out. It told him it was required by my employer to say nothing and write nothing, and handed it back to him. Your problem - not mine.
Every crossing accident gets a visit from the local RR manager before the train moves again, and the LEO gets whatever limited information is required from him/her. But not the digital record. The LEA can request access to that from the carrier's legal department at a later date if they deem it necessary. I'm not privy to whether that's ever been a thing.
All the first responders need to know from a train crew is - are there any injuries that need immediate attention and is there any hazmat leaking or spilled? Everything else is internal matters, and UPRR crews are instructed as much in training.
