Having seen photos of the footpaths and shared footpaths/cycle paths around the area of that ring road, I do think the Council need to improve them to make it safer for both pedestrians and cyclists.
If the facilities had been adequate, the confrontation may never have happened, so the Council do bear some responsibility for not having clearer and safer cycle routes and safer footpaths (though I don’t think that excuses anyone from reckless behaviour leading to manslaughter, so that is a separate issue)
The Council do have a duty to provide safe footpaths around busy roads and they are failing to do that in this area, in my opinion.
From the photos in this local news article, it’s clear there’s areas of that ring road where the needs and safety of pavement users and cyclists have been forgotten - the footpaths are a patched mess, littered with street furniture and shared cycle / footpaths are just too narrow in some places - check out the shared path across the beck in the link below!
Look at the photo with all those street sign poles, electrical cabinet, lamp posts etc all crowded together near the road crossing - how on Earth could someone in a wheelchair, mobility scooter or pushing a pram manage to negotiate all the poles and signs spread across the pavement there? It is just a bit further up the road from where Ms Grey confronted Mrs Ward.
And does that dotted line at the side of the road which begins just before that group of obstacles in the pavement denote where the cycle path switches from the pavement to the road?
It’s not very clear - but it looks as though those dotted lines have been added recently because I’ve just looked at street view pics from Google Maps and those dotted lines weren’t on the road then - if that’s their idea of making the path and cycle route clearer and safer, they haven’t done a very good job!
Pic from 2023
Maybe I’m mistaken - they are very faint! - maybe it is just more patched up bits of uneven tarmac catching the light and making it look like a white line!
There’s a lot of patchy tarmac in that area!
Strange that Auriol Greys family who had up to now had little to do with her are supporting her now .
Too little late now .
Anyway she must have served a fair bit of her time by now.
If it is a cycle path why have they put that big metal pole in the middle of the path? I cannot believe it is a shared path. We have one locally but it has a clear white line the whole length of it - probably quarter of a mile - pedestrians on the inside lane, cyclists in the other. It also has a blue sign indicating this at either end.
I read that the sister, her husband and children always looked out for her even though they lived at the other end of the country. There are photos supporting this. The sister passed away not long ago and her husband promised her very elderly estranged mother that he would always be there for Auriol. She and her Mum had a strained relationship which is not unusual in many families.
All this is irrelevant though. In a perfect world the paths would be wide enough for walkers and wheelchairs, and cyclists would have a lane of their own with crash barriers protecting them from the busy road. There would be toilets situated every half mile, with a defibrillator on the occasional wall just in case.
But it isn’t a perfect world and if people can’t coexist and share a path without throwing tantrums and blocking paths, sending cyclists, or wheelchair users to their death I fear for the future of the human race.
Exactly that, just because a situation isn’t ideal or we think someone else is behaving badly it isn’t an excuse for aggressive behaviour and causing someone’s death.
All that was needed to save this woman’s life was for Auriol Grey to behave in a civilised way and show some decency and basic good manners
The town near where I live is ancient and the streets are narrow ( it’s medieval for goodness sake ) there is always someone whinging about the pavements being un push chair / wheelchair friendly . They arent they are about 2ft wide in places but heck you can’t suit all of the folks all of the time .
You have to accept that there are some places you just can’t go .
You’re missing the point OGF. We have never had a definitive answer as to whether the path in question is a shared pathway for both cyclists and pedestrians. Even the judge doesn’t know for sure. How ridiculous is that?
The shared path I mentioned earlier (in my village) is great. Clear signage, clear pavement marking etc. and a lovely wide path. I was responsible for us getting it because I contacted the county council and they actually listened. I am both a pedestrian and a cyclist (and a drive actually).
It is on a very busy road between two small towns and is outside a primary school. Cars park all along the road at in/out times at the school and it is extremely dangerous for cyclists because the cars take up one half of the road. Being a rural area, at certain times of the year we have very heavy lorries passing through with sugar beet, potatoes etc. it was previously just a path for pedestrians.
Makes no difference .
It’s obvious the road was busy and dangerous .
The cyclist was an elderly lady who was not hurtling along .
The path was wide enough for both but Auriol Grey stuck herself deliberately in the middle of the pathway , flailed her arms and verbally abused her.
An elderly woman who was doing her no harm .
She caused Celia Ward to veer into the road and be hit by a car and is therefore responsible for her death .
But it doesn’t matter who was right or wrong concerning the law Rose, even if Celia was illegally riding on the pavement she didn’t deserve to be accosted and made to swerve into the road. A photograph and reported to the police would have been an appropriate action if Ms Grey felt that the law was being broken, you shouldn’t take the law into your own hands.
