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?

I’m certainly not victim blaming. It seems to me giving all the circumstances especially those I’ve read more recently, like an absolutely tragic accident.

A tragic accident would be CW going along the road and falling into the path of a car entirely of her own volition.

But that isn't what happened

What was accidental about barrelling towards a cyclist while shouting, swearing and swatting, and sending her into the road?

Unintended consequences of an illegal act of aggression and assault do not constitute an accident!

This is MN, not a court of law. There are no implications to my opinion. I have plenty of reasoning for my opinion, but I have no obligation to explain anything to you.

Not everyone is responsible for their actions to the same extent. Not everyone can control their actions to the same extent.

What is criminal behavior from a person in full control of their faculties may not be from someone who is brain damaged and unable to process consequences and control their actions.

You're actually libelling the judge. The post should probably be reported.

Before you said you didn't need evidence, now you say you have it but you're not sharing. A strange approach for someone accusing a judge of mishandling a trial. Or anyone who actually can back up what they're saying.

I think we can safely disregard your opinion here.

You have libeled the judge.

Either back up your claims or request that your posts are deleted.

Exactlyb

I’ve rewatched the video…it does look as though there was contact of some form but the pavement also looks pretty narrow.

There are so many ways it could have played out if either person reacted differently.

It is sad all round.

AG insists she has full capacity.

I am going to give her credit for that. A lot more responsible person than our hapless ex-PM who can't seem to figure out anything for himself (like "Hands Space Face")

Could she see the cyclist was elderly? If she just panicked, she didn't necessarily choose not to stay still.

But yes, if things had been different nobody would have died, and what actually happened is tragic.

I don't know if the outcome of the trial was correct or not as I don't feel I know enough to say, but on the face of it I think an argument can be made that the judge did not take AG's disabilities properly into account. An appeal should, hopefully, sort this out.

She really wasn’t panicking. I fully accept she wasn’t intending to kill or even cause serious harm, but it was motivated by anger, not fear or panic.

I've seen the slowed down images of the bike toppling, the video of some of the police interviews with Auriol Grey, and lastly the impact statement of the PTSD suffered by the motorist whose car Mrs Ward fell into the path of. Ms Grey was registered as disabled and had been living in her home for 17 years. She went out independently to go shopping so would know that cyclists used that path, even though it wasn't clear at the time of the accident whether it was a shared path. It's also clear from the slowed images that Ms Gray went from the railings across the path towards Mrs Ward. I don't know what the speed of the traffic is using that road but in dry conditions in the clear daylight traffic wasn't queuing so it could have been quite fast.

The Judge said he'd drawn conclusions from the police interviews with Ms Grey as she had not been cross examined or given evidence in her defence, which she wasnt required to do. I wonder whether at the time she was interviewed by the police if she'd had a social worker or solicitor with her. We don't know at what stage her barrister was instructed in her defence. As I worked with adults with disabilities I do know that many are more vulnerable and not as capable as they might appear. The Judge set out clearly how he arrived at the sentence he imposed. My view is that a custodial sentence isn't the right one for someone who is themselves disabled.

I have not libelled the judge, I do not have to back up any claims (I didn't make any claims, I gave an opinion) and I will not ask for my posts to be deleted.
You can ask for that if you are so bothered, but since I said "the judge came off as biased" as opposed to "the judge was biased and I can prove it", I can't see why they would be deleted.

In case you are unaware (and it would appear you are), honest opinion is a defense of libel, even if the opinion is exaggerated, prejudiced or obstinate. All it needs to be is an statement of opinion (not fact) and honestly held.

Way off topic but no car can tell you if your tyres have insufficient tread or uneven wear or damage. All recent cars have a warning light to warn you if there has been a loss of air pressure in your tyres. My 2003 Mercedes isn't fitted with such a system, later ones are as it was an EU directive.

AG’s actions were motivated by anger.
I would lay money on this not being the first time her temper has got her into trouble.

She is where she should be.

But not everyone is equally responsible for their anger. If you have brain damage and serious cognitive issues, it can be entirely possible that you have no ability at all to control your anger, and you cannot be punished for that anger in the same way as someone who does have the ability to control their anger.

It's highly likely her anger issues have got her into trouble many times, which makes it all the more likely that she has significant difficulties to control her anger, and possibly the inability to learn from past instances.

Completely agree @coldmarchmorn . There's also the issue that sometimes, and especially in people with significant or severe cognitive impairment, anxiety and fear might be expressed as anger, so what looks like anger, is actually stemming from underlying fear and anxiety. Not in every instance of course, and not in all cases, but this is why a full evaluation of AG's disabilities and the impact of them on her functioning is critical to this case.

There seems to be a bit of "bigotry of low expectations" at play here.

Just because someone is disabled doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to account for their criminal wrongdoings. If AG is so disabled that she's incapable of controlling her own behaviour and as some have tried to suggest her own movements, she shouldn't have been allowed out without a chaperone.

If she's been deemed fit to be independently out and about on her own, then she must have some control over herself, mustn't she? You can't have it both ways.

I highly doubt this is the first time she's behaved in an aggressive manner towards other people. It's just the first notable time because someone got killed because of her actions. Her actions resulted in the death of a 78-year old woman who had contributed greatly to her community in her life. She should pay the price for that.

How would all of the people leaping to AG's defence feel if it was your mother who was killed?

As for the question over the shared space, it's irrelevant. It really has little bearing on the case. It looks like it was a shared space but even if it wasn't-it doesn't justify AG's disproportionate response to it. In any decent society you don't get to decide to behave in a way that is aggressive and endangers someone just because someone else inconvenienced or annoyed you. That's not how the world works.

We don't see someone breaking the rules and decide to take matters into our own hands. Had AG held her course and continued walking as she was, CW would have cycled past her with no issue at all. Instead, she made a choice and that choice cost a woman her life and AG her freedom, but AG will soon be free and CW will never live again. That's the real tragedy and CW is the real victim. Not AG.

I have to say I did wonder whether she was NT given how under-diagnosed neurodiversity is in women her age.

You ask this -

"she's been deemed fit to be independently out and about on her own, then she must have some control over herself, mustn't she? You can't have it both ways" -

....and my answer is that it depends.

I have made the point upthread already, that just because someone is living independently and out and about, doesn't mean we can draw the conclusion from this alone, that they should be. The state of our social care system is such that many sick and disabled people are being left without adequate assessment and review, and in turn, without adequate care and support. Perhaps AG's needs, properly accounted for, might actually show that she needed a PA, to accompany her to do her shopping or whatever, and help her avoid potentially dangerous situations, such has led to this tragedy.

Completely agree.

Her actions caused someone to die. Imagine if that was your relative. And what makes it worse is the poor car driver.

People like her need to just mind their own bloody business. Hopefully, it'll be a lesson to all those others who have nothing better to do than cause trouble!

It’s weird how there seems to be so much support for a killer and no regard for the victim who died and the car driver who’s life has been very negatively affected. Not to mention their families as well.

A killer who left the scene of the carnage she created while she tottered off to do a spot of shopping !!

Ask yourselves this … What if the victim was a member of your family ?

Do you really think she should have been given a slap on the wrist and forget about ?