someone tell me what crime has been committed?

[Weefreetiffany]

Baffled by this story

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?!

You don't stop near someone who's assaulting you, though.

Thanks for posting again. I could say the same about it as your take on that video. The pavement still looks narrow to me. In most of the clip, see a woman with an awkward gait walking down the middle with strange wavy arm movements.

The pavement looks narrow because of the angle but we know it is not. 2.4m is plenty of space for two people to pass so what it looks like from that perspective is, frankly; irrelevant.

As for 'strange wavy arm movements'...come on. It's quite clear what she's doing because the movement correlates exactly to what she's shouting. She's shouting 'get off the fucking pavement' and is clearly gesticulating towards to road. She's not waving and she's not flapping. She's making clear, directional motions off the pavement.

Tragic, but am amazed the cyclist was killed. Such a terrible incident.

It's a case of us all needing better hazard perception. Just because a cyclist is on a pavement, it absolutely does not mean that the 1m gap doesn't apply.

Any driver should've seen two people on the pavement and at least acknowledged a potential hazard.

But outrageous behaviour from the pedestrian.

Why would you stop if there's enough room to pass safely? (Unless there's an unpredictable factor like small children or a dog) instead of just slowing down and passing safely. All pavements where I live are shared and cyclists and pedestrians manage just fine without cyclists having to stop all the time.

I would stop as there really wasn’t enough room to pass as the pedestrian is right in the middle of the path leaving about 60 cm for the cyclist. I’d also start to doubt it was a shared space, as there were no markings and think I was in the wrong so wouldn’t expect the pedestrian to move over. Just going slowly is not a good idea as it it is harder to stay steady and upright at very slow speed.

The driver was not found in anyway to blame.

To me it’s very obvious in the video that this was a terrible accident and not the fault of the pedestrian. She gesticulates, the cyclist seems to lose balance or focus and falls into the road. The path looks narrow so I’d be surprised if it was a shared one although maybe that’s already been established.

Would you stop if they were shouting at you and acting in a threatening manner? I certainly wouldn't stop in case I was attacked.

Shouting, swearing, and swinging her arms agressively is assault. Touching the cyclist as she admitted doing to the police followed up and continued this assault. You can assault someone and end up causing them to die by accident. That doesn't make their death an accident.

Don't want a manslaughter case - don't assault people.

shouting at a cyclist would lead to them veering into the road

Shouting didn't. She flings her arm out at her in close quarters (clear from the video of you watch it closely), and admits to making contact. She pushed her, however lightly, after shouting aggressively. Even if she hadn't made contact, that's still assault and the assault caused Celia Ward to fall into the road and be killed by an oncoming car.

Most people upon meeting AG would have reacted differently, stopping or swerving in.

As has been pointed out multiple times, if someone is aggressively swearing and gesticulating at you, you don't generally stop next to them. You get the hell away from them, which, for Celia Ward, meant carrying straight on.

She had no space to swerve in without cutting across the pedestrian's path, and if you look at the photos that have been posted, it's highly likely she had only just mounted the path via the dropped kerb, meaning there wouldn't have been time to go to the railings side safely. Her placement was reasonable in the circumstances, but do carry on with your victim blaming.

it’s not forgone that this outcome was likely. If traffic were lighter, the car had swerved it wouldn’t have happened

It's absolutely a forgone conclusion that aggressively forcing someone into a well-used road, whether by language, or some physical contact, in the middle of the day, may result in them being hit by an oncoming car. It's not 100% definite, but it's likely, and she acted recklessly despite that.

This public hate of AG is more about hating her and her actions

Public hating? I don't hate her, I don't know her. But I think the verdict is absolutely right because her actions were criminal, and think that justifying her actions and looking for ways to exonerate her solely based on the fact she's disabled is shameful. While it may be a mitigating factor, it does not make her innocent.

The cyclist would not have fallen if the pedestrian had walked calmly by. Her death was a direct result of the pedestrian’s actions. I’m sure she didn’t intend to kill her but she did intentionally assault her. That was not accidental.

Also, for the approx 800th time, 2.4m is not narrow!

It's been pointed out m multiple times on the thread now that 2.4m is not narrow. There's sufficient space. If you scroll up, you'll see some photos of the path head on which show the actual width more clearly.

Yes, it's snug if the pedestrian didn't move over, but there's still enough space, as evidenced by the fact the bike's wheels don't leave the pavement until the bike's back wheel is in line with the pedestrian. She's already mostly past her. The pedestrian actually has to turn as she passes her.

Have you watched the video on a large screen, and scrubbed through it slowly? Because it really is very clear what happened if you do. You can see the way the pedestrian's steps hesitate to allow her to be alongside the cyclist, see her weight shift, see the moments her arm comes up and then retracts back into frame at the correct position for someone that's just pushed the cyclist's shoulder, and then see her turn back around to face forward.

Plus she admits light contact. In close quarters it isn't an accident that you nudge someone if you fling your arm at them intentionally because you know it's likely to happen. It's reckless. The death might be accidental, but the actions leading to it weren't, and that's why it's manslaughter.

ladymaiasura · Today 08:55

Also, for the approx 800th time, 2.4m is not narrow!

Cyclists are legally entitled to 2m room from car drivers, what about pedestrians room from cyclists?

Pedestrians are not entitled to 2m space away from cyclists, no.

The cyclist was no danger to the pedestrian here.

Pedestrians are not entitled to 2m space away from cyclists, no.

But why is that? I've been bumped and jostled by cyclists in numerous occasions. Never shoved one under a bus, mind you.

I'm not blaming the driver. Just pointing out the difference in hazard perception when people are on the pavement and road.

It'll be blindingly obvious to anyone who's completed an advanced driving course. Such a needless accident.

It should be a reminder to all of us that drive. People on pavements are also a hazard.

Probably because it would involve narrowing roads. It's one to take up with councils - National Cycling recommend shared pathways 3m. But that's not a right.

I've walked; I've cycled. I've met inconsiderate and unsafe walkers and cyclists. This doesn't change anything.

Celia Ward was cycling safely by all evidence. Auriol Grey assaulted her and caused her death.

It's because bikes don't weight the same as cars and being clipped by one is considerably more likely to result in death and serious injury than being clipped by a cyclist, which is also very dangerous to the cyclist

OneTC · Today 09:23

It's because bikes don't weight the same as cars and being clipped by one is considerably more likely to result in death and serious injury than being clipped by a cyclist, which is also very dangerous to the cyclist

That's true, but the minority of cyclists who behave like arseholes lead to people labelling them all that way. People get defensive when they see them approach. We have a wide shared pathway on the sea front and I've had cyclists change their line and come right at me, or across me, just because they wanted to change sides.

Most aren't like that, but as with many things, the crap incidents tend to stick in the mind.

Not that any of that makes this incident any less of a tragedy, but it could explain why the woman reacted badly to a cyclist on the path.

Would you stop if they were shouting at you and acting in a threatening manner? I certainly wouldn't stop in case I was attacked.

Yes I still would. I don’t think I’d really fear attack from a middle aged woman however sweary . If I knew for certain it was a shared space, I might argue the point.

The stats for cycling are what they are and people hate cyclists anyway! if people were logical they'd be ranting daily in threads about cars and the many many times the fatality rate and series injury rate that cars create in all spaces, even pavements.

But the media hasn't run a campaign against driving in the same way they have cyclists, drivers have never been presented as a class in the media as uniformly breaking laws and forming some kind of homogenous, 1s anyone speaks for all, group.

What if you were 77

Not that any of that makes this incident any less of a tragedy, but it could explain why the woman reacted badly to a cyclist on the path.

To me, it doesn't really explain why you'd shout and swear and push at a cyclist rather than move away from them, if you were scared.

Celia Ward was cycling safely. What other cyclists do is not her fault.

You'd honestly stop when someone is shouting and swearing at you and waving their arms in an aggressive way? What if it was a man instead of a middle age woman? (And not exactly an nonthreatening middle age woman). You're braver than me if you would, I'd rather not risk getting attacked.

Not that any of that makes this incident any less of a tragedy, but it could explain why the woman reacted badly to a cyclist on the path.

I do understand that, and for what it's worth I'm not a cyclist, and have had some seriously close calls and issues with cyclists (flying past without warning from behind in close quarters, refusing to leave space for my brother's wheelchair, meaning he was precariously balanced and nearly toppled over, riding two abreast on a narrow lane so that I had to force myself and my dog into brambles along the path so as not to get mowed down...).

Nevertheless, I've managed not to assault any of them. Like most people, I grumble to myself about twatty, selfish cyclists, and/or report dangerous behaviour instead.

For posters saying they wouldn't have stopped because the pedestrian was being threatening and aggressive - isn't it then more dangerous to get even closer to the pedestrian? I would have stopped - it would automatically have diffused the situation.