She may seem “childlike” but does not have an intellectual disability (I think learning disability in the UK). And - of course her lawyer is going to say stuff like “childlike”.
There’s also a number of ways “partially blind” can be interpreted. My DH could be described as that, he has had to wear spectacles since he was a child, but has normal vision with them.
Adapted accommodation doesn’t mean she isn’t cognitively able.
It’s odd how posters have decided she may be on the autism spectrum, or definitely have had a brain injury, or that the arm movements were stereopathies, or spasms or that she be cognitively impaired to the extent she wasn’t culpable, when the judge decided otherwise. Of course she’d have had psychometric testing, it would be standard for a woman with disabilities especially if deemed “childlike”.
She may have had - for whatever reason - black and white thinking but that’s not a reason to argue diminished capacity. I’d argue it makes her more dangerous.
She swore at, made aggressive hand gestures towards the cyclist and admitted to touching her. From the videos the touching occurred after the cyclist was nearly safely passed her. To me, based on Grey’s body positioning it looks like a push, but i appreciate if that’s the only footage of that contact it’s be difficult to be sure.
The cyclist could easily have been a wobbly child. Grey’s entitled/angry/remorseless approach is dangerous.
Her lawyer stated that Grey’s cognitive issues (bearing in mind those issues were not sufficient to reduce capacity) meant that she was unable to verbally express remorse which is exactly what you’d except a lawyer to say. Alternatively, she could just be a vile person.