Auriol Grey cycling manslaughter conviction overturned

[Cav]

I’m sure her family feel better for that. The facts appear to be rather unclear given the outcome of the first trial.

The facts are as the Court of Appeal judgment says. I have no doubt that will be of no comfort to the family of the deceased but would they take comfort from an unsafe conviction?

Why won't you accept that the pedestrian was guilty of no crime and that a pedestrian shouting at a cyclist is not a crime - if it were the jails would be full of such people?

 

[bor]

77yrs old, moving at walking pace.

She had every damn right to use that pavement, shared or otherwise.

One way or the other, intimidated so much that she fell into the road under a car and was killed?

And the pedestrian is somehow going to get away with it?

What a travesty this is.

Sickening. What must her family think right now?

 

[AndyU]

So an elderly cyclist on a shared path was pushed into an oncoming vehicle & killed, people on here see that as a good outcome?

Wow, I thought better of some on here than that.

I watched the video. I didn’t see anyone pushed. The cyclist was incapable of controlling the bike and probably shouldn’t have been cycling. If she had been able to control the bike she would have stopped and let the old autistic, partially blind woman with cerebral palsy and partial paralysis walk on. The appeal court judges said the case was so weak it should never have been put to a jury.
Auriol Grey has cyclist manslaughter conviction overturned https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68975335

 

[Seeker_UK]

`Following Grey's conviction, Cambridgeshire County Council said it might review its shared pavements policy, admitting it did not know whether this section was one.`

I know that stretch of Huntingdon's Ring Road very well and I do not believe it is a shared pathway.

Huntingdon

Huntingdon

maps.app.goo.gl

If it is, it's a poor bit of planning - further down the path is a road sign which a cyclist would have difficulty passing.

[edit]

It would seem I am correct, it was not shared:

'Auriol's challenges are not over today': Family speak after conviction is overturned

Auriol Grey's family have spoken out after her overturned conviction today.

www.huntspost.co.uk

"At that time, there was no marked cycle lane alongside the ring road and, so, no designated route along which Mrs Ward could cycle. Mrs Ward’s decision to cycle on the pavement was entirely understandable."

 

[Cav]

77yrs old, moving at walking pace.

She had every damn right to use that pavement, shared or otherwise.

One way or the other, intimidated so much that she fell into the road under a car and was killed?

And the pedestrian is somehow going to get away with it?

What a travesty this is.

Sickening. What must her family think right now?

Why is it that some people choose to believe a narrative not supported by the facts?

 

[Somafunk]

You don’t have to physically touch someone to commit the crime of “common assault” in the UK (afaikj – leading them to think that you’re going to do so, is enough. Standing in the way of a cyclist, swearing and waving your arms about, certainly I can see why the victim may have thought they were going to get pushed off, and reacted by swerving out of the way. Ergo they were forced.

A deliberate act that resulted in a death

 

[Mike Hughes]

Is reading the judgement really so difficult that we get a thread full of people who clearly haven’t done so pronouncing definitively on what took place in defiance of the facts, the video and the court? Bravo.

There was no “technicality“ here. The court very clearly found the original decision to lack even the basics of having identified the correct law and an applicable base offence. It was a terrible decision where, because the base offence wasn’t identified, the court inevitably compounded that by failing to identify relevant evidence; failing to draw relevant findings of facts from said evidence and then didn’t apply the law correctly to those misguided facts. In law it’s harder to go further astray and, whilst it would not be judicial language to describe the original hearing as incompetent, that’s essentially the gist of the new decision.

Those of you busy pronouncing otherwise clearly don’t know the first thing about the law.

 

[Cav]

You don’t have to physically touch someone to commit the crime of “common assault” in the UK (afaikj – leading them to think that you’re going to do so, is enough. Standing in the way of a cyclist, swearing and waving your arms about, certainly I can see why the victim may have thought they were going to get pushed off, and reacted by swerving out of the way. Ergo they were forced.

A deliberate act that resulted in a death

Suggest you write to the Court of Appeal telling them how they have got it wrong...

 

[Salamander]

Ever heard about cars?

As ever people go postal about rare events.

I agree that cyclists shouldn’t be on pavements & we need far better infrastructure to encourage more people to cycle.

A cyclist died here, this wasn’t someone being reckless or speeding.

These incidents are tragic & stirring up hate doesn’t help.

There are so many cycle lanes were I live, roads narrowed and yet not on cyclist in sight. For me it is all a waste of money. The uk does not have the weather for cycling, people can jump in their cars and keep warm on their way to work. A better way to go would be public transport.

 

[Muttley2]

Cycling on pavements is wrong full stop. Councils are to blame for ridiculous cycle lanes swapping from road to path, not clearly marked trying to satisfy the weekend Lycra brigade. It’s a mess and made worse with electric scooters screaming past to add to the jeopardy of going to the shops. Cyclists need insurance and taxing and maybe more of them would ride with care and courtesy.

 

[tiggers]

Regardless of who exactly is to blame the case is tragic. As for the old arguments above about tax/insurance,/cycle lanes etc. etc. sorry but we need to encourage people to cycle not discourage them. Firstly it keeps people fit, but secondly, and just as importantly, it reduces vehicular traffic and makes the roads clearer for those journeys where a bicycle is not appropriate or for road users that cannot use one. A lot of the reasons cycle lanes are little used is they are very poorly planned and/or maintained. If I cycle and have the choice of a well used road or a debris strewn cycle lane I know where I'm cycling and it isn't the cycle lane. At the end of the day people really need to stop demonising road users choosing an alternative form of transport than them and realise that we all need to share the roads and a bit of give and take is what is needed rather than a tribal mentality. Some motorised vehicle drivers love to point out cyclists doing bad stuff just as much as some cyclists love to do the same back to them, but at the end of the day it's only a proportion of each that behave like dicks, that's because they are dicks and not because of their chosen mode of transport.

 

[Brown Bottle]

There are so many cycle lanes were I live, roads narrowed and yet not on cyclist in sight. For me it is all a waste of money. The uk does not have the weather for cycling, people can jump in their cars and keep warm on their way to work. A better way to go would be public transport.

Cycling is huge in London and to be encouraged. Getting cars out of city centres is good for everyone, although as someone who has to drive in London a bit more thought needs to go into it.

With regards to the court case it’s pretty tragic for all parties. I certainly think the pedestrian has to share some of the blame but I can’t imagine she remotely considered her actions would lead to the death of the cyclist.

Cheers BB

 

[Fatmarley]

Years ago, a stupid woman on a racing bike came flying past my toddler on a narrow path (you know when you can feel the wind as they fly past). Toddlers are completely unpredictable, and obviously unsteady. All he had to do was fall to the side. At the last minute, I grabbed him, and pulled him the other way because it was obvious she wasn't slowing down. What a selfish cow... She used to pass us every day. So I just grabbed him when she was coming.

 

[vince rocker]

Cycling on pavements is wrong full stop. Councils are to blame for ridiculous cycle lanes swapping from road to path, not clearly marked trying to satisfy the weekend Lycra brigade. It’s a mess and made worse with electric scooters screaming past to add to the jeopardy of going to the shops. Cyclists need insurance and taxing and maybe more of them would ride with care and courtesy.

BINGO!

 

[bor]

Not yet.

Still waiting for "number plates" for the full-house.

 

[Mike Hughes]

Cycling is huge in London and to be encouraged. Getting cars out of city centres is good for everyone, although as someone who has to drive in London a bit more thought needs to go into it.

With regards to the court case it’s pretty tragic for all parties. I certainly think the pedestrian has to share some of the blame but I can’t imagine she remotely considered her actions would lead to the death of the cyclist.

Cheers BB

On the other hand, one might consider that local authorities have had their road budgets forcibly slashed by central government and have to grab at whatever pots of money are available even when that money is ring-fenced for something they may not actually agree with such as cycle lanes.

This constant attack on local government is exactly what central government encourages. Central government determines how well or otherwise local government can function but gets little of the blame.

My local authority makes all the right noises about cycle lanes but essentially isn't bothered that much about whether cyclists use them. The point being that it’s a means to fund 25% to 33% of a road surface so that it’s well-maintained for motorists.

 

[vince rocker]

On the other hand, one might consider that local authorities have had their road budgets forcibly slashed by central government and have to grab at whatever pots of money are available even when that money is ring-fenced for something they may not actually agree with such as cycle lanes.

This constant attack on local government is exactly what central government encourages. Central government determines how well or otherwise local government can function but gets little of the blame.

My local authority makes all the right noises about cycle lanes but essentially isn't bothered that much about whether cyclists use them. The point being that it’s a means to fund 25% to 33% of a road surface so that it’s well-maintained for motorists.

A cycle lane isn't for motorists, and cycle lanes are often poorly maintained as the funding doesn't include that.

 

[Woodface]

The facts are as the Court of Appeal judgment says. I have no doubt that will be of no comfort to the family of the deceased but would they take comfort from an unsafe conviction?

Why won't you accept that the pedestrian was guilty of no crime and that a pedestrian shouting at a cyclist is not a crime - if it were the jails would be full of such people?

I watched the video. I didn’t see anyone pushed. The cyclist was incapable of controlling the bike and probably shouldn’t have been cycling. If she had been able to control the bike she would have stopped and let the old autistic, partially blind woman with cerebral palsy and partial paralysis walk on. The appeal court judges said the case was so weak it should never have been put to a jury.
Auriol Grey has cyclist manslaughter conviction overturned https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68975335

Is this the same delicate flower you told the cyclist to 'Get off the f88cking pavement'. This whole case is tragic, particularly for the cyclist who is the real victim here & is being blamed for being so. It's a bit of stretch to suggest that the cyclist is at fault. What an utterly horrible society we live in.

You have no idea whether the cyclist was capable of controlling the bike, sometimes people get startled or surprised.

 

[les24preludes]

Years ago, a stupid woman on a racing bike came flying past my toddler on a narrow path (you know when you can feel the wind as they fly past). Toddlers are completely unpredictable, and obviously unsteady. All he had to do was fall to the side. At the last minute, I grabbed him, and pulled him the other way because it was obvious she wasn't slowing down. What a selfish cow... She used to pass us every day. So I just grabbed him when she was coming.

Exactly the same thing happens on pavements in London. Cyclists who do this seem blissfully unaware that frail old people and kids can and do make unpredictable moves. They have no excuse to be on pavements. Here's just one example of a pedestrian killed on a pavement by a cyclist. The cyclist got just one year in jail. He just rode away. What a bastard.

"Elizabeth Stone was walking along the pavement in Monmouth when she was hit. Stewart McGinn, 29, rode his bike on the pavement and around a corner at speed, running into Mrs Stone head on. The force of the impact knocked the 79-year-old to the ground and caused a serious head injury. McGinn did not stop and rode away. Mrs Stone was taken to hospital. However the injuries she had sustained proved to be fatal.

https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2022-07-14/cyclist-who-rode-on-pavement-jailed-for-fatal-collision-with-pedestrian

Six pedestrians killed and 100 injured by cyclists. One cyclist just got a £2,000 fine, another was jailed for just 27 weeks after running over a four-year-old.

These six people all died after being hit by cyclists

As bike riding becomes ever more popular — nearly three million people in Britain cycle at least once a week — more and more pedestrians are being hurt by those who ride dangerously.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Woodface]

Cycling on pavements is wrong full stop. Councils are to blame for ridiculous cycle lanes swapping from road to path, not clearly marked trying to satisfy the weekend Lycra brigade. It’s a mess and made worse with electric scooters screaming past to add to the jeopardy of going to the shops. Cyclists need insurance and taxing and maybe more of them would ride with care and courtesy.

Moronic comment. As a member of the weekend (& during the week) 'lycra brigade' I go nowhere near cycle lanes or shared paths. I tend to cycle in the Peak District & have to take my chances with boy racers, inattentive drivers & the occasional errant walker on the road who hasn't looked. All part of it unfortunately.

Tax & insurance argument is ridiculous, why should I pay VED when a Tesla doesn't. I have insurance, many of us do.

I also walk 20 miles a week & drive.