To think Auriol Grey being jailed is not appropriate.

Cyclists on the pavement are a threat to pedestrians. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise. The risk being collisions and actions taken to avoid collisions. In any case it is inconsiderate to cycle within inches of someone, much worse than shouting at them.

Putting aside all of the questions about the details of what really happened and who was at fault... what happens to AG?

I mean, prison is not solely supposed to be about punishing people. It's about rehabilitating people. If she lacks the capacity to understand how abhorrent her actions were, how can we rehabilitate her? And if we can't rehabilitate her, does that make her a danger to herself and others? Is it appropriate for her to move back into her sheltered accommodation, or does she need to have her freedoms restricted for her own good?

I just don't know where we go from here. I guess more accurately, I don't know where we should go from here. In a world where we want to support disabled people living their best lives, what is the right thing to do?

Oh, and what on earth is being done to avoid a repeat of this situation again? If it's still ambiguous whether a surface is a pavement or shared cycleway, pedestrians and cyclists alike are still being put at risk against each other.

The court will have been presented with all the evidence and come to a verdict and sentence based on that.

Exactly.

Yes and you have access to all of the evidence don't you?

AG is a liar who was deliberately minimising her own actions in an effort to get away with causing a woman's death.

I'm not the one claiming that she was convicted for physically forcing the cyclist into the road or pushing her.

If she'd been accused and convicted of that then it would have been reported.

I don't need to have heard all the evidence to disagree with a group of people who also haven't heard all the evidence and are claiming something that the people who have heard all the evidence aren't claiming.

If the judge had said in his sentencing comments "You pushed this elderly lady into the path of a car" then I'd agree that she'd probably done that. But as the judge isn't reported as saying that then anybody who hasn't seen all the evidence has no grounds to dispute what he said.

Apparently they've put signs up now.

For someone who's "nearly" blind she was pretty fast spotting the woman coming towards her.
I'm not sure this was a split pavement but it was certainly wide enough for her and the lady to pass. There seems to be a brief contact between her and the cyclist.
I'm not into cyclists on the pavement but bloody hell, that was an elderly lady on that bike and she certainly didn't look like she was out there joyriding, this was your typical granny bike for comfy journeys.
She didn't get enough. If she wasn't in her right state of mind, she should have been isolated or not let out on her own, without a carer. I have zero sympathy for her, she caused the death of a lady by harassing her out of the pavement and that's not OK at all.

she reminds me of the cat bin woman, a real nasty piece of work.

Better tell the Judge. He said it was.

www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/auriol-grey-49-screamed-swear-26372980

It’s not a split pavement because for some reason the council in that area thinks it’s safe to designate the unmarked pavement ‘shared usage’ and let pedestrians and cyclists have at it.

A more likely outcome would have been a frail elderly pedestrian being injured by a hefty speeding cyclist. What actually happened was that the (larger, younger) arrogant lout was on foot and the frail elderly person was on a bicycle.

The result was the same - injury (death) to the elderly person because of an inconsiderate, arrogant thug who thought she owned the pavement.

Of course there was enough room. Photo of the path below.

And the cyclist was mostly past Auriol Grey at the time that Ms Gray turned sideways and flung out her arm at the cyclist (making contact).

It was assault, plain and simple, and it led to the cyclists’ death.

And bearing in mind that it rather looks like she deliberately pushed the cyclist, she is likely very lucky that the CCTV angle is not 100% conclusive.

This case is only controversial because the tabloids are making it so, to generate clicks.

Judge Sean Enright, sentencing Grey to three years in prison, said Grey has no mental disorder or learning difficulties and claimed the pavement was 2.4 metres wide at the relevant point, describing it as a “shared path on the ring road”. He added “these actions are not explained by disability”

^
For the hard of understanding.

She is indeed just a violent thug as pp said. A lying devious one at that. A killer that belongs in jail.

The fact she swerved either shows that she lost control as a result of the highly unusual and threatening situation she found herself in and in which she - even at a slow speed - had mere seconds to make decisions. Or because there was a force propelling her.

People need to stop blaming the victim for what was a natural reaction to being screamed and sworn at next to busy traffic.

She lives in supported housing. It is reported she has CP and certainly impaired vision. No idea why Judge Sean Enright think these matters aren't relevant.

She doesn't appear to be a violent thug by any stretch of the imagination rather someone with lifelong issues that no doubt caused stress and anxiety which would understandably make her react impulsively to an adult on a bike on the pavement.

The judge didn’t take it into consideration I imagine because 1) she shows absolutely no remorse whatsoever so must understand what she has done
2) she left the scene to continue her day
3) she lied in her interview

Disability isn’t a get out of jail free card, I feel so sorry for the victims family and the driver too. AG she would’ve seen a car oncoming yet still forced the victim off the pavement. She’s vile regardless of what sort of housing she lives in.

This.

Aparantly she might lose her housing but that's the price you pay when you commit a crime.

We’ll find out in the inevitable appeal whether this judge has erred in this respect, but in the meantime it seems arrogant to assume he has. It’s not a binary has-disabilities-is less-culpable / no-disabilities-is-culpable, but a question of how severe those disabilities are, how they may have impacted on what happened and the accused’s understanding of the crime and various other factors.

All of which we have to presume - unless and until we learn otherwise - was properly considered by a judge and jury with access to more information (and understanding of the legal tests to be applied) than we have.

She lives in supported housing. It is reported she has CP and certainly impaired vision. No idea why Judge Sean Enright think these matters aren't relevant.

Because there is no reason why any of these things should mean that she doesn't realise that blocking and whacking at a cyclist next to a busy road could cause the cyclist to fall into it.

There probably was a push. The video strongly
suggests a push but the angle is such that you can’t see, conclusively, whether or not contact was made. If the case turned on whether-or-not there was a push, it is doubtful AG would have been convicted (criminal cases have to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt).

However, assault is easily proven here. A reminder on what constitutes assault:

‘An assault is any act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence’

At the very least AG, having sworn and gestured
at the cyclist from a distance, turned towards the cyclist and, when the cyclist was almost past her, threw out her arm towards the cyclist.

Even if there was not a shove, there was clearly and plainly an assault.

And when you commit and illegal act and it causes someone’s death, that’s manslaughter.

I do suspect that AG is very lucky that there wasn’t a better camera angle though.

Have you seen the video, you deluded person? I have, it's on the Daily Mail website and she was clearly stepping into the biker's path, gesticulating wildly, harassing her. Unless the victim was very smelly or your woman is a dog and could smell her from the distance, there's no way she was blind enough to not see her coming.
And the "adult on the bike" was an elderly lady on a granny bike who was clearly using the bike for convenience, not because she was a speed junkie. That lady was probably scared of cycling on the road, hence her cycling on the pavement which was wide enough for both.
Not sure who's behind the pity party for that uncouth jerk but disability isn't an excuse for harassing someone into their death.

Ah well no house to come out to. May as well stay in prison then...where she should be. No second chance for Celia. This lout shouldn't get any.

Has anyone got a link to the things her neighbour has said about her? That it wasn't great living next door to her, and that she heard lots of shouting and swearing at people when Grey was on the telephone?

Grey seems to regularly be angry with people.

Things said about her by friends and neighbours - she has been described as being bitter because of her disability. Her mother and sister are no contact with her because of her nasty ways. She did have a boyfriend until recently (not sure why that ended). She's been unpleasant to her neighbours. She has one friend because no one else likes her because of how nasty she is.

She's simply not a nice person. But people excuse it because she's disabled.

She doesn't appear to be a violent thug by any stretch of the imagination rather someone with lifelong issues that no doubt caused stress and anxiety which would understandably make her react impulsively to an adult on a bike on the pavement

If this is true then she needs to be locked up for the rest of her natural life, maybe not in prison, but she certainly is not safe to be out in public without supervision. The same applies to the argument that her disability excuses her actions.

If Grey really is incapable of controlling her temper and/or unable to learn that forcing someone into oncoming traffic is wrong then she is not safe to be released.

Neighbours said she was seen as a "loner" and was often bad tempered.* Winston Ward, who lives opposite Grey told MailOnlinee: "We have paper thin walls and sometimes I heard her having heated phone conversation with people, telling them to F* off!

From https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/woman-who-killed-pavement-cyclist-29377042?intsource=amppcontinuereading&inttmedium=amp&intcampaign=continueereadingbutton#amp-readmore-target