Woman convicted of manslaughter after swearing and gesturing at 77 year old cyclist.
- Thread starter Cycleops
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Ming the Merciless
There is no mercy
- Location
- Inside my skull
Eh, it was a shared space that specifically included bikes! The only bully was that pedestrian
lazybloke
Priest of the cult of Chris Rea
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
1) Most sources have concluded the path was shared (albeit badly signposted)
2) EVen if it wasn't shared, I'd probably choose to ride on it rather than on a busy road. Slowly and carefully.
3) Width measurements quoted in court suggest the shared path wasn't narrow
4) What makes you think the hierachy of road users was ignored?
5) I saw no bullying of a pedestrian. Did you not see bullying of the cyclist?
(Actively blocking the way; waving to create an even larger obstacle; pushing)
6) In your understanding, how much of a bully is a 77 year old pootling along on a bike?
(the approach of the bike isn't visible, might be usefu to get some calculations/estimates of speed)
7) Although the direction actions of the pedestrian are what put Celia Ward in mortal danger, nothing else
Crap choice for me to look back at this thread and get annoyed again.
HMS_Dave
Grand Old Lady
Yes, that maniacal 77 year old lady on a shopping bike deserved her gruesome exit from this world...
You never know though, maybe we shouldn't be so quick to judge. Like @DaveReading said, how do we know we've seen the same footage as the Jury? She could have been riding with a baseball cap reversed, bunny hopping down the pavement wielding a 9 iron in a threatening manner asking passers by to empty their pockets... We may never know.
Re the badly signposting, seems that all of the signs are on opposite side of the carriageway and there is one crossing of a road with both pedestrian and cycle red/green lights, immediately beyond that there are round shared signs whose postioning is not that clear as to what they are referring to
If where the cyclist is a shared path then their is no cycle symbols on the crossing with the next road same as that acoss the road to the right. The incident took place beyond the large sign on the opposite side of the road. Similarly if you follow the road in the opposite direction cylceway signs also simply disappear and neither instance is there an obvious end.
If where the cyclist is a shared path then their is no cycle symbols on the crossing with the next road same as that acoss the road to the right. The incident took place beyond the large sign on the opposite side of the road. Similarly if you follow the road in the opposite direction cylceway signs also simply disappear and neither instance is there an obvious end.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
That's been debunked a few times. There are at least two sets of cycle signs on the same side of the carriageway as well: one at the junction with Priory Road (shown on TV, I think not visible on Street View due to roadworks) and one west of Ambury Road.
In theory, there should be signs both sides of every road crossing and "Cyclists Rejoin Carriageway" (or its predecessor signs) at the ends, but it's not surprising that the signs are inconsistent, given that the highway authority appeared to have no farking clue whether it was a cycleway or not. Ideally there should be paint to reinforce this (and often that's a dashed line by the kerb in Cambridgeshire), but that's not required. In practice, the judge ruled it was irrelevant and it would be disproportionate for pedestrians to kill people even if they were committing highways offences.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
One of the problem I have seen is a sign indicating that the cycleway has finished is placed on a pole about 8 foot up in the air and is quite small
OK the cyclist should see it
but in reality a cyclist is generally looking ahead and behind - but also downwards towards the approaching path/track/road.
Hence some of the "No cycling" signs are placed in places where they are very easy to miss
such as this one near me
The cycle path goes off to the left here - the straight on bit is no longer a cycle path but at theis point, as well as the visible junction, there is also a road leading to an old Golf course that is being 'fixed' so there are trucks and stuff coming in from behind you and people coming from the left
SO the chances of a cyclist who is not familiar with the area , seeing the "No Cycling" sign is remote
A painted sign on the road indicating cyclist need to turn left of return to the road would fix that
Of course a proper rejoining thingy would be nice - but lets not get excessive!
OK the cyclist should see it
but in reality a cyclist is generally looking ahead and behind - but also downwards towards the approaching path/track/road.
Hence some of the "No cycling" signs are placed in places where they are very easy to miss
such as this one near me
The cycle path goes off to the left here - the straight on bit is no longer a cycle path but at theis point, as well as the visible junction, there is also a road leading to an old Golf course that is being 'fixed' so there are trucks and stuff coming in from behind you and people coming from the left
SO the chances of a cyclist who is not familiar with the area , seeing the "No Cycling" sign is remote
A painted sign on the road indicating cyclist need to turn left of return to the road would fix that
Of course a proper rejoining thingy would be nice - but lets not get excessive!
I suggest you read the various reports - THERE ARE NO SIMILARITES.
The high court judges have refused to grant permission for Grey to appeal against her sentence, concluding it was "not arguably manifestly excessive".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-65645364
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-65645364
Alex321
Guru
- Location
- South Wales
Given he is accused of running her over with her own car, I don't think there is anything remotely similar.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
Not a total surprise because the powers that be were already being asked whether it was an Unduly Lenient Sentence: has that been decided yet? It's mentioned in https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-64900815
KnittyNorah
Über Member
- Location
- The Frozen North (of England)
From https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-65645364, referenced above.
I can only assume that 'catering' to those people who lack what I suppose might be called a 'normal' perception of risk means a more lenient sentence if they kill someone by their deliberate action. In a very few cases it is abundantly clear that a person is so profoundly 'mentally challenged' that they have little or no perception of risk (to themselves or others) so any and every interaction with others must be appropriately monitored and the individual in question cannot carry responsibility for their actions.
This was clearly not the case here, though.
All of us have different perceptions of risk, too - and it changes throughout our life and changes in circumstance.
What is a 'normal' perception of risk, and who or what defines it? What is 'mentally challenged' in this context?
What a box of worms and slippery slope this could be!
This concerns me.
I can only assume that 'catering' to those people who lack what I suppose might be called a 'normal' perception of risk means a more lenient sentence if they kill someone by their deliberate action. In a very few cases it is abundantly clear that a person is so profoundly 'mentally challenged' that they have little or no perception of risk (to themselves or others) so any and every interaction with others must be appropriately monitored and the individual in question cannot carry responsibility for their actions.
This was clearly not the case here, though.
All of us have different perceptions of risk, too - and it changes throughout our life and changes in circumstance.
What is a 'normal' perception of risk, and who or what defines it? What is 'mentally challenged' in this context?
What a box of worms and slippery slope this could be!
Gwylan
Veteran
- Location
- All at sea⛵
At the risk of being provocative, " they came for the cyclists"?
DaveReading
Don't suffer fools gladly (must try harder!)
- Location
- Reading, obvs
Statements made outside court by barristers whose client has just been convicted are pretty common, and tend not to result in changes to the law.
Similar threads
