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?!

Then the cyclist should have stopped. I've been on shared cycle/pedestrian paths many times (which this even wasn't) and you slow down when you pass pedestrians. People may be hard of hearing or partially sighted or struggle to quickly get out of the way. The onus is on the cyclist to take greater care, as it is on the motorist to take care where there are cyclists or pedestrians. It is no defence to say the cyclist wobbled at the last minute, for instance, I shouldn't be that close to them.

This particular section of video doesn't show that - we do not know what the court was shown. I presume that the released footage didn't show the actual vehicle contact/ accused contact out of consideration for the cyclist's family.

I also feel very sorry for the driver of the car in this instance. What a dreadful thing to happen.

@Bard6817 if children shouldn’t be cycling on dangerous roads, their parents should be taking responsibility for that.

That doesn’t mean that they should be cycling on narrow pavements next to dangerous roads, it means they should be going a different route, or walking on the pavement.

Bard6817 · Today 08:02

So you believe a 10 year olds should be cycling on major roads….. Because that’s what the same law says.

Yes! That's it exactly! I think that 10 year old pavement cyclists should be shoved into the road, under the nearest articulated lorry. It's the only language they understand!

Oh, or perhaps they could be taught to give way to pedestrians? Nobody really minds kids on the path, as long as they are considerate.

Thankfully Police are more understanding and accept that some roads are just too damn dangerous and that if cyclists are not doing so poorly - then it’s not a fine.

So, the Police ignore people braking the law, because it's small beer, to them

But let’s all stick to the law - which is an ass in some cases - and be damned how kids die.

As a 10 year old, I used to cycle from West Denton into Newcastle city centre, to go swimming. I used to cycle on the road with my dad, from about 8 and did cycling proficiency at junior school. We were taught not to ride on the path, my dad said if I did, to stop and push, if there were people.

So, please drop the ridiculous hyperbole and assignation of thoughts and attitudes, to people who don't have them.

You seem to be suggesting that they are only prosecuting because she is female.

She was an elderly lady ,she can’t be expected to ride on a busy road
I have lots of people ride past me on pavements,I just stand to the side to let them past ,I don’t shout and hold my arms out to stop them getting past .
the woman walking caused that accident,100% .
and it’s irrelevant what we all think anyway as the court say she caused it too

Shuttlesandspinners · Today 08:55

That doesn’t mean that they should be cycling on narrow pavements next to dangerous roads, it means they should be going a different route, or walking on the pavement.

Well, quite!

If she pushed the cyclist that would of course be manslaughter.
It’s not mentioned, so clearly was not proved that it happened, so that suspicion should be irrelevant to the conviction.

It does appear possible that the last was pushed off the bike

*person

That type of path seems too narrow to be a shared path

I honestly can't tell if you're trolling here. Even if you only watch the video and don't bother reading anything else about the case, which you clearly haven't, that is very obviously not what happened. She changed her course to walk towards the cyclist, whilst shouting "get off the fucking pavement" at her. The cyclist was clearly elderly and was on a small folding bike.

You can see from the video how fast the road traffic is moving. She would have seen the oncoming car approaching at speed behind the cyclist.

I don't understand why they can't find out if this pavement was just for pedestrians or a shared space. I wonder how hard they tried, I always assumed the default position was pavements are for pedestrians unless there is specific permission for cyclists.

On google street view: it seems this happened on Nursery Road in Huntingdon - opposite Sainsbury’s. That pavement does not look anything like a shared pavement - no signage, no on-off ramps with bike markings, too narrow - really looks like just a pedestrian pavement to me.

The suspicion should be irrelevant but chances are some of the jury members would of thought that

It really does doesn't it.

It might be the most read paper but it’s still toxic.

I struggle to believe a 77 year old woman was cycling ‘fast’ on the pavement. The hesitant way she she falls into the road to avoid the encroaching pedestrian suggests she was trying to avoid the woman’s aggressive approach.

The angry woman crossed the pavement towards her in a aggressive manner, forcing the cyclist to the edge and to fall into the road. The aggression and danger was from the pedestrian. If she’d stayed on her existing course, the cyclist would have gone on by.

It was a truly unfortunate outcome, that I suspect the angry pedestrian didn’t intend upon, but the real aggravating factor is once the woman was hit by a car, she just fucked off.

The ones I've seen are usually more wider and or have a white line to separate both sides etc

I'm a serious cyclist. I think the cycling and infrastructure in this country is a shitshow, and the Daily Mail and other sources stoke up an attitude of hatred that causes me physical danger.

But, having looked at the video, I'm astonished that a prosecution has happened here. Based on the OP, I was expecting to see someone angrily running towards the cyclist, shouting and waving their arms about in an aggressive way that forces the cyclist to swerve. In reality, all she does is stick her hand up and tell her to get off the pavement.

Manslaughter? I think she's behaved reasonably. If you're commenting on this but have not watched the video, you need to.

Probably, that’s why jury verdicts can be wrong.

I think it's also a very dangerous precedent to start handwaving away legal culpability from disabled people purely because they are disabled. It is at best highly patronising, at worst a pernicious kind of ableism.

The video does not show due to the angle, but it looks like she was pushed

This suggests that riding on the pavement if the road is dangerous is legal

but in this instance was it a shared path or a pavement?