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?

AG had time to step over to the right side of the path if she genuinely thought that she was at risk of being run over. Regardless, there was room enough for them both to pass without AG or the cyclist changing their position on the path.

I thought the cyclist hit her though? Wasn't there contact?

So I guess that was a no on the humanity then?

You're defending the convicted killer of 76 year old woman and questioning my humanity?

No, there wasn’t contact from the cyclist. The cyclist did not hit AG or make any contact.

When being interviewed by the police, AG said she may have made light contact with the cyclist whilst she was throwing her arm towards the cyclist and shouting “get off the fucking pavement”.

Is this a wind up? Getting hard to tell.

The cyclist didn’t come close to colliding with Auriol Grey. Based on the photos there appears to have been 1-2 feet between them.

When the cyclist was already about half way past Auriol, Auriol (having turned to face towards the cyclist) extended her arm to push or hit the cyclist, and made some contact.

Where did you read that? All I can find after reading several articles is that she 'believed she had made light contact with Mrs Ward.'

If you've got a link to a story with more detail I'd be interested to read it.

The judge’s sentencing remarks (posted throughout the various threads, including the previous page on this one) had a section where the judge summarizes the evidence of an independent witness who saw Celia swing her arm at, and possibly make contact with, the cyclist.

And obviously the aggressive swearing is on the video.

You know I actually feel great sympathy for anyone that through the circumstances of their life ends up in prison. No one ends up in prison after their best day and the path that most people take to get there is pretty tragic.

But given how we do things this is an expected outcome. If you took all of the people with behavioural issues out of prison there wouldn't be anybody inside. If you took all the people out of prison that had endured a shit life there wouldn't be anyone. Some estimate that 60% of the prison population have serious mental health problems.

But this is one of 2 active threads, and if you look back to the date of the conviction there's I think 3 x 1000 post threads on it and the focus of each of them is the injustice this woman has suffered and very little emphasis on the lady that died.

I think it's extremely unlikely that the avenues that people are saying here about her vulnerability weren't explored by the defense. They were her extremely renowned defense. I reckon they did a more thorough job than someone off the internet given they had access to actual pertinent information.Lots of people with disabilities similar to Grey's live in the community and don't kill people.

fwiw I was surprised she got a custodial

She says it in the interview linked in this thread

@StepAwayFromTheBiscuitJar
’I thought the cyclist hit her though? Wasn't there contact?’

Nope.
Was the other way round.
That’s why AG is in jail.

I think these are always derailed, due to the nature of the forum, into a discussion of the person.

For me the discussion should be about the wider legal system. Support in the community. I am personally really concerned about justice in the UK. This is the same system in which rapists are barely punished. Vulnerable victims and offenders are suffering. I am fearful that if I develop vulnerably, or my loved ones do, that we would be at risk- either as victims or if charged.

It isn’t just about Auriol Grey. It is about a more fundamental level of ‘justness’ in the justice system.

I don’t have any personal sympathies or feelings of warmth for Auriol Grey, nor can I relate to her actions. Putting aside my feelings though about the emotions of the incident, I am concerned that the appeal should stand. I do think potential mistrials are really really important to discuss. This one, historical cases of race impact verdicts etc.

In this case, looking at the evidence out there it seems the judge has made a statement about the path, that neither the police nor council support. Also it appears that possibility quite significant physical and cognitive disabilities have been disregarded by the court. It’s worth noting this is the second trial too, her first was unable to reach a verdict. It wasn’t a straight forward case at all going through the system

How do you know the evidence in court?

Were there other witnesses who talked about the path? People who use it often for example

Assume you mean Auriol? Celia was the cyclist who died.

Both involved in the incident were women so how is the outcome misogyny exactly?

but it is not a capital offence

Exactly - and bikes are legally allowed on some pavements, possibly even the one in question.

Definitely the one in question, there are signs to indicate exactly that.

Maybe 1 foot between the cyclist's wheel and Auriol's foot. This means that the handlebars and their bodies would have passed very close together if not contacted.

I think it’s reasonable to say if neither the council or police can work out the status of the pavement then it’s reasonable to at least appeal the judgement that a disabled person would know. The council have access to their planning, legal records, can talk to people… yet

Also as a point of appeal, the judgement is that she had no impairments to impact her. That again is quite possibly open to appeal, especially if there is further evidence from prison about her understanding of the concept of prison. It may be appealable, depending on the evidence and how the judgement interpreted it. I can’t see a reason to block an appeal. The first trial didn’t reach a verdict, it’s an unusual one

Is it relevant, though? What she did would have been unlawful even if it was undeniably a pedestrian-only zone.

The council has worked out the status of the pavement and erected signs to indicate that it’s a shared pathway. The reason the records are cloudy is because the road has only existed for 50 years and the pathway was part of its construction so no adoption order was necessary. The parallel pathway on the other side of the road has always had signage to indicate dual use, there would be complete clarity if it had happened on that side.

I wasn't talking about the legality of whether it was a shared path, I was remarking that allowing cycling on pavements is s bad idea.
We need better public transport as a solution to congestion, not endangering vulnerable people on foot.

Why centre a thread about the justice system failing vulnerable people with this particular example though?

Vulnerable person kills clearly more vulnerable person is a tragic story for sure but using such a divisive example seems kinda goady