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?!

I think however you feel about shouting and swearing, the jabbing with the arm would look threatening to a 77 year old.

Not really - your call but I'd feel safer moving past her. It's not as if you can start a bike up in an instant and be gone.

There was no perfect reaction for Celia Ward - AG's attack made that happen.

I disagree. Stopping would have caused a standoff and put you in a position where you have to confront each other. If I felt threatened I think my instinct would be to try and get away rather than engage with the person threatening me.

Or just given Auriol Grey more time to harangue Celia Ward because she would have then had to try and walk past, while wheeling her bike (taking up more space, incidentally), and risking her being blocked in and trapped, unable to turn around without going into the road.

If someone had been aggressively swearing and gesturing in that manner, I wouldn't assume they'd then just stop and pass on by quietly because I got on my bike. I'd think it more likely they'd use to opportunity to shout more at me, at minimum. It would haven't necessarily diffused the situation at all.

Yeah I'm not stopping to see what's she's got to say and I'm not a 77 year old woman.

Despite everyone having a healthy and encouraged hatred of cyclists I don't think some people realise what hating cyclists means to true aficionados. I've been attacked on my bike, I did nearly get run over after the person took a swing at me and I rolled out into traffic. My offense? I'd stopped to take a phone call and pulled my bike up off the road so I wasn't sitting in the gutter. An older man came over and started haranguing me for being on the pavement endangering him and "it's always you lot" type vitriol. I told him to do one and he started physically going for me. I'm not staying round to fight an old man so I rolled off the kerb, forgetting I had one foot clipped in and almost ditched it in front of traffic

CornishGem1975
”None of this should be about age”

Why? It’s a huge factor. Just as not being annoyed by children on the pavement, I’m not annoyed by older people either. I’m nearly 60, fit and well but think twice about cycling in busy roads because whether I like it or not I’m not as sharp as I was when I was 25 and the roads are full of nutters. Age does make a difference.

1.5m is the space a vehicle needs to give a cyclist when passing. Under normal circumstances a cyclist wouldn’t need to give that much room to a pedestrian as generally speaking the risk to the pedestrian is lower from the cyclist than compared to that of a cyclist from a car.

Mangledrake · Today 09:36

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.

I wouldn't, but I've certainly shouted at a few.

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

You've misunderstood my point, which is that people remember the bad incidents and form an opinion that all cyclists are reckless, inconsiderate idiots. Whenever I see one on the path, I'm primed to take evasive action.

As I said, most are perfectly fine and present no hazard, but a minority are arrogant and expect pedestrians to jump out of their way.

So, if her cumulative experience was that she was in danger, it could explain why she reacted so badly:
A cyclist approaching - they might hit me - over-react.

Yes I’d have stopped, at a distance

• one to diffuse it, and keep a distance from the person, rather than continue approaching
• it’s safer than the road option

Its not victim blaming, she didn’t deserve to be harmed. However it doesn’t mean it’s criminal. It’s just like if someone fell down steps they didn’t realise were wet. It’s tragic, but it’s not their fault, it’s not anyone else’s fault. It just happened and was sad.

There's 'reacting badly' and causing the death of someone.
So if I've been knocked into by a jogger or had sidestep to avoid a group of teens in the past, then if I come across them again, I can push either into traffic and cause a death I can say 'well I thought they might knock into me, I'm absolved of all responsibility' and walk away and continue with my day?

It’s just like if someone fell down steps they didn’t realise were wet. It’s tragic, but it’s not their fault, it’s not anyone else’s fault. It just happened and was sad.

but it’s not just like that at all. Now if someone swore get away from the f-ing steps forcing you back and then you fell down them that would be the same and they would be in the wrong then also. It’s not sad either if tragic what happened.

...I can push either into traffic and cause a death I can say 'well I thought they might knock into me, I'm absolved of all responsibility' and walk away and continue with my day?

Well done, that's exactly what I said in several posts, isn't it?

So you agree?

I’d also have stopped for a pedestrian who maintained their straight course, and I have done before. If the pavement was 2.4m wide, let’s guess AG was about 45cm wide and the bike was 40-45cm wide. If AG was central and didn’t move there was less than a metre between her side and the kerb. To ride a bike through that narrow gap without wobbling at a low speed would be rather tricky, it means you be passing her at much less than an arms reach, with a road.

Id never ever pass a pedestrian so close that I had potential to clip them accidentally or wobble into them. If a cyclist passed me so close I’d be scared. It’s not ok as a cyclist to presume that oncoming people will, or even can, move out if your way. You look ahead and if the path is blocked in anyway you stop, or put feet down. As a cyclist I’d say it’s really really common people don’t move and not unusual, I stop to allow them to walk past or put a foot down at least. It will not be the first time she’s had a person in the way on the pavement. The most common reason people don’t move is they are partially sighted or hearing impaired and don’t notice you, other times they have headphones in etc

If they pushed me or forced me back yes. If I walked at them and they didn’t move and I fell, or I didn’t take the opportunity to stop when safe it’s a different scenario. If I turned around and they chased me down it’s clear..

You aren't really keeping distance from the person if they're continuing towards you though. You need to pass them, and then have the issue of being on a stationary bike while they act erratically and aggressively towards you, or trying to wheel your bike, meaning there's less space on the path.

Rewatching, she wouldn't have had time to dismount between 'get off the fucking pavement' and encountering the pedestrian unless she was very spritely, and some gesticulation alone isn't necessarily enough to indicate the temperament of the pedestrian to make her do it earlier, so as a cyclist she would have been stationary, with a bike between her legs, which is not a position I'd want to risk being stuck in with an aggressive member of the public. She had a very brief moment to risk assess the situation and her decision to continue on was perfectly understandable in the circumstances.

Falling down wet stairs because you slipped when walking alone is a bit different to someone assaulting you and you being pushed/frightened so you fall down them...

MichelleScarn · Today 11:18

So you agree?

I think that your sarcasm antenna needs adjusting!

Ignoring the comments, let’s imagine AG just stood still, or carried on walking the same course without acknowledgment. There wasn’t safe passing pass. You don’t ‘have to pass’ as a cyclist, you can stop. You look at the route and ride at a speed at which you can see obstacles. It’s reasonable to ride on a pavement in a way that if a toddler with a scooter came out a driveway, or someone pushed a buggy out a door suddenly you could take evasive action to prevent a collision with the unpredictable pedestrians.

Again, no one deserves to die because of poor judgement.

Looks like a "fuck about and find out" for both of them.

77 yr old should have slowed down when she realised the pedestrian wasn't changing course. I'm not sure why she didn't as that bit of pavement looks narrow. Even if it is a shared use path, foot traffic always has right of way.

49 year old with cerebral palsy and limited vision got scared and over reacted. Until they were along side she didn't do anything wrong. I don't think the last gesture was the right thing to do but I can absolutely see why she did. The question is had she moved from defending herself from harm at that point to becoming the aggressor in the situation and I think she had.

It's sad but very understandable I think. The 49 year old felt threatened. I wonder if police would have prosecuted her if it were a 25 year old male?

Last night in the dark on a much narrower on a actual undisputed footpath a bike managed to pass us without any fuss at all.

I do suspect the pedestrians eyesight issues contributed to her fear - though I believe a PP saying her DH white cane had been missed by cyclists - I think if she had one the jury may have been more sympathetic even with the touch /push perhaps being seen as defensive and the proceeding aggression understood better.

As it is if the jury and judge think she pushed the cyclist into path of an oncoming car then I do see why the sentencing was 3 years - though I do wonder what will happen with any appeals.

I’d be interested to the outcome if the pedestrian was more relate able. For example a well dressed gentleman in his 70s waved his cane around in ground of him and barked ‘that’s illegal you know, back off right now, off the footpath off…’ at a slightly mobility impaired teenager in a tracksuit riding towards him…

I genuinely can’t understand why posters keep making up and interpreting facts differently?

FACT - the path is a shared path
FACT - the path is 2.4m wide
FACT - the pedestrian was aggressive towards the cyclist
FACT - the pedestrian made contact with the cyclist
FACT - in a court of law, the pedestrian was found guilty of causing the cyclists death

What is it about these facts that posters don’t understand, don’t agree with, or want to change to suit their own narrative?

I'd be interested, but it's a rare event as it is. For what it's worth my life and demeanour are probably closer to AG's than the cyclist's.

I don't understand the angle that AG felt threatened. AG was the one swearing at the cyclist, signalling her to move outward, and not moving inward herself. She too could have stopped!

You missed off the most import fact, lots of people hate cyclists and that fact trumps everything else and makes her death her own fault. Apparently.

Thank goodness, 1000 comments