Auriol Grey's manslaughter sentence overturned for killing cyclist. Correct decision?

[Locutus2000]

Reported in multiple outlets - BBC.

Mixed feelings - it was a complex case with no winners on any side.

It was something I read at the time. It's also irrelevant now because her behaviour did cause the death of Celia Ward, trauma to Celia Wards family and as well as the Driver of the car, her family and the breakdown of her marriage. Auriol should be required to have supervision when outside of the house.

@Cailleach1 that's not the same, AG pushed CW into the path of a car because she wanted to, not because of infrastructure.

I'm not perverse. I have simply heard contradictory information and am sensible enough to realise that I wasn't there, I don't personally know the people involved and therefore I don't know enough truth about what really happened to be glorying in the idea of sending an apparently brain damaged woman to jail for years.

Well, she hasn’t though, has she. The opposite in fact. She’s learned that she can shove cyclists in front of cars and get away with it because reasons.

Actually slowing a horse down often makes the chance of it behaving unpredictability higher rather than lower. The reason horse riders slow down around pedestrians has a lot more to do with the fact it is intimidating for the pedestrian when horses pass them at speed. That also applies to cyclists.

The autism is absolutely not incidental and if you think that then you know nothing about autism.

It explains why she was determined to correct a person on a bike that she believed to be in the wrong, and it explains why she left afterwards and carried on with her shopping.

People who don't understand autism really shouldn't have an opinion here. The law courts accept it would have made a difference in this case if diagnosed before the event. That doesn't mean I am autistic so I can get a machete and attack every cyclist I see; but that isn't what happened here.

Has nobody actually got a time stamp for the moment the physical contact between the pedestrian and the cyclist occurs?

Exactly. From the video there is absolutely nothing that indicates AG was afraid or nervous of the cyclist. She did not take any avoiding action, she continued down the middle of the footpath and actually moved slightly into the path of the cyclist. She looked aggressive, not afraid and intimidated as another poster claimed.

@AngeloMysterioso I disagree - they should behave responsibly in shared spaces and pedestrians on foot are the more vulnerable party. They cannot be absolved of responsibility for paying attention to what is going on around them.and riding with due care and attention. They are not a special case.

At least the public know her face now, so they can keep their distance, reducing the chance of future violence.

But that sounds like you ARE saying that what she did is OK, because it was OK to her?

You do have to wonder how she sleeps at night.

Exactly. This idea that cyclists should never be expected to slow down is absurd. Car drivers are expected to drive at a speed which is safe for the conditions. Why are cyclists exempt?

It’s desperately unfair the cctv doesn’t show the full story of her outburst but no one could watch it and not realise she deliberately went head on at the cyclist intending to force her into the road into fast traffic. Devastating to think of how terrified Celia must’ve been in her last moments.

It's not what you 'think' though, it's what you can 'prove' that's what's important when it comes to the facts

That’s correct.

I'm autistic. You don't 'correct' someone through violence.

Some parts of the police interview if anyone is interested.

Video: Police interview with 49-year-old 'pavement killer' Auriol Grey | Daily Mail Online

I am pretty sure I read that the CCTV does show AG pushing the lady, but it it obviously not available to the public as it is so distressing.

The jury will have seen the whole lot.

Unlikely given that two trials seem to have been unable to establish any physical contact as incontrovertible fact, based upon the video.

I understand, but some autistic people are so entrenched in their rules, and insisting others abide by them, that they can get violent. I have mentioned in a previous post about a friend who gets into an absolute rage about people not following "the rules", and one time it was with a cyclist and I immediately thought of the AG case and wondered if it was going to be another one.

Autism presents differently from individual to individual. How it presents in Auriol is relevant to determining how safe other people are around her and how much supervision she should have outside of her home. Auriol's sense of right and wrong does not trump other peoples rights to safety.

If you are cycling on a shared path that means cycling very slowly to the point you can stop if there's a sudden hazard. This is boringly slow. Such as a child not looking behind then and moving over to the other side of the path, or even an adult! Does everyone look behind them when veering to the other side of the path perhaps to avoid another pedestrian? I dont think so. From the video screen shot of the incident on sky news the path is far far too small to be a shared path and the cyclist should have had the sense to dismount or wait until the pedestrian had passed. I'm surprised that any town planner deemed this section of the path as shared.

No that is not what I am saying. Her behaviour can be understood as less culpable if you understand she is an autistic person who has no insight and has had no support because she has been undiagnosed for 49 years. She is behaving like a person with severe difficulties in flexible thinking and social understanding, which is what she is. These are core differences in autism.

This is what I see rather than her being an evil person who deliberately pushed an elderly woman into traffic, who should have anticipated the potential consequences of her actions and been more balanced in understanding the shared space on the pavement for pedestrians and cyclists. She was incapable of doing this because of her autism and learning difficulties, with tragic effect for Celia Ward.

I am saying this woman was undiagnosed and insufficiently supported when it's obvious to anyone who knows anything about autism or learning disabilities that she has them both. She has fallen between the cracks of support and diagnosis and this tragedy has resulted.

So how and who manages that? They are violent and like this case kill someone and it's 'oh well, they didn't follow x rules, oh well'.

You are absolutely right. She should have been diagnosed and she clearly needed more social support than she was getting.