The driver in the 2016 Croydon tram disaster, which killed seven people and injured 19 others, has been found not guilty of failing to take 'reasonable care'.
Alfred Dorris, 49, was charged under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 over the derailment.
The prosecution at the Old Bailey argued that Mr Dorris was driving three times the speed he was supposed to before his tram derailed on a sharp curve at Sandilands, in south London.
It also alleged that the driver from Beckenham, southeast London, may have had a 'micro-sleep' before the crash in November 2016 - something that Mr Dorris denied.
Mr Dorris said he had become 'confused' and 'disorientated' before the tram derailed and at one point thought he was going in the opposite direction, but that he could not explain how it happened.
The tram derailed on a sharp turn as it came out of a series of three tunnels. The court heard that there was 'an accident waiting to happen' at the corner where the crash took place due to a lack of visual cues in the tunnel system, which was poorly maintained and had broken lighting.
Mr Dorris broke down in tears during the trial and said he was deeply sorry for what happened.
'Unfortunately, that morning went horribly wrong and that was because of something I wasn't in control of,' he said.
'I am truly and deeply sorry - it's something that I am going to have to live with for the rest of my life, and I would just like to end by saying there are no winners in this case.'
The jury deliberated for almost two hours before reaching a unanimous not guilty verdict in the case, which was brought by the Office of Road and Rail (ORR).
It follows a July 2021 inquest, in which the jury concluded that the victims died as a result of an accident and were not unlawfully killed.
Transport for London (TfL) and Tram Operations Limited (ToL) have previously admitted health and safety offences relating to significant failings ahead of the catastrophic derailment.
The organisations will be sentenced at a later date.
A 2017, Rail Accident Investigation Branch investigation concluded that 'it is probable that the driver temporarily lost awareness on a section of route on which his workload was low'.
'The investigation has found that a possible explanation for this loss of awareness was that the driver had a microsleep, and that this was linked to fatigue. Although it is possible that the driver was fatigued due to insufficient sleep there is no evidence that this was the result of the shift pattern that he was required to work,' the report said.
However, rail expert Christian Wolmar accused the RAIB investigation of being 'wholly inadequate'.
The report seemed 'to bend over backwards to avoid considering any systematic failure by the tram operator,' he said.
He argued that 'a further, independent investigation should be undertaken', to ensure that the operators respond to the tragedy in a way that makes sure it never happens again.
Register now for full access
Register just once to get unrestricted, real-time coverage of the issues and challenges facing UK transport and highways engineers.
Full website content includes the latest news, exclusive commentary from leading industry figures and detailed topical analysis of the highways, transportation, environment and place-shaping sectors.
Use the link below to register your details for full, free access.
Already a registered? Login
