Pedestrians versus Cyclists - Who's to Blame?

[Anise]

After watching the video several times, and only being able to see a small section of it, it’s hard to say with any real certainty that the actions of partially-sighted, physically disabled Auriol Grey, actually contributed to the fall, and that it was possible that the cyclist would have fallen anyway and coincidentally at the same time Auriol was ‘remonstrating’ with her.

I doubt the cyclist was intimidated by someone who clearly was not in good health physically, but more likely she was just an inexperienced cyclist, and therefore shouldn’t have been on roads or pavements putting others lives at risk.

Had i been on a jury, and taking everything into account, i would have found Auriol to be innocent.

[Lincolnshire]

I took my own advice and looked at the video clip again. Three things jumped out me.
First, it does appear that the pedestrian actually touched the cyclist with her final hand wave. That was the action that made the cyclist veer off the pavement. It does not, to me and to the court, appear that the cyclist’s topple was unrelated to the actions of the pedestrian. Much more that the topple was a direct consequence of the actions of the pedestrian.
Second, the cyclist is clearly old, female and definitely cycling slowly. I would look at someone like that and think them vulnerable and not surprisingly fearful of road traffic. For me, that excuses a lot about this cyclist being on the pavement. You cannot claim that the cyclist would not have been intimidated by the pedestrian. That is unreasonable and excessive assumption based on nothing. I’d also note that the pavement seemed very empty of pedestrians, so the cyclist was not being excessively unreasonable.
Third, the pavement does not appear so narrow that a cyclist could not pass a pedestrian with room to spare. Auriol did the opposite of continuing to walk on the wall side of the pavement as she easily could have done. Instead she made a choice to confront the cyclist.
It is clear from your posts that you would preferred that the pedestrian was found innocent. However the video shows she was not simply a bystander nor simply standing her ground passively. The court found she was culpable in the death of the cyclist and that, for me, is how it looks on the video.

[Anise]

And this is why there will be an appeal.

Just one more comment here from me.
I don’t believe Auriol is fundamental to this case at all, and by that i mean she was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. It could have been any pedestrian on that stretch of pavement who had the right to uphold the law against a cyclist clearly breaking it.

I’ll repeat that it could have been an angry mum with double buggy and children in tow, shouting at the cyclist to get off the pavement.

The laws regarding where you can or cannot cycle are there for a reason for both cyclists and pedestrians to be safe, and if you knowingly break that law, there will inevitably be consequences, in this case tragic consequences for the cyclist.

[AnnieS]

@mart

Although the footpath may not have been a shared one at that point, I think there does appear to be room for a pedestrian to move closer to the fence to allow safe passage for both. Shout the words from there if feeling strongly, rather than drive a cyclist into the road and the oncoming traffic.

I don’t think there is much room if you are a size 18-20. There was nothing to stop the cyclist putting brakes on early and pulling into the driveway she had just passed. There’s also a shedload of street “furniture” making the path even more narrow.

[mart]

I think there was room to avoid trouble if wanting to.

[spitfire]

This Lady could have been two feet closer to the fence to cling onto, there would never been any conflict then.

[greengage]

If the cyclist was going slowly then she should have been able to stop almost instantaneously with decent brakes. I often cycle on pavements for short distances to avoid parked cars and so on but have to be very aware of any approaching pedestrians. It looks like she just swerved and maybe overbalanced. If this was caused by outrageous behaviour by the pedestrian is complicated.

[OldGreyFox]

@Anise

I cannot understand why this partially sighted lady with cerebral palsy could be found guilty of manslaughter,

@Anise

but as a disabled person

@Anise

likely exacerbated by her disability. Auriol suffers from Cerebral Palsy and also limited vision.

@Anise

or disabled people on foot.

@Anise

That maybe the lady does not process things in her mind in the same way as someone who doesn’t have Cerebral Palsy.
The symptoms online include both physical and mental disorders.

@Anise

to expect a visually and physically impaired person like Auriol,

@Anise

i doubt was her intention when she left home that day in order to collect medication for her many ailments.

@Anise

the actions of partially-sighted, physically disabled Auriol Grey,

I think we get the picture Anise…Auriol playing the disabled card (or at least somebody is) to get off with manslaughter.

[Anise]

For anyone who may be interested, there is a petition which can be accessed through Change.org, which is calling for the release of Auriol Grey.
Also there will be an appeal , so there is a lot of support for Auriol - i will be signing the petition.

At the moment, Auriol is in a hospital wing of the prison because of her disabilities, so the earlier she can be released the better.

[scot37]

There were faults on both sides. Clearly this stretch of pavement is not wide enough to accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists particularly with the lamppost projecting out from the fence. The cyclist should have dismounted instead of trying to get through a space that did not exist. If she could not stop she was going to fast to be on a pavement. The pedestrian on the other hand could have stepped to the side instead of confronting the cyclist.

[OldGreyFox]

I’d sign one to keep her in prison and do her time for the murder of an innocent cyclist, who incidentally, might have had some medical problems herself…

[MargaretF]

It seems to me that some folks have overlooked, or ignored, the fact that the cyclist lost her life due this woman’s eccentric behaviour - she has only lost her freedom, quite rightly in my opinion. I accept that she has health problems but in my view they don’t exonerate her from punishment for causing a death. The family of the cyclist must have been devastated by what happened.

[Maree]

There is no doubt in my mind that Auriol Grey caused the cyclists death with her violent, aggressive and entitled behaviour and was definitely guilty of manslaughter, more like murder

And that her deliberate evasiveness while being interviewed by the police showed her to be manipulative and aware of her guilt

I think her sentence was woefully inadequate, I would be furious if the cyclist was my mother and she should definitely serve at least that sentence in full and it’s disgusting that an appeal is being considered and it’s an insult to that poor cyclists memory

And I don’t think it’s safe for her to be in the community if she can’t control herself and her temper

That she’s a danger to the public has been proved by the way she caused the cyclists death

The issue of whether the cyclist should have been on the pavement is a red herring and a distraction

It’s not clear if it was a shared pavement or not
But even if it wasn’t we don’t have the death penalty for riding on the pavement

And it doesn’t excuse Auriol Grey’s violent behaviour

I hope she suffered in prison and learned a little humility, discipline and self control and that her appeal is rejected and she gets sent back

I believe she comes from a wealthy family so there’s probably a good lawyer helping her exploit sympathy for her alleged disabilities

I just feel so sorry for the cyclist bullied to her death by this woman and for the poor bereaved family

It’s interesting to compare the lack of sympathy for that family to the families of those killed by Valdo Calocane

He is a paranoid schizophrenic, a disability much more likely to affect behaviour than Auriol Greys limited mobility and partial sightedness?

She chose to behave the way she did, showed no remorse and tried to evade responsibility and knew what she was doing and could have chosen to control herself, he couldn’t

Yet the mob were baying for his blood, grieving with the victim’s families and demanding the death penalty And he’ll never be free again

Whereas the bleeding hearts are seeing no wrong in Auriol Grey, ignore the grief of the cyclists family and are demanding she be released to be a danger to the public again

https://www.itv.com/news/central/2024-01-25/nottingham-attacks-killer-valdo-calocane-sentenced

[Maree]

@OldGreyFox

I’d sign one to keep her in prison and do her time for the murder of an innocent cyclist, who incidentally, might have had some medical problems herself…

I think the cyclists family should start one and I’d definitely sign too

[Anise]

The cyclist would have been aware that stretch of pavement was not designated for dual purpose as it was so narrow and not fit for purpose, so really she was putting her self at risk.

Yes i agree she should have dismounted and i said this in an earlier post, with hindsight if she had, we wouldn’t be having this discussion now.

Auriol’s reactions wouldn’t be the same as an able-bodied person would in the same circumstances.
I don’t think just stepping aside easily, could have been possible, as having Cerebral Palsy, added to which she walked with a leg splint, would slow her down - not only physically, but also mentally.

Also she was partially sighted which meant she wouldn’t have seen the cyclist immediately.

[AnnieS]

@OldGreyFox

I think we get the picture Anise…Auriol playing the disabled card (or at least somebody is) to get off with manslaughter.

it’s not a “card” OGF. Disability rights are being eroded in favour of the able. The needs of the most vulnerable in society are being ignored in top-down cycling lobby led re-configurations of pedestrian spaces around the country to satisfy council tick-box exercises forced on people who have no say.

This is what the disabled, blind pedestrian has to negotiate because of the madness of the relentless rollout of poorly planned cycle lanes :

London 'floating bus stops' calls to rethink them, for buses, cyclists, disabled and blind (UK)

[Maree]

@Anise

The cyclist would have been aware that stretch of pavement was not designated for dual purpose as it was so narrow and not fit for purpose, so really she was putting her self at risk.

Yes i agree she should have dismounted and i said this in an earlier post, with hindsight if she had, we wouldn’t be having this discussion now.

Auriol’s reactions wouldn’t be the same as an able-bodied person would in the same circumstances.
I don’t think just stepping aside easily, could have been possible, as having Cerebral Palsy, added to which she walked with a leg splint, would slow her down - not only physically, but also mentally.

Also she was partially sighted which meant she wouldn’t have seen the cyclist immediately.

Her eyesight was good enough to see the cyclist a good ten yards away in time to start her temper tantrum and violent outburst

She chose to deliberately advance towards her, waving her arms about violently and swearing when she had plenty of time to just step aside and there would have plenty of room on the pavement for both of them

As for the cyclist, if I’d seen a big aggressive woman like that coming towards me, swearing and waving her arms aggressively, I wouldn’t have chosen to make myself vulnerable by stopping and dismounting either

My first thought would have been to get past and get away from her as quickly at possible as it was clear she had mental issues and was violent .

[Anise]

@Maree

As for the cyclist, if I’d seen a big aggressive woman like that coming towards me, swearing and waving her arms aggressively, I wouldn’t have chosen to make myself vulnerable by stopping and dismounting either

My first thought would have been to get past and get away from her as quickly at possible as it was clear she had mental issues and was violent .

I’m amazed that an ‘aggressive’ and ‘violent’ person such as Auriol Grey, hasn’t left a trail of severely injured or dead people behind her.
Really?

[Maree]

@Anise

@Maree

As for the cyclist, if I’d seen a big aggressive woman like that coming towards me, swearing and waving her arms aggressively, I wouldn’t have chosen to make myself vulnerable by stopping and dismounting either

My first thought would have been to get past and get away from her as quickly at possible as it was clear she had mental issues and was violent .

I’m amazed that an ‘aggressive’ and ‘violent’ person such as Auriol Grey, hasn’t left a trail of severely injured or dead people behind her.
Really?

Well, she’s left one How many more do we need?

[Anise]

@OldGreyFox

I’d sign one to keep her in prison and do her time for the murder of an innocent cyclist, who incidentally, might have had some medical problems herself…

I don’t doubt that the cyclist had medical problems of some kind, most people develop medical problems as they age - i would guess there aren’t many on this forum who don’t need to take medication on a permanent basis.

However i also doubt that the cyclist had Cerebral Palsy, or limited vision like Auriol - at least i hope not as there is no way she should be on a bike if that were the case. That would be an accident waiting to happen.