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?

Thought exactly the same when reading article in times today. Wondered what sort of a poor defence she had to have been found guilty. It was clearly a tragic accident, but in no way can it be reasonable for her to be in jail, in light of this information about her considerable cognitive difficulties and physical disabilities and how they were relevant to this situation.

She is partially sighted. She was walking close to the kerb as she can’t see out of the other eye. So the cyclist was directly obstructing her limited vision and she wouldn’t have been easily able to get out of the way. She has cognitive difficulties, (they must be considerable if she was initially unaware that she was in prison and was asking the warden if she could go home). This would have affected how she would have responded in that moment.

She didn’t need to get out of the way though, the cyclist was nearly past her at the time that Auriol turned towards the cyclist and swung her arm at her (making at least some contact).

I don’t know if prison is the right place for her, but this was a plain and obvious assault that resulted in a woman’s death.

No she is responsible for her anger, not tge accident that then followed. The cyclist was on a pavement which is illegal so not an innocent party either.

Massive tragedy, but the whole thing stinks to me, it's not justice by a long shot. She should not have been handed a custodial sentence.

My colleagues wife was killed by a Mercedes driver with problem tyres who in court plead the case that the car was ££££ and didn't tell her there was a prob with the tyres. Err they do tell you your tyres have a problem (Im an ex merc owner). She got off scot free.

The cyclist would not have known of any of AG issues. AG saw the cyclist, made the point of getting in the cyclists path, and then pushed the cyclist into the traffic.
This is all in the video.

She should not have been handed a custodial sentence.

How should we deal with people who push other people into busy roads and kill them?

(The cyclist did have a right to be there, but it would have been manslaughter just as much even if she hadn't.)

She didn’t push her into the road did she? She waved an arm in her face which caused her to fall in the road ( and her cognitive and physical difficulties are a relevant factor in why. big difference in terms of intent)
it says in the article that it is not known whether it was a shared cycle way after all, that there’s no evidence to suggest it was, and the cyclist regularly cycled on pavements as she was hard of hearing.

The article is wrong. I posted pictures of the signs. Perhaps you didn’t see them.

Anyone?

It would be violent because he’s a man. It’s automatically not violent because she’s a woman.

I doubt anyone would be like ‘plus the poor guy’s sister passed away a few years ago’ as a weird side defence like has been mentioned several times in this thread.

Several articles.

But the police, in their evidence, said they could not categorically state that the route in question was a shared cycleway and the county council could find no legal records showing that it was.

And according to Department for Transport guidance on cycle infrastructure design — issued to councils in July 2020 — shared routes should be at least three metres wide on roads used by up to 300 cyclists per hour and 4.5 metres wide on roads used by more than 300 cyclists per hour.

The stretch of pavement where Celia Ward fell off her bike into the path of an oncoming Volkswagen Passat was just 2.4 metres wide and there wasn't a sign indicating a 'shared path'.

this is just what it says.

It happened in October 2020, both the police and council have confirmed it was confusing. People are taking their word, over an unverified mumsnet post from 2023. Maybe signage was improved since

The Sunday Times reckoned it visited last week and couldn’t see any signage although those pictures were taken two weeks ago. Perhaps it’s invisible to some people 🤷‍♀️ Even if the signage has been improved since 2020, it was still a shared pathway then as Grey would have known, just as the judge pointed out in his summing up.

Yes, being expected to move to the side on which you have no vision would be unnerving. She couldn’t see to her right, the road was too the left. You or I may without thinking step right, but would be reluctant to step anywhere quickly you couldn’t see. There could be an obstacle, hole etc and it would be scary. Mix in cognitive difficulties and it’s not straightforward

If the council don’t know, the police don’t know, other people have reported they don’t know… why is Auriol Grey meant to know?

She didn’t push her into the road did she?

Yes.

A light push is still a push. You don't need much force to send a 70-something woman on a bike off course. Hand makes contact with enough force to send cyclist off course? That's a push. To be honest, the video looks like she put some force into it. Body turns, she stops.

But even if you want to split hairs like a mad barber about exactly how much force constitutes a push, it comes to the same thing. Grey caused her to fall into the road and is directly responsible for her death.

There was also no confirmation that the path wasn't shared. But cyclists were known to use it and Grey would not have been surprised to see one on there. She wasn't ambushed. And even if it were completely, unequivocally illegal - it doesn't make it legal to kill the cyclist.

No, but if he makes jerky movements, has poor motor control or has related cognitive difficulties he wouldn’t be held accountable for wobbly wild movements in the same way you or I was.

My son has epilepsy. If he had a fit and fell on someone causing harm would you want him punished by the law? Extreme example, but there’s enough what ifs on this thread to wonder…

The council quite obviously does know, it’s erected signage. Everyone who lives here knows. It’s been a shared pathway since the road was built 50 years ago.

My son has epilepsy. If he had a fit and fell on someone causing harm would you want him punished by the law?

Do you honestly think that's comparable?

It’s the extreme conclusion of what people are saying above

Why are they lying to the court then?

From what I can see Auriol Grey deliberately moved towards the cyclist waving her arms and shouted. It would have been different if she'd froze in panic and the shouted out or put out her arms to protect herself. What she did looked aggressive to most people.

Absolutely no fucking idea. Everyone who lives here is utterly mystified by it.

@HibiscusBlues epilepsy is really not the extreme end of this argument at all. It’s completely different.

Say AG tripped and fell into CW, yes, but to use her own words ‘get off the fucking pavement’ and pushed her into the road. I’ve watched that video over and over and I honestly don’t know how anyone can say it wasn’t a push.

Even the judge who convicted her did not say it was a push. That’s a very loaded word. He said that she made 'a lateral sweeping movement' with her left arm, which he said, either made contact with the former midwife or made her recoil and fall.
so if the judge can’t tell whether she made contact or not how are so many people using the word ‘pushed’.