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.

You are correct - they said it would likely have done had she been diagnosed at the time of the first trial.

Being let off scot free with the belief she was right in her actions?

I never did say suffering from anything gives you the right to act like a cock but Auriol presumed she was in the right. She suffers from cerebral palsy, was said to be childlike and in her police interview she comes across as childlike.

As I’ve stated earlier here I believe she thought she was totally in the right, despite what you or I might normally think. So her reactions were OTT compared to what a normal person would do as she wrongly thought Mrs Ward deserved to be shouted and sworn at and a hand placed on her.

Look at that photo: I wonder if she has useful function in that right arm at all? Wonder how bad her leg is, I'm sure I read somewhere she has to wear a brace to walk.

If in any other situation you are approached by a person who appears angry and aggressive (verbally sweating and waving her arms) do you...
A) continue to cycle towards them and hope they jump out of the way in time

Or
B) respond to what you see in front of you and assume you (the bigger vehicle) are posing a threat and either stop to let the pedestrian past or dismount and walk until it is safe to cycle on the path again.

Motorists are always told to anticipate what might happen- hazard perception - especially when there are 'smaller' things around you.

It's why car drivers get told to 'think bike'. Maybe the other slogan should be 'cyclist think pedestrian'. They're unpredictable, might suddenly dive into a shop they're passing, decide to cross the road. Drop something as we approach. and the only thing that can truly be predicted is that action we ourselves would take.

@prh47bridge Could she still be charged with something else or is that not possible given the previous attempt and/or time passed?

So she thinks her actions resulting in CWs.death were fine,.and this is being backed up by her supporters, so it's OK if someone else annoys her, that she's violent and causes their death?

Just read it yourself? it's easier than explaining again.

Absolutely.
She stomped towards the victim and already has form for aggression towards cyclists.

Wonder what will happen if she challenges a male on an E motocross bike?

People seem to forget here that if Mrs Ward had got off her bike and walked it safely along the pavement or indeed road, then none of this would’ve happened.

In one DM article they state that Mrs Ward was frail. If I was that frail I wouldn’t want to be riding a bike and my family should ensure I wasn’t riding it too, if I was that frail.

@oakleaffy that'll be his fault again..

She wouldn’t though, would she? A woman almost 30 years older than her is the limit of her cowardice.

I think her supporters believe that she was wrongly convicted. I’m sure her supporters including her close family have impressed on her that her actions were unwise and shouldn’t be repeated. I’d be very surprised if her supporters have made it all into a tragic accident and have told Auriol to act similarly if this happens again.

A cyclist CYCLES - She was legally allowed to cycle where she was without being assaulted verbally and threatened by a raving pedestrian.

Many older people ride bikes

Being shoved sideways by a heavy pedestrian will knock most lighter weight cyclists over.

Her supporters should have been supporting her so this whole tragic incident should never have happened to start with.

There's no way of knowing with regards to the trial but judges presiding over the appeal on those grounds didn't think it would make a difference to the overall sentencing:

An earlier Court of Appeal bid to reduce Grey's sentence - on the grounds that an autism diagnosis secured after her trial might have affected the outcome of her case - was rejected last May.

Judges who presided over the hearing concluded the sentence was 'not arguably manifestly excessive'.

I think this is right to be honest, autism or not, being sentenced to three years in prison for your actions causing a death seems pretty lenient as it was IMO and her legal team are just vultures.

I'm disgusted she's got off on a technically, all this is just an insult to Celia Ward's family, and the irony is Auriol Grey was probably the most looked after that she's ever been while in prison.

She still got off though.

I think her supporters including her family quite rightly kicked up a stink in the way a disabled woman with learning difficulties was treated by the police and the prosecution services.

Fuck me, isn’t this just a masterclass in victim blaming.

I mean, this whole thread is a masterclass in victim blaming but that really takes the prize.

Well - given that the Court of Appeal have stated in their judgment that Auriol Grey's actions contributed to Mrs Ward's death, it's perhaps not unreasonably to colloquially describe her as a killer or in Court of Appeal language, what she did contributed to the death

Give me STRENGTH! 🙄 She lost control of the bike because Auriol Grey pushed her. Auriol is responsible for her death. Why are you defending this vile woman?

Well of course her supporters should’ve been supporting her but we all know what good care in the community is don’t we? And we also know that friends and family of someone like Auriol only generally tend to step in, as is tragically when this case happened.

Otherwise there’s lots of whataboutery about them and their needs.

Appeal Courts make mistakes sometimes. They have made one overturning this woman's conviction.