Spike did it,for Xmas anyway.
2 Likes
So are you suggesting that visually impaired/disabled people should stay indoors?
2 Likes
Well Celia Ward would still be alive today if Grey had stayed indoors Rose…
1 Like
As would Celia Ward if she hadn’t gone out on her bike
1 Like
Good point Dex…
But Celia Ward was doing no one any harm at all .
She was wishing her rights to ride her bike without being abused .
She was an old lady who according to the most creditable wittiness did stop before Grey prior to Grey swing her arms out causing the her to veer into the road .
Grey was ill tempered and abusive and caused the death of a harmless woman .
3 Likes
The video doesn’t back that up. She was still moving forward.
1 Like
I use footpaths, towpaths and cycle tracks extensively (only walking and running on, never on my bike which is strictly only for road) and you must exercise ‘give and take’ I step aside for cycles providing they give me fair warning. We all have to exist together, and if you can’t do that without getting aggressive and violent you should not be there. There is no place in society for the intolerant.
3 Likes
I recall a YouTube clip (can’t find it now) in which someone had allegedly taken a piccy if the sign on a lamppost stating that the pavement was “shared”. Since the council was unable to verify this as a correct status, then it seems to me that whatever workman or their line manager who was involved in putting that sign up is culpable.
Of course disabled/visually impaired people shouldn’t have to stay indoors but the safety of the public is also important when they do so, just like when the rest of us go out
The judge was of the opinion her disability didn’t cause her to behave in the aggressive way she did
Just like able bodied people, is perfectly possible for the disabled to be nasty, intolerant, entitled pieces of work
And they’ve just as responsible for the consequences of their actions if they behave that way
Isn’t that part of being treated equally and equal opportunities?
All that was needed was for her to control her temper and have some respect for the cyclist’s safety
So if her disability makes having some basic manners and decency impossible for her and she’s a danger to others, then perhaps she does need supervision
3 Likes
I cited part of the Highway Code earlier in this thread. It is incumbent on all of us (including and especially cyclists) to take due care and attention when approaching other pedestrians, especially where their disabilities might not be openly obvious. Maybe, if there is a lesson to be learnt from all of this, we should not assume that the person approaching us is “normal” and to act upon that assumption.
1 Like
We didn’t see the video only up to a point .
The police and the jury did .
1 Like
We saw enough of it to see the pedestrian walking, the bike moving towards her and the bike swerving into the road.
2 Likes
Anyway @Muddy, this is a minor point and not worth nitpicking over.
The question is whether the judgement was appropriate and proportionate. Personally I think it was too harsh.
3 Likes
I think the videos and photos made it very clear that she marched down the path in the road side, close to the kerb in order to confront and obstruct the cyclist, rather than keep to the right so there would be room for both of them?
When the cyclist fell off, the pedestrian was very much on her side of the path
Combine that with the aggression and with swinging her arms at her and swearing, it’s not surprising that the cyclist was alarmed and took a tumble
There really are only two victims here, the cyclist and the car driver
And one aggressor, Auriol Grey
3 Likes
She’s not appealing the guilty sentence, is she, just the length of sentence. Just as well, she’s obviously guilty
Remember, a woman had lost her life down to Auriol Greys nasty temper and behaviour
I expect it will get reduced, but I hope not
Someone has put in a appeal against the leniency of the sentence, the cyclist’s family, maybe? I’d be the same if it were me and I hope they win
I think the judge should have gone for the five years available to them, after all, she’ll only serve a small part of it and it’s not much for causing someone’s death
3 Likes
Sorry, but where does it state which side of the pavement was designated for whom? I’ve seen clearly labelled cycle lanes on shared pavements both on the kerbside and inner lane. If the cyclist had been near the fence and not the kerb, then it would seem pretty obvious she wouldn’t have swerved onto the road.
2 Likes
The convention is that the cyclist rides by the kerb, I think?
But that doesn’t really matter, even if there were no clear markings
Because what is completely unacceptable and pure bad manners is to take possession of the middle of the path when you see someone coming towards you, and then to obstruct them
And to combine that with a lot of swearing and falling your arms about
If it was two pedestrians you’d move to one side or the other to give each other room, that’s just civilised behaviour
4 Likes
We’ll just go round in circles on this issue. I am well aware that we only have a limited amount of “evidence” available compared to the courts, which makes it hard to be definitive.
I’m happy to agree to differ over the degree of culpability in this tragic case.
That’s the other side of the road further up. There are no signs on the side the accident took place. Presumably the other side is the correct width.
1 Like