To think today’s article about Auriol Grey paint a very different picture

[HibiscusBlues]

I was sad to see articles today about the woman jailed for the death of a cyclist. At the time of the offence she was living in a home for the disabled. If this is the case my experience is places like that aren’t easily available.
Shes partially blind, has balance problems and cognitive difficulties after a birth injury to the brain. She’s had related brain surgery.
If this is the case, as her family’s appeal stated, then there does seem a disconnect with the judge saying no difficulties that impacted her actions. Accessing supported living yet being deemed able-bodied and cognitively normal by a court.
Obviously the incident was horrendous for the Ward family, and the cyclist need not deserve to die. It’s a sad case. However the handling of the case is starting to sound uncomfortable. What have others thought of the articles today?

Leaving this thread now, but shocked at the level of vitriol and misinformation from some posters.

AG is not without blame, and it is heartbreaking for the victim's family as well as the poor driver. I can feel deeply for them all.

The question is has this disabled woman been treated fairly at sentencing and by the overall justice system. Even if you feel she has, the nasty denigration of her is horrible.

You know @EarringsandLipstick its an emotional case, but you’re the one eye rolling and name calling all over the thread.

I lived in Cambridge and cycled to many places when I was there. Someone putting their hand on me while I was cycling would have resulted in a similar tragedy. A push doesn’t have to be hard for it to be a push. My two year old pushed me today: had no effect whatsoever, it will still a push.

I am normally liberal, but disabled or otherwise I think we’ve all known someone like this who walk around ranting and raving and trying to intimidate others into behaving as they see fit. In this instance it had tragic consequences. I’m not confident, myself, that had we shown kindness and understanding towards her Grey wouldn’t be swearing and waving her arms around at the next person to get in her way.

Those are factors that were taken into account when she was sentenced to three years rather than the standard four. If something was missed, hopefully the appeal will right it.

That's true - but it can be argued, insufficiently so.

So, answer the question.

She is responsible for an innocent woman's death, so if not prison, what should happen to her? What would the AG apologist's great solution to this situation be?

Well @EarringsandLipstick have you looked at her previous history??

Have you?

I'm guessing not....

Well, that's the purpose of the appeal and the reason for the appeal system.

but you’re the one eye rolling and name calling all over the thread.

I've eye-rolled where posters have deliberately misread and misrepresented facts.

I've not name-called bar one characterisation of one poster who was gleefully cruel.

I’m not confident, myself, that had we shown kindness and understanding towards her Grey wouldn’t be swearing and waving her arms around at the next person to get in her way.

I don't disagree.

I just don't believe prison is the correct place for her.

@SunshineGeorgie What was her previous history? I know no previous convictions.

What would the AG apologist's great solution to this situation be

I'm not an 'apologist' for anything. Arguing a particular viewpoint doesn't make me or anyone else an 'apologist'

Suspended sentence with appropriate care order.

Er, no?

Have you? I mentioned that because that's how a sentence is calculated. I only know what has been reported.

Do you know more?

Agreed, they should. And tbh, the vast majority do, just the same as the vast majority of drivers are safe and considerate.

It's just a dreadful case all round.

Well, that's the purpose of the appeal and the reason for the appeal system.

Yes I agree. But if it's done correctly first time round, there's no need for an appeal.

Either way it's fucking dangerous and foreseeable it would cause harm

Who's to say it wasn't and her legal team are chancing it

Previous Convictions I know nothing of

But locally, she was well known

It’s interesting the papers report Grey was shocked and devastated by her sentence, not by her actions leading to someone’s untimely death.

Sigh.

We know our justice system can never be perfect. That's why we have an appeal system.

I'm sure we'd all rather have a perfect system but failing that, a set procedure to try to right potential wrongs is the best we can do. Don't knock it unless you have some idea of how we can ensure perfect verdicts and sentences every time.

Actually, this country wasn't designed with CARS in mind.

@SunshineGeorgie i gathered … in fairness though being an arse is not grounds for a custodial sentence!

No, it won't bring her back.

However, it will give Ms Ward's grieving family some justice and peace knowing that the woman whose aggression directly caused the death of their loved one isn't free to inflict similar harm on other innocent people.

@Tietheapron I would think she had been spoken to about her behaviour in public. Yet she continued

Consequences and all that. Hard lesson for her

I'm horrified and saddened by this case. As someone who has lost family members due to a strangers careless driving, I completely understand the anger and desire for vengeance some families feel In similar situations. The truth is though, locking someone up away from their family doesn't bring the people you love back to you.

What I am particularly stuck by in this case, is the original reporting about the Husband of the lady who died being a retired distinguished RAF officer.

Cyclists are required to give way to pedestrians. Regardless of who their Husband is.

When that pedestrian is observably disabled, flapping their hands and shouting, the onus is even more on the cyclist to stop.

I have also learned today that shared routes should be a minimum of 3 metres. This section was 2.4 metres.

I cannot fathom why the judge disregarded the hierarchy in the Highway Code.

I don't understand why the judge didn't clarify the "shared route" situation.

I don't understand how Miss Grey was considered fit to plead by the CPS/Defence.

And I don't understand why someone who didn't show emotion at the death of her sister was expected to behave like someone without disabilities after this tragic incident.

As a physically disabled woman myself, I find it outrageous that the judge decided she didn’t feel vulnerable on the pavement. The more I read about this case, the more I feel compassion for Auriol Grey.

What's unfair? She was assessed by experts and deemed 1) fit to stand trial and 2) Responsible for her actions. Are you saying disabled people should have immunity from presecution?