I’m following the line of logic on these last few posts and they’re quite correct in so much as agreeing that a great many pavements aren’t wide enough to safely accomodate all those who might like to use them.
I’m afraid in that instance … cyclists should not be allowed on them.
It wasn’t so long ago that a cyclist got off their bike when they saw a pedestrian coming … the pedestrian had right of way.
Dog walkers, push chair users and pedetrians had to sort it out amongst themelves who had lion’s share… but cyclists didn’t even come into the equation.
But that was also when roads were much safer for cyclists.
That’s precisely why if councils choose to have so many different types of users in one space it should be wide enough and safe enough to accomodate everyone.
And a great many pavements aren’t .
I still believe the council to be grossly negligent.
Well said OGF
There is too much evasion of responsibility it’s always someone else’s fault .
The council didn’t make the poor old lady fall under a car .
There is a dual carriage way on the journey to the metropolis, it has a 40mph speed limit which I adhere to, others don’t but that is their choice, there are some folks who go into the outside lane and sit there at 40mph to stop anyone else who wants to break the law doing so, this is the problem, self certified, self righteous folks, who want to make a point, without a badge. If folks want to run rampage, that is up to them, they will probably come to a sticky end by their own volition, it’s not my place to assist that conclusion, or try to prevent it.
Their poor planning created this situation. They don’t even know whether it was a shared path. What does that tell you about how much they care about road user safety?
It’s tells me that they can’t fix every eventuality and certainly not unpleasant human behaviour .
If we had no traffic lights, no zebra crossings, no road markings, no highway code, and children had to walk to school on a motorway hard shoulder who would be to blame? The pedestrian, the motorist or the local authority?
The kids would be more aware of fight or flight?
That’s a nonsense scenario .
As a child I had to go to school walking by busy roads and travelling on buses .
I also rode my bike on the pavement because it’s wasn’t that safe on the roads .
It’s a matter of give and take and consideration for others .
No it’s not, have you forgotten your roots?
My post was actually directed to Rose’s post I have edited it accordingly putting in a quote .
I regret I don’t speak Spitty
I thought it was a strange post to be directed at my comment, because it contained a contradiction within in it.
Thanks for the clarification.
With such a bad tempered old biddy it still would have happened on a shared path Annie…
And it wouldn’t have made the path any wider if the council had stuck up a sign saying it was a shared path.
Well, exactly. I am getting very weary of those not taking personal responsibility and looking for someone else to blame
“I got in a temper, stormed up to a cyclist, swore at her, waved my arms and made physical contact and blocked her path which made her fall in the road under a car. And that’s obviously the council’s fault, not mine, because they didn’t make the pavement wider or put up signs”
Auriol Grey fails in her appeal against her 3 year sentence.
Thanks for the update … 
Here’s a link:
Court of Appeal judges dismissed her application for leave to appeal.
The Court of Appeal in London heard that, after she was jailed, a psychologist - in a report paid for by Grey’s family - found an autism diagnosis.
Miranda Moore KC, representing Grey, who has cerebral palsy and is partially blind, argued that the sentence was “excessive” and the diagnosis may have made a difference in her case.
She had argued the sentencing judge had made findings of fact against evidence, stating it “came as something of a shock” he found the pavement to be a shared cycleway, despite the local council being unable to confirm that.
But Mr Justice Griffiths, sitting with Lord Justice William Davis and Judge Neil Flewitt, refused to grant permission for Grey to appeal against her sentence, concluding it was “not arguably manifestly excessive”.
Grey should have pleaded guilty and been remorseful - she might have been out of jail by now.
Celia Ward, however, would still be dead.
Yes, it’s still a tragedy, I feel so sorry for the poor cyclists family and hope this helps a bit
I’m pleasantly surprised, I thought they’d play the disability card and she’d get off
I think the sentence was fair and appropriate, perhaps a little short
I thought you were staying out of this??
half a dozen of one and six of the other I would say?
I have since March 30th!!
Just move on … believe it or not cycling can be fun!