To think this woman should not be put in prison?

[Nooyoiknooyoik]

Bizarre and very unfair Link

2.4m wide. That’s massive. Easily enough space. Easily

Wasn’t an accident, cause and effect, she chose to act in an aggressive manner and her actions had consequences, no she didn’t mean for someone to die but we should all conduct ourselves in a certain way and when we don’t and react in such a manner we should be held accountable.

You are correct that it wasn't intentional. I wouldn't go so far as to say it was an 'accident'. She was being deliberately aggressive, but I'm sure she didn't intent the cyclist to be killed.

But this is why it was manslaughter and not murder.

She still caused someone's death through her deliberately aggressive behaviour. What's more, she walked away afterwards and carried on with her day.

The woman walked away! She didn't stop!

There doesn't appear to be any sentencing consistency. What the cyclist in that article did was much worse.

Paths for both cyclists and pedestrians are a ridiculous idea especially when you see how fast some cyclists ride.

I would imagine in this case her actions after the event have had as much influence on the sentencing as what led up to the cyclist falling into the road.

Obviously if she deliberately pushed the cyclist then that is different.

She was walking down the middle of the pavement, her deliberate actions caused an slow, elderly rider to fall off her bike into oncoming traffic, walked off and failed to call for help in any way and lied about the incident until confronted with the CCTV footage.

The woman is a fucking psychopath.

She "literally" didn't "shove" her. She rightly told her off for being on the pavement

No, a custodial sentence was not appropriate.

Luckily the judge who had full view of all of the evidence thought otherwise.

But she did the thing that CAUSED Z the accident that killed a woman. That's manslaughter

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the meaning of the word "manslaughter".

Nobody is saying that this woman intentionally killed the cyclist.

However, her actions undeniably caused the cyclists death.

This is why it is manslaughter and not murder.

You cannot go around aggressively gesticulating at cyclists on busy roads - it is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible behaviour.

She also just went off to the supermarket afterwards without even checking on the cyclist.

She deserves the sentence.

There's different types of manslaughter in the UK - a lot of people are probably thinking of the more typical sorts, which is where a crime is in effect murder, but due to the circumstances you "downgrade" it to manslaughter because of diminished responsibility or provocation. There's also gross negligence manslaughter, which is where you owe a duty of care to someone.

The third type which I believe this was is "unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter". So for that, you don't have to have intended any harm to the person that died. It's not like a murder case where you intended to give someone a bloody nose, but they hit their head and died, well tough you intended serious harm and that's bad enough. For unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter, if you commit any unlawful act and as a consequence someone dies, then there you go. If you commit a burglary and somehow someone died as a consequence, that's enough.

Aggressively shouting and waving at someone, in a way that can cause them to fear for their safety, is common assault. You don't have to have actually hit them - a raise fist and shouting is well established to amount to common assault. Most reasonable people could interpret that walking towards a 77 year old woman, waving your arm at her and shouting get off the fucking pavement, could make her afraid for her safety. As a result of that assault, the woman veered her bike into the road and died. That is sufficient to charge the offence, and the jury has convicted her.

Yeah I don't think people get that.

Manslaughter.

No one is saying she deliberately killed the cyclist.

This needs to be balanced against the feeling of the deceased’s family.

Somebody who causes death by careless (not dangerous) driving may be full of remorse, no risk to the public and counterproductive to lock up, but that wouldn’t acknowledge the victim’s lost life.

It’s a tricky one.

Exactly, is it because the victim was a cyclist there's so much sneeryness and blaming? If it had been a jogger AG had been aggressive towards and had admitted 'contact' resulting in their death with would that be different? The police themselves have NOT stated that the cyclist shouldn't have been on the pathway, and that it was unclear as whether this is shared for cyclists and pedestrians or not.

She made contact (AKA pushed) her. It wasn’t an accident.

I read there was no clear signage of it being a cycle path as well as pavement. The cyclist should have been in control and stopped when she saw this woman waving and swearing - who to me seems to have mental health issues.

Exactly. Pedestrians can be blind, deaf, physically disabled, ND, elderly, children etc. There's no threshold of competence. The cyclist should have been pushing her bike.

This. Every single free person is allowed to walk the streets and they are not all going to have good awareness of the needs of cyclists for a whole host of reasons. I would bet that 9 times out of 10 it’s the disabled person who comes off worse. This seems to be a dangerous precedent. If you are cycling near pedestrians in a confined space then you need to exercise extreme caution.

Yet as far as we know she was prosecuted for waving her arms and swearing, rather than for 'pushing'. That should tell you that there's no evidence she pushed the lady.

The judge took into consideration all mitigating circumstances

I haven't seen all of the evidence, only what has been posted on the news sites, but although I can see both sides I think I am on the side of agreeing that the sentence is fair.

From the facts I can gather: on the one hand, there's the argument that a cyclist should be on the road rather than the pavement (which is subject to it's own fine) and the partially sighted lady was startled by the oncoming cyclist. The lady did not physically push the cyclist into the road, nor did she cause the cyclist to fall off or lose control of her bicycle, which was what led to the cyclist being hit by a car.

On the other hand, the pavement has not been confirmed as a "pavement" and it's contentious as to whether bicycles are allowed there or nor. The pavement was 8ft wide, wide enough for both users to allow each other to pass. The lady did not say "please may you cycle on the road rather than the pavement? The pavement is only for pedestrians, not cyclists", she waved her arms and swore which could have frightened the cyclist into feeling an imminent assault was oncoming. This may have meant the cyclist felt pressured and panicked into rejoining the road when it was unsafe for her to do so, leading to her falling off the bike. After the cyclist is hit by the car, the lady does not stop to enquire about her wellbeing, nor did she show any remorse until the day of the trial, she went on her way and bought some shopping.

Whether the cyclist should have been on the pavement or not, she shouldn't have died that day. Although she was responsible for her own re-entry to the road and was responsible for keeping control of her own bicycle, it's likely she would not have felt the need to rejoin the road at that moment and in that manner if she had not been sworn and gestured at by the lady. The lady's actions caused the cyclist to take measures which led to her death, which wouldn't have happened if the lady did not take those actions.

That's no indication the 77 lady was hurtling anywhere.

Are you saying then it was reasonable to try to topple the lady even if not into traffic?

The fact she a saw the accident she'd caused then tootle off to Sainsburys its frankly chilling

So are you saying that if the deceased woman had no family, it would be OK not to jail the pedestrian?

It doesn't matter whether or not she pushed her. She still caused her death, hence it was manslaughter.

If she actually pushed the cyclist into busy traffic then one could argue it was murder.

She wasn’t right. I live in the town. It’s a combined cycle path and pavement and clearly marked as such. The cyclist had as much right to be on it as the pedestrian.