To think Auriol Grey being jailed is not appropriate.

I live close to where this happened. The ring road is v busy, 2 narrow lanes. Nearly everyone cycles on the pavement where this happened as it's too dangerous to be on the road. And those cyclists who do cycle in the road get loads of abuse as it causes cars to crawl along behind them, no opportunity to safely overtake. The pavement is generally fairly quiet and not particularly narrow.

This was October 2020. Much lighter traffic and cyclists and joggers were getting shouted at all over the place for getting closer than 2m and breathing too much etc.

Yes that covers it.

And this is spot on too.

3 years is not enough for behaviour like that directly leading to another persons death. Regardless of whether someone is right or wrong to be on the pavement cycling, they don’t deserve that aggressive language to be hurled at them or to have hands waved at them or to be lightly shoved.

She is a menace to behave like that. And to then continue with her shopping knowing she had caused a serious accident.
Letting her out is saying that behaviour is acceptable. It’s not. 3 years is not enough for what she has caused.

Eyes. Just with eyes.

or to be lightly shoved.

Don't make things up.

She's a nasty piece of work who thinks that she can go around acting like that and there will be no consequences. She should've been jailed for longer. Hopefully she gets a hell of a time in jail.

The footpath they were on was too narrow to be a shared space.

And yet it is …

On interesting. I take that back. In any event, the Highway code itself isn't law and there is no actually law that says people should cycle through on pavements. Just so sad all around and I feel so sad for the cyclist and her family.

She said herself she made light contact…

'Light contact' is not necessarily the same as 'lightly shoved'.

Amen to this.

She had no business lightly making any kind of contact with her and directly caused her death by doing so.

The council couldn't say it was. The police couldn't say it was. Of course Judges are always right and never make mistakes...

Agree she should be in jail.

Suspect her disability will be a very relevant factor in any appeal.

Or... The cyclist had no business on a pavement, not giving way, and passing too close on the wrong side.

I'm not really arguing that that's the case, but 'contact' doesn't mean 'shove'. I've had contact with many cyclists when walking along minding my own business.

Apparently it's now (in the last 5 months) become an official shared user path.

This is exactly where I sit with it too. I've watched the video and unless I've seen a heavily edited version I can't see where anyone is pushed or shoved into the road? There's absolutely nothing to substantiate the judges claim that it's a shared cycleway, even the council and police don't agree with him. But because he's a judge he must always be correct and nobody should ever question that. You only have to look at the volume of successful appeals to see that judges are not always correct.

The whole premise of this thread is that the wrong person is identified as the victim. I would rather save my sympathy for the real victim - the one who lost her life.

Rather convenient that it should become designated just in time for the trial.

It always was. The signs on the path on the outside path of the ring road - where the cyclist was killed - appear to be recent additions.

I'm not really arguing that that's the case, but 'contact' doesn't mean 'shove'. I've had contact with many cyclists when walking along minding my own business.

Given you were minding your own business, and she was not minding her own business but actively targeting Celia and making her arm travel in that direction, I'm not sure why that's relevant.

Cyclists shouldn't be bumping into pedestrians. Pedestrians shouldn't be bumping into cyclists. Sometimes it's an accident. Sometimes, it quite clearly isn't.

I don’t really get it though. It looks really narrow. It doesn’t look like it’s 2.4m or whatever the figure was, but accept it could just look narrower in the pictures.

but why was the cyclist heading straight for AG? Why didn’t the cyclist move around, away from the road side? It was tight to pass her on the road side.

Meaning there were no signs before, so it's impossible for an average user to know the path's status even if it was 'shared user' - which the absolute absence of signs suggests it isn't (or wasn't).