To think Auriol Grey being jailed is not appropriate.

Absolutely this.

As far as I am aware she has no cognitive issues

The judge confirmed that she has cognitive issues.
**
**

Her actions caused the death of a woman (that's the definition of manslaughter.
She then left the scene before emergencies services arrived.
The judge said "These actions are not explained by disability."
She showed no remorse until her sentencing.
Don't forgot the other victim - the driver of the car - who will be affected all her life by this too.

I am satisfied that jail and the length of her sentence is entirely proportionate.

She killed someone

Then I am now aware that she has. Thank you.

The little I have read previously indicated that she did NOT have cognitive issues.

Disability card. It must be nice to live in an able bodied bubble. Been so long I’ve forgotten what that’s like.

Did none of those saying she "pushed" the cyclist watch the video that's available in every online newspaper? She didn't push her. She waved her arms telling her to get off the pavement. It was an accident.

She admitted she made contact with the cyclist.

She didn’t push the cyclist. She waved him away. Ludicrous sentence. The car driver killed him.

She did not push her

The judge only mentioned them in the style of "your issues have no bearing on the case"

‘Her’

The cyclist was a woman. The pedestrian's actions cause the cyclist to fall into the path of an oncoming car. Unless you know something the judge and jury don't?

Someone who knows what they’ve done and are taking flight rather than stay where they are and face the consequences.

She’s an appalling human being and I would put money on her being a bully who hides behind her disabilities in order to get away with nastiness.

Found this upthread.

''Judge Sean Enright, sentencing Grey, said her "Actions are not explained by disability”. He said that Grey, of Huntingdon, had no mental disorder or learning difficulties

That doesn't sound like she had cognitive issues to me.

Yet a jury with access to far more information than you have, decided she was guilty of manslaughter. But you know better?

Seriously?

'Him'? The cyclist was a 77 year old woman called Celia Ward and she was killed by the actions of Auriol Grey.

As far as I'm aware she has no cognitive issues

It has been widely reported that she does.

It’s a difficult one. Very sad case. I’m more unsure about this than I was yesterday.

After reading some reports yesterday I felt that a custodial sentence was very harsh. I was also surprised that the judge didn’t believe the woman’s disabilities were a mitigating factor. The video footage of the pedestrian walking shows a woman who looks stiff and a bit unsteady on her feet. Added to that, she has sight impairment. It’s also worth remembering that this happened in October 2020: cyclists, runners, walkers galore getting frustrated with one another.

However a poster mentioned on the other thread about this case that the pedestrian admitted she may have had some physical contact with the cyclist. This alters the picture and does make the pedestrian seem more involved in the cyclist’s death.

Sounds to me like the judge made a decision not based on the facts.

Her

and yet a jury who had access to all the information deemed her guilty of manslaughter. But you somehow know better?

and to blame the car driver is appalling!

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.

She was sentenced because an experienced judge with full access to her back ground reports, her medical history, the police reports, the decision by CPS to prosecute; who saw her performance in court, and heard the witnesses evidence, decided

"These actions are not explained by disability."

Det Sgt Mark Dollard, of Cambridgeshire Police, said "What is clear is Grey's response to the presence of Celia on a pedal cycle was totally disproportionate and ultimately found to be unlawful, resulting in Celia's untimely and needless death."

She killed someone.
Sometimes when you’re just a horrible person, you go through life getting away with it. Sometimes you take it too far and someone dies, and then you no longer get away with it.

I think if she was a man people wouldn’t be so surprised by her sentence.

The facts they had access to and you haven’t seen? Judges and juries will see far more facts than you can Google.

I wonder what happened at the original trial? Did the jury fail to reach a verdict? This was a retrial.