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.

Yes me too. 'Beyond Reasonable doubt' is there for a reason. As is the requirement to have charges based on clear legal criteria.

I wonder how many of these angry and outraged posters would get equally wound up if they or someone they know was sent to jail on the basis of an unsafe conviction, and solely because a jury thought they 'might' have done something without any evidence to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.

I hope even if she has been found legally innocent that she has had someone make clear to her actions were unkind and unnecessary

Understatement of the fucking century…

I've never seen a shared foot/cycle sign on this particular stretch. Especially as it's right outside a doctor's surgery and CAMHS building where there is a lot of footfall.

There are however several sign posts and junction boxes in addition to the street lights which make this stretch difficult to navigate if there are other people walking let alone a cyclist on a footpath.

This incident was a tragic accident.

Angry and outraged? Hello? A woman died because of this person's vile behaviour, whether it legally counts as manslaughter or not.

Angry and outraged 🙄

She'd probably kick your kid off their bike and go about her day.

It's not her fault she is autistic.
It's not her fault she is 50 so wasn't diagnosed in a timely fashion as a youngster.
It's not her fault she didn't get the social care support she should have had given her blatantly obvious social understanding difficulties.

It wasn't Celia Ward's fault either.

It's the law (not me) saying that there is no real evidence she pushed Celia and that without a base assault there is no manslaughter.

All of this. ^

And yes she DID admit to pushing her, even though she tried to retract it afterwards (on the advice of her lawyer no doubt.) Vile woman should have had a much longer sentence. Shame the family of the lady whose death she was responsible for can't 'appeal.' 🙄 (To get her a bigger sentence!)

She was responsible for the lady's death, and after screaming at her, and pushing her into the road, she walked off leaving her for dead, and went shopping. It's reprehensible that ANYONE is defending her. As you said, it would be a different matter if it was one of THEIR loved ones!

One person having an angry aggressive outburst and contributing to someone falling into traffic and being killed is not, by any means, an 'accident'.

I've never seen a shared foot/cycle sign on this particular stretch. Especially as it's right outside a doctor's surgery and CAMHS building where there is a lot of footfall.

There’s a sign on the corner of Cowper Road and another on the corner of Priory Road.

Yeah this. Like fuck was it an 'accident!'

I know this will be unpopular but I think we have to start being really careful about undermining culpability in people with autism.

If this website (and my local community) is anything to go by, in 10 years time probably a fifth of young people will be diagnosed, and many more with ADHD.

Do you really want to see men perpetrating domestic violence and similar receiving softer sentences or no convictions at all based on their neurodivergence? Because if you’re saying autism impairs your ability to understand consequences to such a degree that Auriol didn’t know what she was doing, then that has to be applied to others in even more unpalatable circumstances.

Just think about it for a minute.

Absolutely!
Grey is a large powerfully built woman- put rage behind the shove-
Then a cyclist is going to get hurt.

Awful thing to have done.

Grey clearly can’t control her violent impulsive tendencies

Large and powerfully built? Are you kidding? She very obviously has a right hemiplegia, ie the right side of her body has increased tone and significantly decreased strength (which is absolutely consistent with the reported cerebral palsy).

Well said @Welovecrumpets It's incredibly tough living with ND or disability, but it should NOT be a literal get out of jail free card. I'm disgusted at the apologists.

I'll stand corrected then. I've only ever seen them on the opposite side of the road (Sainsbury's side) and this incident took place outside the CAMHS building.

AG was born with cerebral palsy, resulting in brain damage, which led to epilepsy.The epilepsy required brain surgery, which removed a part of her brain. This caused cognitive impairment and weakness down the right side of her body. She walks with a limp and wears a lower leg brace. Her vision is significantly impaired (approximately 50% vision loss) to such a degree that she has a total loss of visual field on her right side.

Given these challenges, I think it is understandable that AG became very agitated seeing a cyclist on the pavement.

There are different manslaughter charges depending on what has happened, and reading the link below it isn't as clear cut as I thought.
I was always under the impression that if someone died as a result of your actions and you didn't mean that person to die then it was manslaughter. I wonder if the charge should have been manslaughter by the means of diminished responsibility?

The saddest thing is a woman is still dead and this was as a result of Auriols actions, whether she meant to cause her to go into the road or not. It is worrying by reading other comments from posters from the area she is known to be like this towards cyclists.

CPS

I’ve already also said upthread her behaviour was unhinged, cold and entitled.

Absolutely, all the 'oh but...' posters in defence of AG would you be agreeable to that same defence for everything?

Still does not give her a get out of jail free card.

But to my mind’s eye, Auriol saw Mrs Ward cycling towards her, she could possibly see she was an elderly woman. Auriol
rightly presume she had way over the shared path and expected Mrs Ward to dismount and walk with her bicycle, she could also have been worried that Mrs Ward would cycle into her and she’s at risk because she’s disabled and particularly sighted. I think Auriol was fed up that it was another cyclist, cycling as she saw it, on a pavement, leaving her no room to walk past and she just saw red mist and reacted the way she did.

The exact same risk could apply with a 5 year old but any responsible parent would be with that child and would steer the child by hand if walking with them or leave their bicycle if cycling together to one side and collect it once they’d passed Auriol. That’s not to say that Auriol would be aggressive and swear at both of them too but it’s been established that she’s had form for that sort of behaviour.

Who knows, maybe she’s been verbally abused in the street for her learning difficulties and being partially sighted (she could be an easy target) so her verbal abuse and abusive manner could be a front for that. Not that this excuses this behaviour.

The cyclist was not pushed. Stills and video footage evidence this.

Understandable she caused a death? Being agitated means you can kill someone and that's OK?

AG did not cause a death.

Yes this is what I think, I understand her agitation for sure and I share it to an extent myself based on experiences with cyclists.

However, if you listen to the aggression in her tone, watch her deliberate move towards the cyclist and the fact she admitted to making contact with the cyclist it still shows she went way too far. And then you add the fact she went on her merry way to get groceries, legalities aside it’s actually quite chilling and very sad.

Do you know many people suffering from cerebral palsy? My DB’s FIL suffers with this and his moods have got progressively worse due to this as he’s aged. He has to wear special shoes and since he’s had a stroke has become a paraplegic.