To think Auriol Grey being jailed is not appropriate.

Rubbish, the cyclist should have been on the road, the pedestrian had no choice of where to be, the cyclist did.

Yet a jury convicted her. I presume you’ve seen more evidence than they have in order to come to your conclusion

I was responding to someone who referenced a lack of regret.

No way would I cycle down that walk way. The cyclist is not at particular risk unless this particular tragedy plays out but the presence of bikes was putting pedestrians at risk - I agree with the defendant there. Not that she should have responded in the way she did.

Just to add, this means I think it’s right she was convicted but I think her sentence should have been non custodial.

I agree - the TV footage of a cyclist whizzing past the reporter showed how little room to manoeuvre there really is.

Shopping is not a crime.

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

If she was an able bodied man perhaps she wouldn't have even been caught, like the man who pushed a woman in front of a bus on Putney Bridge.

I don't think anyone should be able to cause the death of another person and escape without some consequence. Never imagined that would be a controversial view on Mumsnet which is pretty Law and Order on the whole

Even if the cyclist should have been on the road - let’s say the path was VERY clearly marked as pedestrian only - should pedestrians be able to do things that force the bike onto the road at a dangerous time, resulting in the cyclist’s death? Whether or not Celia should’ve been on the pavement is a separate question to whether what this woman did was an offence.

That's the real issue.

The car driver has escaped without consequence. Do you think she should have been convicted of something as well?

We won't be safe while pedestrians are expected to share walking space with cyclists.

No but thankfully causing someone's death is. The ignoring it is just the unbelievably sour cherry on top

The car driver did absolutely nothing wrong, bears no responsibility for any of this and must feel awful. They deserve nothing but sympathy!

Having a bike coming at you isn't a minor threat. A collision or fall is serious.

The judge was clear in his sentencing:

“ You resented the presence of an oncoming cyclist
“You are territorial about the pavement, and that is not explained by your disability
“This was a shared path for cyclists and pedestrians, I am sure you knew cyclists used the path, and were not taken by surprise.”

I assume he had all the facts. Grey could see the car approaching and waved her arm and hurled abuse at an elderly woman so she fell into the path of that oncoming car. And then she went shopping.

The video that is being shown in the media is not the full video. The investigating officer said this "Det Sgt Dollard, who interviewed Grey, told BBC Radio Cambridgeshire: "I'll always remember the morning after it occurred obtaining the CCTV and watching it in its entirety.

"In all honesty it's horrific and not appropriate for wider release to the public, but, if it were, then I think a lot of the arguments in relation to appropriate responses would be null and void."" So it does sound like there might be more that the jusry have been privy to that we have not.

The full article is here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-64835197

I will also say that having seen the portion of the video that has been released, the cyclist is not going at any great speed and the pedestrian had plenty of room to move closer to the fence away from the road if she was concerned about being hit. It certainly appears that the pedestrian is acting out of anger/annoyance rather than fear.

You conveniently left out the post I quoted @FloydPepper I'm not suggesting they should be convicted of anything. As a driver if someone falls into your path sometimes you can't stop, even if you are going at an appropriate speed for the road.

However, @OneTC made the comment that I don't think anyone should be able to cause the death of another person and escape without some consequence. Never imagined that would be a controversial view on Mumsnet which is pretty Law and Order on the whole.

I was showing there are clearly circumstances, even within this individual case, where someone causes someone else's death and is not convicted of a crime.

No because they were just driving along. Only one person here acted aggressively and it was that aggression that resulted in death. It's not a tricky concept really

I agree.

She behaved aggressively. She admitted to "light contact". She fucked off as a woman lay dying in the road.

In the CCTV she veers closer to the cyclist.

The pavement at that point seems to have been a shared path - it was 2.4 metres wide.

It's a shame the CCTV doesn't cover the next second or two because it could be argued she pushed the cyclist into the road, and a bit more CCTV would either prove or disprove that.

It happens every day thousands of times everywhere with no one dying.

Unlike forcing someone into traffic

And then she left her dying to go shopping. She should be jailed for the rest of her life. She admitted she made contact with her. She's evil. I've been shocked by the victim blaming in other posts... oh look.

"In all honesty it's horrific and not appropriate for wider release to the public, but, if it were, then I think a lot of the arguments in relation to appropriate responses would be null and void."

Ah - there was more CCTV then that we haven't seen.

If it's not a tricky concept, please don't make stupid and incorrect blanket statements saying the exact opposite.

The driver was the very unfortunate instrument of AGs crime, not the cause.