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

This literally doesn't matter.

Whether the cyclist was allowed or not to be there makes no difference. If a pedestrian crosses a road on a red light, it doesn't entitle you as the driver to speed up and run them over.

Road safety isn't about deciding you get to be the judge, jury and executioner.

Then the defendant fled the scene, leaving her victim dying in the road.

Except that she didn’t. The police evidence stated that she remained at the scene until a bystander led her away, after which she picked up a prescription, shopped at Sainsburys and returned home. The police picked her up afterwards and interpreted her actions as a lack of remorse, which the judge agreed with, despite acknowledging that expert medical witnesses had testified that she wasn’t capable of expressing that emotion. My concern is not that she has been wrongly convicted, it’s whether due process has been properly and fairly served. A lot of evidence around the effects of her disability seems to have been dismissed in favour of the judges’ opinion, and that opinion has been at odds with expert opinion in several areas.

Is there an official diagnosis for people who have the mental age of a child? Ie “this person is mentally aged 8, officially”? How often is this checked and updated?

Age is objective. Children who commit crimes aren’t legally culpable because there is 99% of the time there is an influencing adult behind their crime. Among other reasons. We cannot afford the same to adults.

Completely agree OP. Someone is illegally riding a bike on the pavement, then falls off, cos some shouts at them for doing that, into path of vehicle and dies. It's a tragic accident.

Why has she been found guilty of manslaughter? I don't get out legal system sometimes. I feel very sorry for her and likewise for the family and friends of the woman who died, but surely they can't hold her responsible for the accident?

I read the article too OP and I can see why (having read it and only the basic details of the case before) you have these views. I agree on the basis of the info in the article that many of the judge's findings of fact as to the defendant's lack of remorse, disabilities etc appear very questionable.

She was out alone!

Someone is illegally riding a bike on the pavement, then falls off, cos some shouts at them for doing that, into path of vehicle and dies. It's a tragic accident.

No, that's not even close to what happened. And it wasn't an accident.

Is this really what people think happened? Mrs Ward fell into the road because Grey shouted?

Being disabled isn't a "get out of jail free" card. You still need to not commit crimes.

Also, being sent to prison isn't just about punishing the offender. It's about making the rest of society a safe place to live, away from people who go around killing other people.

Watch the video. She pushes her into the road.

I find it bizarrely fascinating that posters who consistently claim to have no previous knowledge or history with Grey have such detailed information about the case, Greys life, and of course determined innocence and is of course THE VICTIM in this case...

If she 'panics' and struck out at a child/teen cycling towards her everyone would be up in arms. The fact an elderly person died made this crime more acceptable.
If not prison then a secure home for disabled people, she should be supervised at all times if this is how she can behave in public.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=women+cyclist+killed+in+cambridge&client=safari&hl=en-gb&sxsrf=APwXEddbi7VLfcBGuGK9lo0EAbU4y3yKsg:1679865138849&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwijpvymwfr9AhXJUMAKHbCpCuwQ_AUoBHoECAEQBg&biw=630&bih=412&dpr=2#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:060e9d26,vid:P4eIjOFTB6k

She didn't panic and her actions resulted in the death of the cyclist, hence the guilty verdict. SHe was assessed by experts for both the Crown ans the defence and she was found to be fit for trail, and her cognitive impairments didn't mitigate her actions. It's a pretty stright forward case and I fail to see what the issue is here, unless you are advoating that anyone with a disability is exempt form presecution?

She did stay at the scene - even the police acknowledge this. A bystander led her away and she was picked up by the police later. And you’re another who seems to be incapable of understanding that there was clear, expert evidence presented to the effect that her medical condition makes it impossible for her to understand remorse - the police tried to use the fact that she left the scene as evidence of lack of remorse, despite being made aware that she hadn’t left voluntarily. And she was living in a supervised disabled facility similar to a nursing home until the charity running it deemed she was safe to be housed in one of their independent living flats, adapted to suit her disabilities.

The jury were convinced she committed manslaughter - which I believe requires that the perpetrator intended to cause harm. They heard the defence arguments as well as the prosecution, which is far more than any of us. The appeal is against the sentence rather than the outcome so it's fair to say that she (and her defence team) aren't disputing that she did actually intend to cause harm, and the result was the death of a person.

Manslaughter is a serious crime and needs a serious punishment. Three years doesn't sound like much for killing someone.

It's like those cases where someone is sentenced to manslaughter for punching someone who falls and hits their head. Every time you act violently you run the risk of something like this happening. If you don't want to risk it, then don't be violent.

And she admitted making contact.

her medical condition makes it impossible for her to understand remorse

She does seem to understand consequence, as she lied to police about the incident.

To be honest, being incapable of remorse really isn't grounds for avoiding prison...

How many times would you like me to say I’m not advocating for disabled people to be exempt from prosecution. I’ve restated it several times now. And it wasn’t the medical experts who were saying her cognitive impairments didn’t mitigate her actions, it was the judge - he disagreed with them.

This is a picture of the woman who died.

She is the only victim in this and she is the person who conversation should be centred on.

If it was your mum being verbally abused and contact made causing her to fall in front of a car would you have the same sympathy?

I did not know Celia Ward but I am angry that people are minimising her death - which was caused SOLELY by being pushed under the wheels of a truck - as ‘a woman panicked’. If she was panicking she’d have moved to the side of the pavement not encroach on a cyclist’s space

There's like 3000 posts on this already and it's well and truly done

I am afraid that you have lost all credibility in my eyes by quoting GB News on any matter. An organisation which Ofcom has decided this week is not a news outlet. It peddles misinformation and promoted conspiracy theorists. Your critical faculties are in clear doubt if you look to this source for balanced reporting.

I am not sure what you hope to achieve with this thread. A trial has been held and a verdict achieved; the defendant was represented and advised, and has been convicted on the evidence presented in court.

We do not have trial by media in this country, and a jolly good thing too. Please respect the family of the woman who lost her life, and leave this subject alone now.

Absolutely @TheObstinateHeadstrongGirl it's vile all this sympathy and excuses for a killer.

The judge said ‘But, on the other hand, you then left before police arrived and went off to do shopping. You were evasive when police traced you and told lies in interview.’

So she is sly, offering assistance to look helpful and then leaving before the police arrived and being evasive when police traced her.

She knew exactly what she is doing and it’s good she is behind bars and is taught a lesson.