Page 4 | 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?!

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 08:03

Leftbutcameback · 02/03/2023 08:02

I think that the jury will have heard all the evidence, and been guided by the judge as to the law, and they will be in a much better position than we are based on a relatively short article. I read the BBC one so thanks for sharing.

Agree that it’s odd about not being able to tell if it’s a shared path but then when I was a juror the police evidence was awful. The lead officer was on leave so they sent someone else along who couldn’t answer the questions.

Yes I think we can't really tell what the Jury know

IncompleteSenten · 02/03/2023 08:03

If she hadn't shouted and waved her hands around, would the woman have wobbled into traffic?

Her actions resulted in the woman's death. She didn't intend for that to happen which is why it's manslaughter. If she'd shoved her directly under a bus while screaming die bitch die, it would have been murder

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:04

Also, if I remember rightly from university there is no case for manslaughter if a pedestrian doesn't help someone who is injured, but the driver of the car would certainly be required to stop.

SLS500 · 02/03/2023 08:05

she left the scene and went shopping - she's evil

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:06

Her actions resulted in the woman's death

I think the prosecution will have trouble establishing that unless they can show that she meant to or was reckless as to causing serious harm.

HarlanPepper · 02/03/2023 08:06

The pedestrian wasn't found guilty of manslaughter because she didn't help the cyclist. She wasn't passive. Her actions caused the cyclist to swerve into the road and into the path of an oncoming car. The driver wasn't charged because they could not have stopped in time.

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:06

she left the scene and went shopping - she's evil

Morally that might be the case, but lots of people would be in prison for just not being very nice.

Hawkins003 · 02/03/2023 08:07

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 08:01

I've watched the video. The cyclist had no where to go. The pedestrian wasn't going to stop or move.

As someone previously quoted surely the cyclist should of stopped and gave way to the pedestrian ?

Smineusername · 02/03/2023 08:07

It's manslaughter not because she caused an accident but because she then left an injured woman to die in the street

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:09

It's manslaughter not because she caused an accident but because she then left an injured woman to die in the street

Are you a lawyer? As I don't think that constitutes manslaughter in this country.

HarlanPepper · 02/03/2023 08:09

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:06

Her actions resulted in the woman's death

I think the prosecution will have trouble establishing that unless they can show that she meant to or was reckless as to causing serious harm.

They didn't have trouble establishing it because the woman has been found guilty. She was convicted. What are people not getting here? The facts are in the article and in all the other reporting of the case.

ChaseyLain · 02/03/2023 08:09

I've watched the video. The cyclist had no where to go. The pedestrian wasn't going to stop or move.

What part of the pedestrian had cerebral palsy are you finding difficult here?

CecilyP · 02/03/2023 08:09

ivykaty44 · 02/03/2023 07:50

@knittingaddict

shared paths have been put in as a cheap tick box effort by councils, they’re badly designed as they’re pavements and badly signed

if cyclists don’t use them they get berated and if they do use them they get berated fir being on the pavement

I quite agree with you regarding lack of signage. The really should be obligatory. There is one near my work that I certainly wouldn’t have known about had a cyclist colleague not told me. But it is plenty wide enough for cyclists and pedestrians to pass without problem.

ClimbingRoseBush · 02/03/2023 08:09

There’s an actual video of it happening, I can’t see how anyone can be confused. She caused the cyclist’s death.

FourTeaFallOut · 02/03/2023 08:10

I thought that she must have been waving her arms around like a crazy woman from what I read but the video shows a far more moderate frustration with someone cycling towards her on a normal pavement.

CrotchetyCrocheting · 02/03/2023 08:11

SLS500 · 02/03/2023 08:05

she left the scene and went shopping - she's evil

Maybe she thought it was better to move on than stand gawping at the woman? She probably didn't think it was her fault that the cyclist couldn't move out of her way or stop on time so saw no reason to stay looking at what probably wasn't a very nice scene. There isn't much someone that is partially sighted and has CP can do to be helpful in that in situation. Maybe she thought it more respectful to leave rather be an onlooker in an awful accident?

SliceOfCakeCupOfTea · 02/03/2023 08:12

The language on this thread is very telling.

The bike was apparently "illegally", "hurtling" along and "ploughing" into "innocent pedestrians"

The fact that the police can't even say if it was a shared pavement so I'm amazed so many people on here can.

The footage also shows that the cyclist wasn't "hurtling along at speed" and the pedestrian stepped into her way to intentionally force her into the road.

Any other situation where someone is forced into a road, there would be uproar.

soleilblue · 02/03/2023 08:12

ChaseyLain · 02/03/2023 08:09

I've watched the video. The cyclist had no where to go. The pedestrian wasn't going to stop or move.

What part of the pedestrian had cerebral palsy are you finding difficult here?

The aim of the pedestrian seemed to just be get the cyclist out the way. Fair enough. But there was nowhere for the cyclist to go. The cyclist was forced into the road and hit.

Yes the cyclist shouldn't have been on the pavement but the pedestrian angrily waved and forced them into the path of the traffic.

The cerebral palsy would have been taken into account during the trial and if it wasn't then I hope there is a retrial

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:13

I quite often walk down narrow pavements with the dog and we sometimes have to step into the road to get round one another. Another pedestrian would not be liable if I stepped into the road and got run over, unless they had made me in fear of my life or feel that was the only thing I could do for some reason or pushed me.

I guess the case will be whether the hand flapping was enough to make the cyclist feel she had to swerve into the road, or if she just went into the road without looking.

And there is also the question of whether the cyclist should have been on the pavement in the first place and whether the pedestrian felt she was going to be knocked down herself.

Fancylike · 02/03/2023 08:13

This seems like something that should never have gone to court. The video shows her clearly waving in front of her own body, not at the cyclist.

What else is a disabled woman meant to do if a cyclist is hurtling towards you on the pavement? It’s not a wide pavement and she has a disease which makes her unbalanced and slows her movements, as well as being partially sighted. She’s shouting and waving at her to get her attention, but she apparently didn’t do it kindly enough. Or was she meant to allow this incapable cyclist not even wearing a helmet or able to safely slow and brake when approaching a pedestrian to slam into her? Would police prefer if they both died in a collision?

HarlanPepper · 02/03/2023 08:13

CrotchetyCrocheting · 02/03/2023 08:11

Maybe she thought it was better to move on than stand gawping at the woman? She probably didn't think it was her fault that the cyclist couldn't move out of her way or stop on time so saw no reason to stay looking at what probably wasn't a very nice scene. There isn't much someone that is partially sighted and has CP can do to be helpful in that in situation. Maybe she thought it more respectful to leave rather be an onlooker in an awful accident?

Show quote history

Watch the video.

SoupDragon · 02/03/2023 08:13

and the pedestrian stepped into her way to intentionally force her into the road.

the pedestrian walks in a straight line down the middle of the pavement with no deviation. She doesn't step into the way of the cyclist.

SoupDragon · 02/03/2023 08:14

There is clearly more to this than has been shown in the reporting.

HarlanPepper · 02/03/2023 08:14

Catspyjamas17 · 02/03/2023 08:13

I quite often walk down narrow pavements with the dog and we sometimes have to step into the road to get round one another. Another pedestrian would not be liable if I stepped into the road and got run over, unless they had made me in fear of my life or feel that was the only thing I could do for some reason or pushed me.

I guess the case will be whether the hand flapping was enough to make the cyclist feel she had to swerve into the road, or if she just went into the road without looking.

And there is also the question of whether the cyclist should have been on the pavement in the first place and whether the pedestrian felt she was going to be knocked down herself.

Once again, the case has already been heard, and the pedestrian has already been found guilty, on the evidence.

HarlanPepper · 02/03/2023 08:15

SoupDragon · 02/03/2023 08:13

and the pedestrian stepped into her way to intentionally force her into the road.

the pedestrian walks in a straight line down the middle of the pavement with no deviation. She doesn't step into the way of the cyclist.

She does. She steps towards her.