Page 19 | To think Auriol Grey being jailed is not appropriate.

Finnyfanjango · 2023-03-03T11:47:44+00:00

I’m interested to hear the thoughts and reactions of others as to me given her cognitive issues and the fact she is partially blind, it just seems like such a sad accident, I can’t see why she was jailed. I think what she did was awful, but it surely just highlights the lack of appropriate social care she clearly needed?

OneTC · 03/03/2023 18:25

And I expect your full support!

JarByTheDoor · 03/03/2023 18:25

OneTC · 03/03/2023 18:24

So victim blaming then? Fair enough

Yes, if you like.

shellyleppard · 03/03/2023 18:28

She did not push the lady at all. She flapped her hands, the cyclist fell into the road and the path of an oncoming car. There was no physical contact between the pedestrian and cyclist. Personally i think the sentence is much too harsh.

Rhondaa · 03/03/2023 18:30

I just cannot understand how the judge decided her actions could not be caused by her disability. She reportedly is childlike with cognitive problems and is partially sighted. How can these not be mitigating factors? These conditions would have provided a lifetime of challenges. At the very least I'd imagine she would be anxious about a bike travelling toward her on the pavement. The cyclist should've just controlled the bike, braked and stopped.

A tragic accident and sympathies with the family of the cyclist but 3 years in prison for AG is utterly ridiculous. I hope any appeal is successful and she gets a suspended sentence.

BrigitteBond · 03/03/2023 18:30

shellyleppard · 03/03/2023 18:28

She did not push the lady at all. She flapped her hands, the cyclist fell into the road and the path of an oncoming car. There was no physical contact between the pedestrian and cyclist. Personally i think the sentence is much too harsh.

There was no physical contact between the pedestrian and cyclist.

The pedestrian seems to think there may have been. How do you know better?

OneTC · 03/03/2023 18:32

Rhondaa · 03/03/2023 18:30

I just cannot understand how the judge decided her actions could not be caused by her disability. She reportedly is childlike with cognitive problems and is partially sighted. How can these not be mitigating factors? These conditions would have provided a lifetime of challenges. At the very least I'd imagine she would be anxious about a bike travelling toward her on the pavement. The cyclist should've just controlled the bike, braked and stopped.

A tragic accident and sympathies with the family of the cyclist but 3 years in prison for AG is utterly ridiculous. I hope any appeal is successful and she gets a suspended sentence.

Because she doesn't fall below the accepted level of capacity.

There's been 2 years for her defense to get every report on her conditions possible, and yet they failed to get her off

Parroteets · 03/03/2023 18:34

shellyleppard · 03/03/2023 18:28

She did not push the lady at all. She flapped her hands, the cyclist fell into the road and the path of an oncoming car. There was no physical contact between the pedestrian and cyclist. Personally i think the sentence is much too harsh.

But AG admitted that there was contact.

Why are so many people ignoring the facts?

AlwaysGinPlease · 03/03/2023 18:35

shellyleppard · 03/03/2023 18:28

She did not push the lady at all. She flapped her hands, the cyclist fell into the road and the path of an oncoming car. There was no physical contact between the pedestrian and cyclist. Personally i think the sentence is much too harsh.

She admitted contact. Hope that helps with your victim blaming.

OliveBreadKalamata · 03/03/2023 18:43

There was no physical contact between the pedestrian and cyclist.

There was according to the police interview.

MichelleScarn · 03/03/2023 18:43

OneTC · 03/03/2023 18:24

Next time someone worries me I'm killing them to be safe

Oh you only have to think that they might worry you remember and people will forgive and defend whatever you do, and also make up diagnosis to excuse things!

EvenleyWitch · 03/03/2023 18:50

LadyWiddiothethird · 03/03/2023 12:09

Why start another thread on the same subject?

Perhaps OP didnt see them. Does she need telling off for making the board look untidy, then?

Hoistupthemainsail · 03/03/2023 18:52

NewPapaGuinea · 03/03/2023 18:06

Wonder how many parents would accept it if it was their child riding on the pavement she had caused to career into a car?

I’ve seen the video and it looks like a shove. I suspect the reason it hasn’t been recorded as that happening is it’s just not clear enough that definitely happened. Risk of her getting off if that case was presented and jury couldn’t decide if that happened.

Children are allowed to cycle on then pavement. Adults are not.

ClimbingRoseBush · 03/03/2023 18:54

Rhondaa · 03/03/2023 18:30

I just cannot understand how the judge decided her actions could not be caused by her disability. She reportedly is childlike with cognitive problems and is partially sighted. How can these not be mitigating factors? These conditions would have provided a lifetime of challenges. At the very least I'd imagine she would be anxious about a bike travelling toward her on the pavement. The cyclist should've just controlled the bike, braked and stopped.

A tragic accident and sympathies with the family of the cyclist but 3 years in prison for AG is utterly ridiculous. I hope any appeal is successful and she gets a suspended sentence.

If her actions were due to her disability, what do you think that would mean? That people with CP are dangerous and we should expect them to take actions which get people killed? And that if they do it would be a bit unfair for there to be any consequences for their actions? Clearly that would be ridiculous.

EvenleyWitch · 03/03/2023 18:55

OneTC · 03/03/2023 12:15

We should remember that the big tragedy is the innocent person that died, not the imprisonment of the person that killed her

Dont think anyone has forgotten someone was killed since we're discussing the details of the incident

OneTC · 03/03/2023 18:55

EvenleyWitch · 03/03/2023 18:55

Dont think anyone has forgotten someone was killed since we're discussing the details of the incident

Show quote history

Wait until you read the next 20 pages

EvenleyWitch · 03/03/2023 18:55

FloydPepper · 03/03/2023 12:15

Yet another person who doesn’t understand what manslaughter is and arrogantly thinks they know better than the people who have actually seen all the evidence

Why so rude?

Rainn21 · 03/03/2023 18:57

If it was a 50 year old man shouting at a 77 year old cyclist to get off the fucking pavement and gesticulating wildly to the point she veered into traffic and died, then carried on walking as if nothing had happened - this wouldn’t be the 4th thread about it. Spare a thought for the young mum driving the car that killed the cyclist too, her son was also in the car.

Moonicorn · 03/03/2023 19:01

Catspyjamas17 · 03/03/2023 16:38

Her actions directly resulted in the death of another person. That's grounds for manslaughter. The fact that some people can relate and empathise with her means piss all.

Actions resulting in the death of another person are not automatic grounds for manslaughter.

Look up "mens rea".

Mens rea if present (the mental intent) would make it murder. In the absence of the intent to kill or really seriously harm, it’s manslaughter.

EvenleyWitch · 03/03/2023 19:02

IClaudine · 03/03/2023 12:16

I am really on the fence with this one tbh. If she actually pushed the cyclist then it is pretty clear cut. The fact that she left the scene is also not in her favour, what sort of person does that?

Someone with cerebral palsy and cognitive issues?

NewPapaGuinea · 03/03/2023 19:03

@Hoistupthemainsail They’re not legally allowed at all, but nearly always overlooked. Still if someone took issue and caused them to crash, ironically Mumsnetters would defend the assailant. Or would they not?

BishopRock · 03/03/2023 19:04

Parroteets · 03/03/2023 18:34

But AG admitted that there was contact.

Why are so many people ignoring the facts?

Show quote history

I think they're seeing "poor disabled lady blamed for cyclist being on the pavement" and basing their responses on that, rather than "aggressive woman moved across the pavement to shout "get off the fucking pavement" at an elderly lady and who then made physical contact with her before the lady toppled into the road and was run over".

Namechangethisevening · 03/03/2023 19:05

This

And then the person shouting aggressively andarching towards the cyclist, decided after the cyclist fell into the road and was lying there dying, that they would just keep walking and pop into Sainsbury's to do their shopping.

Calous.

OneTC · 03/03/2023 19:07

Hoistupthemainsail · 03/03/2023 18:52

Children are allowed to cycle on then pavement. Adults are not.

Show quote history

No they're not

OneTC · 03/03/2023 19:08

Those under 10 there's no criminal liability but it's not legal.

SeaWitchly · 03/03/2023 19:08

She should not be jailed. Cyclists should not be on the footpath imo. The footpath they were on was too narrow to be a shared space. The woman gesticulated, she did not push the cyclist into the road. Tragic accident, not manslaughter imho.