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.

I followed this case closely at the time, partly because my own eyesight is poor, and I know it distorts my spacial awareness. I wondered if that is what had affected AG, and influenced her actions.

I also felt that the BBC film report at the time was extremely biased against AG, using innuendo to discredit her actions, and imply her guilt.
Added to this, the confusion about the designation of the pavement/cycle path, and the advanced age of the poor cyclist possibly slowing down her reactions, plus that the prosecution never proved an unlawful act on the part of AG, I felt that the conviction was very unsafe.

So I am pleased with the result today, though I notice the CPS were like a dog with a bone, demanding another retrial. Thankfully, common sense prevailed and this was refused by the Appeal Judges.

None of this stops me being so sorry for the family of the cyclist, whose life ended so tragically.

Why not?

Hear hear

It was heartless of her to have left before the emergency services came, but also not an offence.

Horrible case and I feel for Celia and the driver too. Auriol is probably not a pleasant person nothwithstanding her acquittal and her disability issues.

Again, she has a learning disability. This means that she is very likely not to understand what is ‘heartless’ and what isn’t.

I agree. From the footage I saw she seemed to push the cyclist, or at least her behaviour could reasonably have been expected to push the cyclist into the road, which is obviously dangerous and potentially fatal. She then just left the injured cyclist and went to do her shopping. I have no sympathy for her at all. Dreadful woman.

Fair point

don't say that screaming and waving your arms is enough.

It could have been. The problem was that the jury were not instructed to deliberate on this point, and so based their decision on causality only. They needed to decide on 'unlawful act' as well.

If you think this act could never have been an unlawful act, used as the basis of a manslaughter charge, what do you think of this situation: X is standing on a seawall, and I pop up from nowhere wearing my Scream outfit, shouting boo! very loudly?

Or should it have been gross negligence manslaughter?

I agree - but astonishingly, the judge didn’t actually consider her medical reports. The judge therefore didn't take her learning disability into consideration. Which is probably one of the reasons the conviction has been overturned.

It was a dual use pavement.

If AG is that much of a menace and partially sighted etc perhaps she should be accompanied when out and about. Im sorry but the poor lady who died, died as a result of AGs actions. I feel sorry for the ladys grieving family not to mention the person in the car who hit the lady through no fault of their own and has to live with that every day of their life. This sends a clear message to AG now that shes untouchable and can carry on with her aggressive and inexcusable behaviour

I recall reading about the case initially.
It was never established if it was a shared use path or just a pedestrian footway. The local authority records weren’t clear.
I read an article by her brother and from what I recall she was oxygen deprived at birth and had learning disabilities. Procedures hadn’t been followed in police station re appropriate adults etc. He wasn’t notified of her arrest.
The bbc article explains why the appeal has succeeded legally.
It’s a sad case all around. Her actions weren’t criminal.

Where I live and have worked I’ve seen cyclists behave badly and alap behave well and ride on pavements (not shared pathways!) fast in the opposite direction towards me.

I think a lot of cyclists have no or little idea of the Highway Code or haven’t passed a Cycling Proficiency Test which I took as a child. I see local school children in the park learning to cycle safely once or twice a week.

I don’t double that Auriol’s behaviour was anti social, rude and aggressive but if you see the situation from her perspective she was probably fed up of cyclists cycling as she saw it unsafely and so felt justified in her words and actions.

Mrs Ward to my mind should’ve been aware that she may have had to dismount for a pedestrian and taken this into account, however she simply swerved after being presumably startled by Auriol’s action and her bicycle went into the path of the car.

Mrs Ward is an older woman but surely if you’re elderly and intend to ride a bicycle in public you should take into consideration that if you do eg cycle on the road (as would be expected) then you’ll meet all sorts of road users, some polite and some rude.

It was an unfortunate situation and my sympathies lie with both families.

It is also a lesson to the people involved in Auriol’s life and care that perhaps they need to think about her needs being met to ensure she’s not a troublemaker and abusive.

Agree with every word. If she didn’t know right from wrong why lie?

She didn’t push her though. She didn’t make physical contact. That’s the point gesticulating and swearing isn’t enough to constitute assault therefore it’s not manslaughter.

Auriol probably has a one track mind, very much black and white thinking and her learning difficulties it would seem affect her day to day life.

I’ve known people like this and they’re adamant they’re right in all sorts of scenarios but they have learning difficulties or ASD. Equally NT people can behave in a similar manner.

Fantastic victim blaming 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

The shared pathway question is a bit of a red herring. Say it wasn't. Does that give pedestrians the right to push errant cyclists into the paths of oncoming cars?

It was never established in court as dual use.
The council records had it as a pedestrian footway.
https://road.cc/content/news/shared-use-path-signs-be-put-huntingdon-303071

We ALL have to deal with shared public spaces. We will all have come across pedestrians and cyclists not behaving 100% correctly. We all will feel fed up and vulnerable at times and think that we are in the right.

None of this gives any of us the right to push someone into a busy main road to their death.

there is no way to vote
agree, she was vulnerable, she made a mistake
she had cerebral palsy and was partially sighted

She may well have panicked and lied. Her brother wasn’t informed she was at the police station when she was arrested.

I think some people here are not thinking about someone with learning difficulties and are instead just thinking about an old woman who’s died. For all we know Mrs Gray wasn’t the lovely little old lady she’s made out to be.

There is no proof Auriol pushed Mrs Gray on cctv. Only her swearing and waving her arm.