To think that a three year jail sentence is unreasonable for the disabled pedestrian who was found guilty of causing the death of a cyclist

[DotAndCarryOne2]

The Sunday Times and The Guardian carried this story earlier this month and again today, as did GB News. Link is below. I just find it unbelievable that so much relevant information about this lady’s disability was either ignored or dismissed by the judge, and that she didn’t have adequate representation at sentencing.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjj6omaqvr9AhWJbcAKHVv9DMkQFnoECAkQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk%2Fhome-news%2Fcyclist-manslaughter-auriol-grey-cambridgeshire-b2294507.html&usg=AOvVaw1yOHhh6F4zfEel6m4EMYpL

Disabled people are the same as everyone else are fully capable of being an aggressive twats like the rest which is unrelated to any impairment or challenges they have

No. The assertion made in court was that the legal limit for a shared pavement is 3m, and the stretch in question is 2.4m. I wasn’t aware that the incident involved a wheelchair user - no mention of it in the article I read. But in answer to your question, no I wouldn’t consider 2.4m to be wide enough for a wheelchair and a cyclist to pass each other.

She knew right from wrong, disability or not.

Not suggesting they’re not, but this doesn’t seem to be unrelated, that’s the point.

The pavement is now clearly signed as a shared pathway. The cyclist using the pavement hasn't been found to be the problem.

And you’re medically or otherwise qualified to say that ?

3 years is a proportionate sentence for manslaughter.

The fact that there is a application to appeal means nothing. It doesn't mean anything went wrong in court or that the woman is innocent. I would be surprised if there eas no application. Iirc under 10% are allowed to appeal and by far not all are successful, but I could be misremembering. It was a small number.

Being disabled isn't a "get out of jail" card if that's what you're angling at OP.

Should have got a lot longer for killing and innocent person, whether or not she should have been cycling on the pavement. No excuse. I don't run over the guy in the wheelchair where I live who gets drunk and shouldn't be in the road. And vice versa I wouldn't expect him to push me off the pavement if I was cycling on it, for whatever reason.

And I can only repeat that in the article I read today it was clearly stated that there was no signage on the stretch of pavement in question, it was not considered wide enough to be a shared use area, and that neither the police or the county council could confirm that it actually was shared use.

Judge Sean Enright, sentencing Grey on Thursday, said: “These actions are not explained by disability.”

He said that Grey, of Huntingdon, had no mental disorder or learning difficulties, and that the pavement was 2.4m wide at the relevant point, describing it as a “shared path on the ring road”.

Have already stated several times that this is not what I think.

And you think that still makes it reasonable for her to shove her into the path of a car? Jesus Christ

I could argue this one for a while, but I can't be bothered. It isn't relevant. It's not part of the appeal.

She pushed someone in to the road resulting in her death. Whether the cyclist should have been on the pavement or not is irrelevant. She killed someone through her own aggression and anger. Disabled or not she should go to prison. 3 years for killing someone is pitiful.

I feel for both sides.

I think the lady who has been convicted made a huge error in her behaviour and gesticulated inappropriately. She wouldn’t have imagined for one moment what the outcome would be. The fact she just wandered off and carried on with her shopping seems to me to be more convincing of her cognitive impairment that her character flaws but perhaps it was made clearer in court.

It is of course completely devastating for the other people and families involved.
But sending a disabled woman to prison doesn’t change their loss and I don’t believe she is an ongoing risk to the public.
Our prisons are full and also dangerous. I honestly think they should be reserved for those who are a true ongoing threat or have committed premeditated malicious crimes.

I think people think it’s a harsh punishment because the victim was a cyclist. They see them as sub-human which is a disgusting attitude. Twitter is full of people wishing cyclists harm just for using the roads they’re entitled to use.

All she had to do was step to right and let the cyclist past. It was an error of judgement, causing a death, that's why it's manslaughter and not murder.

And I can only repeat that in the article I read today it was clearly stated that there was no signage on the stretch of pavement in question, it was not considered wide enough to be a shared use area, and that neither the police or the county council could confirm that it actually was shared use.

Regardless you can't push a cyclist to their death because they're on the pavement. Ffs it's not a reason.

But sending a disabled woman to prison doesn’t change their loss

I wish people would stop saying this. Prison isn't intended to revive the dead. It has a different purpose.

And that’s the whole point of the appeal now being prepared. Apparently the judge was presented with evidence that there were all of those disabilities present as well as cerebral palsy, partial blindness, and a cognitive disorder. The criticism is that this is his own opinion and not based on the evidence available - he reprimanded her for not showing any remorse, despite being told by the defence that her cognitive disorder meant that she wasn’t capable of that emotion and that it explained why, after the incident, she carried on with her day as though nothing had happened.

Yabu

It won’t change the loss but it might stop her being aggressive to other people

Here are the judges comments about the sentencing if anyone is interested

https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/why-grey-got-three-years

Until she does it to another cyclist who has the misfortune to get in her way.... she's in the appropriate place to mull over her actions. Rightly so.