Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this woman should not be put in prison?

960 replies

Nooyoiknooyoik · 02/03/2023 15:31

Bizarre and very unfair Link

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
tommika · 02/03/2023 22:31

Blort · 02/03/2023 15:46

Lack of remorse isnt an indication of whether a crime was committed though? It should have a bearing on sentencing yes, but she caused an accident and fucked off. It does make her a shitty person. But you cant go around imprisoning every shitty person, prisons would be full by goverment ministers alone.

Show quote history

Remorse / lack of remorse are mitigating / aggravating factors under sentencing guidelines

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/causing-death-by-careless-or-inconsiderate-driving/

tommika · 02/03/2023 22:40

Fizzadora · 02/03/2023 16:11

No she did not. The woman was riding illegally on the pavement and is therefore responsible for her own death. Its what's called an accident.

Show quote history

No she wasn’t

It’s a route that includes shared usage.
It could not be established in court that it was illegal to ride a cycle on that stretch

tommika · 02/03/2023 22:41

In line with sentencing guidelines against the facts of the case
Just like the current case

DixonD · 02/03/2023 22:45

Kois · 02/03/2023 15:45

Shouldn't have been on the pavement.

So she deserved to die?

That woman is where she belongs. Road rage takes many forms.

tommika · 02/03/2023 22:50

MidnightMeltdown · 02/03/2023 16:54

I thought that it was illegal to cycle on the pavement. That doesn't look like very wide pavement, so I think that I would be pretty angry if a bike came hurtling towards me too.

Perhaps the council, or whoever designed this, should be held accountable.

It is illegal to ride on the pavement

Provided that the pavement meets the definition within that piece of legislation, which could not be established in court as part of this case

Kennykenkencat · 02/03/2023 22:55

TooBigForMyBoots · 02/03/2023 18:57

Like women who wear short skirts? FFS.🙄

Show quote history

i don’t think there is law against wearing short skirts. Cycling on the pavement though there is a law against.

tommika · 02/03/2023 22:55

Cycle paths are full of trees, sign posts and other obstacles

It looks exactly like many cycle paths / shared use paths across the country

BreastedBoobilyToTheStairs · 02/03/2023 22:59

She pushed Celia Ward into traffic, causing her death. She admitted she touched her, and it's clear she did so after aggressively swearing, waiting for Mrs Ward to come alongside her, and then extending her arm towards her, actually hesitating and turning her body to do so. If you watch the video properly, on a large screen, it's pretty clear she intentionally pushed her. She absolutely deserves to be in jail.

NoBoatsOnSunday · 02/03/2023 23:00

Even if it was established, beyond all doubt, that the cyclist should not have been on that path, this sentence would still be lenient.

I am staggered that so many (albeit a minority) feel otherwise.

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:01

BreastedBoobilyToTheStairs · 02/03/2023 22:59

She pushed Celia Ward into traffic, causing her death. She admitted she touched her, and it's clear she did so after aggressively swearing, waiting for Mrs Ward to come alongside her, and then extending her arm towards her, actually hesitating and turning her body to do so. If you watch the video properly, on a large screen, it's pretty clear she intentionally pushed her. She absolutely deserves to be in jail.

No, it's not clear. All you, can see is her turning as the video ends.

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:01

Otherwise it would be a murder charge.

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:03

NoBoatsOnSunday · 02/03/2023 23:00

Even if it was established, beyond all doubt, that the cyclist should not have been on that path, this sentence would still be lenient.

I am staggered that so many (albeit a minority) feel otherwise.

She shouted at her. I highly doubt the intention was physical harm, yet alone death. It's not even comparable to the 'one punch' cases where drunken youths have a scrap and kill each other with a single punch.

BreastedBoobilyToTheStairs · 02/03/2023 23:04

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:01

Otherwise it would be a murder charge.

No, it wouldn't be murder if she didn't have the intent to kill her or cause gracious bodily harm. Manslaughter is correct because she was reckless to the danger her actions caused.

I don't think she was thinking 'let's shove this old lady into the road to kill her', and the prosecution would have had a really hard time proving that, so it wasn't murder. However I absolutely believe she didn't really think about the road or the traffic, just that she was justified in pushing the cyclist she didn't think should be there, out of the way.

ScrollingLeaves · 02/03/2023 23:10

What a tragedy.

'This was a shared path for cyclists and pedestrians, I am sure you knew cyclists used the path, and were not taken by surprise,' the judge said.

How can he be so sure she knew?
It was also reported the woman had cognitive issues.

To me three years in prison for someone like her seems excessive and useless.

WhoSaidWhat123 · 02/03/2023 23:10

ReformedWaywardTeen · 02/03/2023 15:55

I think it's disgusting and if the cyclist had of been a younger person nothing would have come of it and it would've been death by misadventure.
She had no helmet on and was cycling at speed on a pavement, with no apparent shared use or cycle path, she came at a woman who was partially sighted.
I think there should be an outcry, the cyclist was at fault, she was going to fast and swerved to avoid a pedestrian. If she had of had a helmet on she would've survived.

The justice system in this country never ceases to amaze me at how it's totally heavy handed in some cases and overly lenient in others.

Cycling at speed? Are you joking? The little bit of footage we do see shows the cyclist at a low speed. Which footage did you see to be adamant that the cyclist was going too fast and had to swerve? The pedestrian puts her arms out at the cyclist, the cyclist isn’t going towards the pedestrian at all.

NoBoatsOnSunday · 02/03/2023 23:11

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:03

She shouted at her. I highly doubt the intention was physical harm, yet alone death. It's not even comparable to the 'one punch' cases where drunken youths have a scrap and kill each other with a single punch.

Show quote history

I agree with the majority that, while not conclusive, the video (coupled with the pedestrian’s own statement that she made ‘light contact’) seems to show that the pedestrian deliberately pushed the cyclist into the road.

Even if she did not make meaningful contact, her aggressive shouting and gesturing was a criminal act that was directly and foreseeably responsible for causing the cyclist’s death.

Leaving the scene and the absence of remorse plunges her into irredeemable scumbag territory.

BreastedBoobilyToTheStairs · 02/03/2023 23:12

No, it's not clear. All you, can see is her turning as the video ends.

If you watch it properly it is clear. She shouts, swears and gesticulates. Then you can see her stop for a brief moment and move her arm out as soon as Celia comes alongside her (her hand passes in frame as it moves up). You can then see her arm coming back in towards her body as Celia left the pavement, at the angle that is correct to have pushed Celia's shoulder. You can even see her body weight shift backwards slightly because she was leaning towards Celia's bike on that step. Finally, even she said she made contact. So yes, it's plenty clear.

OneTC · 02/03/2023 23:13

It's an unfortunate situation because someone had died, not because a woman has gone to prison for probably 18 months for being responsible for that death.

WhoSaidWhat123 · 02/03/2023 23:13

murasaki · 02/03/2023 15:59

Did the driver who hit the cyclist get charged? I couldn't see that anywhere.

Why would they? A car does not break instantly you know.

BreastedBoobilyToTheStairs · 02/03/2023 23:13

OneTC · 02/03/2023 23:13

It's an unfortunate situation because someone had died, not because a woman has gone to prison for probably 18 months for being responsible for that death.

Absolutely

NoBoatsOnSunday · 02/03/2023 23:20

BreastedBoobilyToTheStairs · 02/03/2023 23:12

No, it's not clear. All you, can see is her turning as the video ends.

If you watch it properly it is clear. She shouts, swears and gesticulates. Then you can see her stop for a brief moment and move her arm out as soon as Celia comes alongside her (her hand passes in frame as it moves up). You can then see her arm coming back in towards her body as Celia left the pavement, at the angle that is correct to have pushed Celia's shoulder. You can even see her body weight shift backwards slightly because she was leaning towards Celia's bike on that step. Finally, even she said she made contact. So yes, it's plenty clear.

Yup. The cyclist was cycling in a straight line, with her front wheel straight, right until she was about 3/4ths of the way past the pedestrian.

At that point, you can see the pedestrian turn her body towards the cyclist and extend her arm
towards her.

The bike immediately begins to tip to the right, the the cyclist swerved into the road, and your can see the pedestrian bring her arm back towards her body.

You do not see the point of contact, but we know there was at least light contact as the pedestrian admitted it.

I appreciate it might not have been provable in court, but it looks a hell of a lot like a push.

In the end I suspect the police didn’t even want to get into whether there was a push or not, as manslaughter could be easily established on the incontrovertible facts.

MsJD · 02/03/2023 23:22

3 years is not enough IMO. She caused the death of a 77-year-old retired midwife. I hope the prosecution appeal against this unduly lenient sentence.

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:23

NoBoatsOnSunday · 02/03/2023 23:11

I agree with the majority that, while not conclusive, the video (coupled with the pedestrian’s own statement that she made ‘light contact’) seems to show that the pedestrian deliberately pushed the cyclist into the road.

Even if she did not make meaningful contact, her aggressive shouting and gesturing was a criminal act that was directly and foreseeably responsible for causing the cyclist’s death.

Leaving the scene and the absence of remorse plunges her into irredeemable scumbag territory.

Show quote history

Yeah, I can't disagree she's a scumbag for just sauntering off. I took it that she shouted aggressively at the cyclist which startled her into swerving. Not a nice way to act and with terrible consequences but ultimately that she only meant to swear at her, which is perhaps more understandable given her cognitive issues and sight issues which likely means rash cyclists pose more of a threat to her than to most.

However, if she actually shoved her then that's entirely different.

AllDayBreakfast92 · 02/03/2023 23:27

Just watched it again. It's definitely unclear whether she shoved her or not. It's literally off camera.

ScrollingLeaves · 02/03/2023 23:28

“A partially-sighted pedestrian with cerebral palsy has been has been found guilty of killing an elderly cyclist who had "angered" her by cycling on the pavement”.

She seemed to be almost flapping her arm at the cyclist. Her walk was a side-to-side kind. She does not look quite mentally or physically sound at all. The sentence seems wrong.

Apparently, according to the judge, the pavement was supposed to be shared by pedestrians and cyclists, and she ‘surely knew that’, but it certainly does not look wide enough for that to have been good traffic planning by the city council. Where are the standard pedestrian and cycle
markings?

How does the judge know she ‘knew’ that?