Page 16 | someone tell me what crime has been committed?

Weefreetiffany · 2023-03-02T07:15:01+00:00

Baffled by this story https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11810311/Woman-49-convicted-manslaughter-raising-hand-elderly-cyclist-collision.html on what grounds are the prosecuting the pedestrian? It seems an absolute stretch to think that her gesticulating and “radiant her hand” at a cyclist for driving towards her on a pavement is wilful manslaughter? I can see how it’s a tragic, very unfortunate accident but how did this make it to court? The atmosphere is this country is so toxic to middle aged women at the moment- what is going on?!

Emotionalsupportviper · 02/03/2023 11:17

OneTC · 02/03/2023 11:12

Yes I mean really.

Cyclists aren't often made accountable for their actions because they're difficult to catch and trace. This one was lying dead in the road.

Manslaughter is an appropriate charge where an interaction between 2 people resulted in one person's death. It's literally what the charge is for. It can result in non custodial sentences as it will in this instance.

But someone died. So there's going to be some legal ramification

Cyclists aren't often made accountable for their actions because they're difficult to catch and trace

Good point.

In my experience not many of them pay any attention to the consequences of their own bad actions - they just bugger off!

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 11:17

Change2banon · 02/03/2023 10:51

A pedestrian walkway you say? … the same one the police could not confirm was for pedestrians only or a shared cyclist path?

You carry on with your stupid made up thoughts as though they’re fact 🙄

Show quote history

But if they atcofi that it is a pavement or shared cycle lane then it might well be a pavement only.

Surely if they can’t even decide that this was a cycle lane then no prosecution should have been given.

Honestly who was this woman’s solicitor. Either there is some huge back story or I am wondering why this got to court as their are so many holes in the reporting to drive a proverbial truck through

OneTC · 02/03/2023 11:21

Emotionalsupportviper · 02/03/2023 11:17

Cyclists aren't often made accountable for their actions because they're difficult to catch and trace

Good point.

In my experience not many of them pay any attention to the consequences of their own bad actions - they just bugger off!

Show quote history

People that are caught are punished, it's rare for bikes to kill compared to cars but there have been prosecutions and convictions. But yeah the normal reason cyclists can escape punishment is evasion, which doesn't apply here

Change2banon · 02/03/2023 11:23

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 11:17

But if they atcofi that it is a pavement or shared cycle lane then it might well be a pavement only.

Surely if they can’t even decide that this was a cycle lane then no prosecution should have been given.

Honestly who was this woman’s solicitor. Either there is some huge back story or I am wondering why this got to court as their are so many holes in the reporting to drive a proverbial truck through

Show quote history

Completely agree with you regarding the prosecution/solicitor/court etc …
but posters saying the cyclist shouldn’t have been on the path gets my back up 🤷‍♀️If the police can’t decide if it’s pedestrian or cycle path too, then as it stands atm, the cyclist could have had every right to be there 🤷‍♀️

Beaglesonlyplease · 02/03/2023 11:24

the CCTV indicates that the cyclist would have collided which the pedestrian. She should have dismounted at the very least as otherwise she’d have had to step into he’s t moving traffic to avoid the cyclist (travelling at speed).
It’s absurd that the pedestrian was found to be at fault.
Is everyone supposed to guess that a cyclist would turn directly into traffic instead of dismounting?

ClaraThePigeon · 02/03/2023 11:24

Surely if they can’t even decide that this was a cycle lane then no prosecution should have been given.

Even if the cyclist shouldn't have been there(That's still up in the air), it isn't a free pass for the pedestrian to endanger her, consequence free. I might return home and find someone who shouldn't be in my garden. I could still be charged and convicted if I harm them without good cause.

Fladdermus · 02/03/2023 11:25

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 11:17

But if they atcofi that it is a pavement or shared cycle lane then it might well be a pavement only.

Surely if they can’t even decide that this was a cycle lane then no prosecution should have been given.

Honestly who was this woman’s solicitor. Either there is some huge back story or I am wondering why this got to court as their are so many holes in the reporting to drive a proverbial truck through

Show quote history

And if it were a pavement only, with signs everywhere clearly stating no cycling, would that mean pedestrians have the right to act in a way that results in cyclists dying? Whether it's a pavement or cycle lane is a red herring. This women deliberately acted in a way that resulted in another person losing their life. That's manslaughter however you look at it.

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 11:27

Fladdermus · 02/03/2023 11:25

And if it were a pavement only, with signs everywhere clearly stating no cycling, would that mean pedestrians have the right to act in a way that results in cyclists dying? Whether it's a pavement or cycle lane is a red herring. This women deliberately acted in a way that resulted in another person losing their life. That's manslaughter however you look at it.

Show quote history

Yes this! It doesn't matter if she should or shouldn't have been there. It was the yelling and scaring her into the road that was the issue.

blackpearwhitelilies · 02/03/2023 11:27

hattie43 · 02/03/2023 07:24

Oh give over , it's the most read paper out there .!

Show quote history

It is the paper which has the worst record of publishing inaccurate stories and being required to issue apologies as a result.
It is toxic and inaccurate and if it is the most read paper, these issues are even more worrying.
Nobody should be told to 'give over' for pointing this out.

CornishGem1975 · 02/03/2023 11:28

Completely agree with you regarding the prosecution/solicitor/court etc …
but posters saying the cyclist shouldn’t have been on the path gets my back up 🤷‍♀️If the police can’t decide if it’s pedestrian or cycle path too, then as it stands atm, the cyclist could have had every right to be there 🤷‍♀️

@Change2banon I don't agree with that. As a pedestrian, or a cyclist (I am both at times) if there is no signage stating that the path is also for the use of cycles I would always assume it's a footpath, and use the road.

It's the sensible thing to do seeing as bikes can go on the road but it's not really ideal for pedestrians to be walking in the road.

WaddleAway · 02/03/2023 11:28

Weefreetiffany · 02/03/2023 07:25

I think it’s a stretch to say she tried to hit her. There are so many posts about aggressive cyclists riding on pavements they should be on. If you’re that unsteady on a bike that you would wobble and fall off it by someone gesticulating at you, should you even be cycling? The 49 year old was rude but not unreasonable and certainly not criminal.

But a criminal court has determined that it was criminal.

OneTC · 02/03/2023 11:28

the CCTV indicates that the cyclist would have collided which the pedestrian

Can you link this angle of CCTV? the one I've seen you only see the cyclist fall rather than her approach

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 11:28

Fladdermus · 02/03/2023 11:25

And if it were a pavement only, with signs everywhere clearly stating no cycling, would that mean pedestrians have the right to act in a way that results in cyclists dying? Whether it's a pavement or cycle lane is a red herring. This women deliberately acted in a way that resulted in another person losing their life. That's manslaughter however you look at it.

Show quote history

Do pavements have signs everywhere stating no cycling?

Wasnt the cyclist acting in a way that could result in the death of someone by cycling on a pavement

Change2banon · 02/03/2023 11:28

@runningpram The lady shouldn't be on the pavement full stop and I say that as a cyclist …… why?? Even the police can’t determine if it was a pedestrian or cycle path too .. you know more than the police who (I assume) have investigated this pathway throughly? 🙄

whynotwhatknot · 02/03/2023 11:29

so we cant tell cyclists now to get off the path theyre not supposed to be on

my dh deals with this everyday going into work had a stand off with a cyclist once and the police turned up and said dh was right andx fined the cyclist

im not syaing this woman was correct to walk off and go shopping but manslaughter seems harsh

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 11:29

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 11:28

Do pavements have signs everywhere stating no cycling?

Wasnt the cyclist acting in a way that could result in the death of someone by cycling on a pavement

Show quote history

No they weren't. The cyclist didn't cause their own death

Showmethefood · 02/03/2023 11:29

Just read in the daily mail that she has been given 3 years jail time?

Fladdermus · 02/03/2023 11:30

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 11:28

Do pavements have signs everywhere stating no cycling?

Wasnt the cyclist acting in a way that could result in the death of someone by cycling on a pavement

Show quote history

Don't be obtuse.

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 11:30

WaddleAway · 02/03/2023 11:28

But a criminal court has determined that it was criminal.

Show quote history

Yes some people aren't happy with this and want trial by mumsnet

OneTC · 02/03/2023 11:30

so we cant tell cyclists now to get off the path theyre not supposed to be on

Of course you can, but that's not what happened here

Change2banon · 02/03/2023 11:30

whynotwhatknot · 02/03/2023 11:29

so we cant tell cyclists now to get off the path theyre not supposed to be on

my dh deals with this everyday going into work had a stand off with a cyclist once and the police turned up and said dh was right andx fined the cyclist

im not syaing this woman was correct to walk off and go shopping but manslaughter seems harsh

How did you conclude the cyclist was not supposed to be on that path? Even the police couldn’t conclude that …. 🤔

Sirius3030 · 02/03/2023 11:31

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 02/03/2023 07:30

She then walked off and did her shopping leaving the woman dead in the road and did nothing to try and help.

Would this have had a bearing on the outcome of the case?

Yes.
Showing a callous disregard for human life would certainly impact on motive and culpability. Probably on sentencing too.

Fladdermus · 02/03/2023 11:32

Even if the cyclist was in the wrong being on the pavement, the penalty for cycling on the pavement is a fine, not a death sentence.

whynotwhatknot · 02/03/2023 11:33

Change2banon · 02/03/2023 11:30

How did you conclude the cyclist was not supposed to be on that path? Even the police couldn’t conclude that …. 🤔

Show quote history

then it shouldnt be manslaughter

i thought pedestrians still had right of way over anyone else

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 11:33

Showmethefood · 02/03/2023 11:29

Just read in the daily mail that she has been given 3 years jail time?

Yes I think it was updated today