To think Auriol Grey being jailed is not appropriate.

None of us have seen the full video and the police officer who did, is reported in the news today saying it was horrendous.

AG was rightly convicted of manslaughter. (Look up the various criteria for manslaughter if you're still trying to insist the conviction is wrong)

As well as swearing and gesturing aggressively and making contact with the cyclist, AG went off shopping after causing the cyclist to die horribly, and the poor driver to suffer PTSD, she lied in her interview and showed no regret until she realised she was being banged up. Horrendous woman; I wish her sentence was longer

There are shared use paths near me that are not dissimilar to that.

How can you tell that is not from the video?

In the video you cannot see if she made contact clearly, it looks like she did, but hard to be sure. Given she admitted she did in court, that confirms that in addition to using aggressive language, she also made contact.
There is also a lot of space she could have moved into on that pavement but didn’t.
The aggression Auriol Grey showed must have been very intimidating and certainly with the hand gesture enough to cause the loss of balance.

Think this case will always be strongly divided.
Let's respect those involved,family and friends etc,the driver of the car has sadly suffered ptsd and her marriage is over,all because of this.🌈
Relatives etc may be on mn so we shouldn't be speculating and pointing fingers.

Because: cyclist.

She shouldn't have been on the pavement.
Disabled people have enough to contend with on the pavements with street furniture and pedestrians without cyclists adding to it.
I feel sorry for the jailed woman and I hope her appeal is successful.

I think the decision is the right one. The judge said her actions could not be explained by disability.

The fact she left the scene of the accident and went shopping. Horrible woman.

My sympathies are with the poor woman that lost her life and her family. Also the driver who has understandably been very affected.

I don’t understand people trying to defend this woman at all.

You'd better tell the judge she hasn't got cognitive issues. He acknowledged them as he passed sentence.

Although no markers to indicate the severity that her lawyer would have you believe. No white / or red and white stick to warn others. No guide dog. No person with her. An ability to walk to the shop independently with her corrective glasses. An ability to walk round the shop, see and pick up her shopping, make her way to the cashier, pay for it. And leave the shop. Independently. Plus mental capacity. No learning disabilities.

How can I tell it's not got a dividing line down the middle of it? With my eyes.

Quite, not to mention the car driver who through no fault of their own has to live with the guilt of being a driver whose car killed another human being.

This woman has taken one life, destroyed another and brought grief and distress to two families. If she had been a young able bodied person whose sudden and aggressive gesture had caused a cyclist to swerve to their death no one would be at all concerned. Playing the confused elderly disabled card is dreadful and cowardly.

Ah, based on the fact you said you think the judge was wrong, I thought you were saying that you could tell it wasn't a shared path.

My mistake.

He mentioned them but said “these actions are not explained by disability”.

Playing the confused elderly disabled card is dreadful and cowardly

Elderly? She's 49 <weeps>

You can’t expect people with disabilities to react to things in the same way as somebody without those disabilities might

That doesn't mean they can behave in a way that causes someone's death with impunity, though.

She could easily have made her point while also giving Celia Ward enough space. The pavement was more than wife enough for both.

He also said, apparently based on no evidence, that she should have known it was a shared path, despite there being no signs to say it's a shared path and her very obviously (judging by her actions) not knowing it was a shared path.

49.Really?I missed that in amongst the other descriptors explaining excusing how her actions are understandable and reasonable.

Yes its awful when people ride on the pavement, a cyclist riding full pelt into you because you haven't seen them and moved out the way could cause a lot of harm or even death to a sight impaired person. If the council wants to have shared pavements they need to be clearly labelled including tactile elements, not just make a decision that its wide enough for two.

I don't agree that shouting at a cyclist that suddenly appears coming straight at you, which is what its like for sight impaired people, is wrong. However an accident occurred when the cyclist could not safely avoid the lady and she then left the scene of that accident, I think that is an offence (maybe not manslaughter, I'm not a legal expert) but something incredibly wrong and that should warrant a sentence.

If a cyclist is on a pavement they should not be going at a speed that means they can't stop for pedestrians, a lot of the people who have to walk places are our most vulnerable, elderly, the vey young, the disabled. It just not on for cyclists to 'share' the pavement in a way that effectively makes it a road.

‘Is this the lady who pushed the cyclist onto the road and cyclist died?’

she didn’t push anyone. She waved her arm and y swore at a cyclist for riding towards her on a footpath. She’s disabled, partially sighted too. She needed a better lawyer if the one she had has allowed her to go to jail
over this, tragic though it is

She belongs in prison and should stay there. Thankfully the disability card didn't work and she was held accountable for her actions.

It is the literal definition of manslaughter. She acted badly, someone died, everyone gets in trouble for that to some degree

Cyclists are advice in cambs to take care of the elderly, partially sighted or hearing problems etc etc. Cambs council haven’t said how a cyclist is supposed to know this.
Some councils state priority to pedestrians on shared footpaths, Cambs council say there’s no priority everyone should respect each other.

Some councils state a shared footpath should be a minimum of 2.5 m wide. This one in Cambs was slightly less and had obstructions.
It is recommended that footpaths have regular signs and different markings on the ground. But Cambs council have said they’re not doing this. Just a couple of signs, that’s all.

I believe this case is being appealed.
Whatever the outcome it’s clear shared footpaths without appropriate separation and markings are not safe for anyone.
What do people do, for example with double buggies, does the cyclist have to back back or drive in the road. There’s been no thought at all.

Councils and Cambs in particular need to rethink the danger people are under with the lack of safety measures in place.

So she's made physical contact with someone forcing them into the traffic and caused their death?

That's murder.

She should feel very lucky that she only got 3 yrs.

If you watch the video then the pedestrian is gesturing angrily at the elderly cyclist and then moves half of camera just as she twists her upper body sharply towards the cyclist. At the exact same moment the cyclist suddenly tumbles into the road.

It looks to me very likely that the pedestrian gave a hard shove to the cyclist.

The cyclist was then run over and instead of calling an ambulance or seeking help the pedestrian fled the scene and went shopping.

Watch the video. It doesn’t look like a mere gesture.