Social order Is the vibe, and folks who contest it, and for what reason.
Lots of people are socially isolated for one reason or another and have been throughout time . I can think of all sorts of people who are socially isolated and it’s sad . It’s something that crosses all social barriers.
In this case we are discussing Ms Grey Rose. Don’t you think each case should be judged on its merits and not all painted with the same brush?
1 Like
I think that’s the thing. The judge said she knows the difference between right and wrong, that her disabilities weren’t the cause of her aggressive behaviour and that she’s shown no remorse
And she said herself her disabilities didn’t cause intellectual impairment and that her arm “may” have made contact with the cyclist
I just don’t understand why she’s getting the sympathy and not the cyclist. I don’t think she deserves any, she was the aggressor, the cyclist the victim
4 Likes
Just one thing to clarify before I bob off. (I could get lonely on here now if I stay otherwise)
I think this where all the acrimony has stemmed from.
They’ve both got my sympathy but for differing reasons… and obviously in a differing amount.
The cyclist because she was not at fault. She lost her life and that’s the tragedy of it.
The pedestrian, because she was aggresive and I don’t see anyone denying that … and I’d go as far as to say she sounds pretty unpleasant … but there sounds like there is good cause for that.
So leaving out any bearing on this that her partial blindness, cerebal palsy, lack of spatial awareness and learning difficulties might have had on her behaviour … and leaving out the fact that the cycylist did not appear to get off her bike, sadly, a woman has lost her life because two women met going in opposite directions.
Should she have got off her bike ? … The council says no (though they can find no official record of it a shared pathway). So legally, she had no need to.
But if she had she might not have fallen. That is not to say that in any way is she to blame. This tragic incident really does drop into the category of … it could have been avoided.
It sounds trite and no way diminishes the poor ladies death but is true.
The accident need never have happened.
If councils expect both pedestrians and cyclist to share a pavement in safety … they failed. Cyclists are at danger on the roads now amongst ever increasing traffic but shunting them onto pavements with pedestrians, dog walkers, mobilty scooter users, children or women with prams is not going to solve the problem.
Everyone is entitled to the space they need to travel safely.
I can not wholeheartedly condemn Auriol Grey for a death, bad language yes, aggresive behaviour yes but that is becoming the norm on our pavements and roads … harsh words do not kill, normally.
So … I feel most sympathy for the cyclist… and her family,
Next I feel sympathy for the lady motorist who has to live with a death … that was not her fault at all.
And finally, the pedestrian, because I believe 3 years is too long a sentence. But in her case, it primarily is only becausee of the length of her sentence.
1 Like
Her family have said they will appeal and that prison is not the right place for her!
There is an excellent report in The Times but it has a paywall so I can’t really share it. It describes how she was born with the umbilical cord around her neck and she was starved of oxygen which led to her disabilities and a lifetime of problems. it also says that the judge ignored the fact that when she was initially interviewed she had a person with her who was there to assist her because it was clear she had learning difficulties.
There is still much confusion over whether it was a cycle path and the judge also glossed over that too.
Her brother in law says she is still not really aware of where she is and seems to think it is a sort of hotel. She has asked to go home.
I sincerely hope this case is looked at again and she is released. She is not a danger to anyone and if she did say “get out of the ******* way” then that is something we hear on our screens every day.
I found that rather odd as well. Neither the police nor the authorities could confirm it was a cycle path. I saw a later video of a news reporter giving a report from the same spot when a cyclist brushed past her at speed.
1 Like
From the trial reports, I wasn’t aware Ms Grey had any family - and I thought her lawyer had already submitted the Appeal against her sentence straight after the sentence was given.
Her lawyer Ms Moore told a judge: 'She has nobody to support her apart from a friend and no family support at all. She has no financial support at all other than state benefits.
‘If she goes to prison today she would lose her home and has no one to store her possessions. She doesn’t know what would happen to them.’
After reading that, I was surprised to see that she does have some family after all.
I hope her family are now giving her some help and support - she will be out of prison within 18 months, released on licence, maybe earlier if the Appeal against the sentence is successful, so I hope the family who have now come forward will stay in the picture after her release, as she will need support.
2 Likes
Why is the “family” just her brother-in-law and why is it only the the DM that is “running with the story” … 
1 Like
She was estranged from her family. Her sister died a couple of years ago, and at that time the brother in law promised her mother he would help look after Auriol. He is the one giving the interview. But at the time of the incident in 2020 her family would not have been involved. It seems now he is stepping up to the promise. It’s a wealthy family but Auriol was living independently of their financial support in sheltered housing.
1 Like
Presumably that information came from the Daily Mail?
it is in the Times article
1 Like
Thanks … 
I will await more familial developments … 
It’s not just in the DM. There is a lengthy report in The Times about it as I mentioned above.
1 Like
Well, I can’t read the Times … 
I believe it’s because she did not tell anybody she had any family.
This is what happens when people comment before reading posts properly. I did explain that the interview was in The Times but I was unable to share as there was a pay wall.
Her mother is alive and reasonably well off, I read, but has little to do with her?
I did read it but it doesn’t say where the Times got the information.
There is a Times feed about this on Twitter. Bits and pieces of the article.