No evidence for us to see.
Depends on her standing in the community, and whether or not they decide that we shouldn’t know.
Anything is possible, and so far we’ve heard some amazing unfounded accusations about Auriol Grey.
It’s pretty disgusting to slate the cyclist for no reason and make up claims - simply to put her in a bad light. Let’s stick to known or observable facts. If you watch the very last couple of seconds of the video of this event you will note the way the pedestrian shifts their weight towards the cyclist as she lashes out with her arm. That is a push or an attempted push on a 77 year old woman.
3 Likes
I wear glasses. I don’t know if that counts. The judge who was actually there to assess Mrs Grey’s conditions and abilities thought her actions were not explained by disability.
1 Like
No it doesn’t count because you can see with the aid of spectacles, whereas Auriol still only has limited vision which can’t be corrected with her glasses.
Whatever the judge said at the time, there is going to be an appeal, and this has been granted for a reason.
Over and out.
1 Like
Yes, for better or worse, that is how the law is.
As the autopsy showed no alcohol, and there was no evidence from her behaviour of drinking, I think it’s very cruel and arrogant and rather absurd of you to presume you know better and accuse this poor woman of being drunk and imply a cover up
In fact, it verges on libel
Did they breathalyse Auriol Grey, I wonder?
She was the one caught on video behaving like a drunken thug
2 Likes
Yes, there is going to be an appeal but there really shouldn’t be and if she wins it, she will be getting off scot free with manslaughter
1 Like
The cyclist may or may not have broken safety rules, there’s no evidence it wasn’t a shared path
Nor was she speeding or riding in a dangerous way
But what is very clear is that Auriol Grey broke, not rules, but the law of the country on aggressive behaviour that caused someone’s death
Breaking safety rules and breaking the country’s laws on killing someone, aren’t comparable
But she didn’t just “stand her ground” She advanced in the cyclist aggressively, arms flailing and swearing
And she didn’t have “every right” to do that and endanger the cyclist’s life
Having priority on a footpath, or someone else breaking the law on priority, doesn’t give anybody “every right” to indulge in a violent temper tantrum, justify that behaviour, or mean they should escape the consequences of what they’ve done
I think letting this nasty woman out is a travesty of justice and an insult to the cyclists memory and to her family grief
1 Like
No i didn’t see it quite the same way.
I see Auriol gesture towards the road with her left arm while telling the cyclist to get off the pavement, which was seconds before Ward drew level to her, so no it has already been established that there was no contact.
As far as daring to suggest that this cyclist may have been intoxicated at the time, you have to ask why she had very little control over her bicycle, or why she was wobbling around like a jelly on a plate.
A glass of wine beforehand, may not have put her over the limit, but would have been enough to impair her judgement.
However there could also be other reasons why she appeared not to be in control, but there is no question that she was not in control of her bike for some time before the incident.
The fault is absolutely with the cyclist.
Sadly she may no longer be alive, but it doesn’t change the facts.
She saw the approaching cyclist well enough in advance. Looks to me as if she knew who/what she was shouting and waving her arm at.
I saw this news report on TV and that cyclist went past the reporter at high speed. If this pedestrian uses this stretch of pavement regularly no doubt she has been buzzed by cyclists before which maybe explains the anger which she showed. No excuse however but why the cyclist did not dismount instead of trying to forcing herself past I do not know.
3 Likes
Mrs Ward could have been spoofed/destabilized by the behaviour. I might have been myself under those circumstances.
Regarding dismounting when approaching a pedestrian. A cyclist walking beside a bike takes up a bit more footpath width than if they stay on the saddle. Not saying it was right to do but it could be better to stay on the bike for room purposes, providing both parties behave considerately towards each other.
1 Like
Considering the cyclist was wobbling and clearly not in control of her bike at the time. would have been extremely dangerous for any pedestrian she was trying to pass on that narrow stretch of pavement.
And of course the cyclist was blatantly breaking the law as well.
Looks like lots of room to me Scot, the reporter is stood in the middle of the footpath, she could have gone back to the fence when she saw the cyclist approaching. Imagine if Auriol had got angry with that bloke on the bike, it might have been Auriol under the car. She is not only a danger to other members of the public, but to herself.
Perhaps she only picks on frail 77 year old cyclists.
2 Likes
But not to the point of murdering the offending cyclist Annie…
Well if the cyclist was indeed that frail, this would raise further questions as to her suitability to ride a bike, which would almost certainly jeopardise the safety of not only pedestrians, but motorists as well.
Interesting point.
I have a big problem with cyclists going into me on a pavement that I know isn’t a shared path, but I wouldn’t contact the council, press, police. The inconsiderate loser who went into me and became entangled in the dog lead got his comeuppance without any help from the pointless, useless higher-upper powers that be. He thought that he didn’t have to stop even though I was standing in the middle of the pavement staring at him. He got caught in the extendable lead like a fish in a net & that ensured he came to an abrupt stop. He will be more careful next time. He said he didn’t see the dog. One wheel short of a spoke. If Auriol had a dog on a lead and the same happened careering the cyclist into the road whose blinkin’ fault would that be? The dog’s?
2 Likes
This was my thought too. You have to declare health conditions to the DVLA if you drive but no such test for cyclists because they are not registered.
1 Like
She looks like a size 6-8, not a normal sized person.
1 Like