Apart from children, and then with supervision, I don't think cyclists should be on the pavement. and certainly not electric scooters. When we drive we must give cyclists a wide berth, if the pavement is narrow then cyclists can't do the same for a pedestrian. Pedestrian safety on pavements should be paramount if a person was aged, infirm how safe are they expected to feel if a cyclist looks wobbly or worse still going too fast. In any event, SOME, are a law unto themselves, a woman died recently crossing the road when a cyclist ploughed into her riding at nearly 30 miles in a 20 mile an hour zone, then I read cyclists are not bound by the same speed restrictions as motorists, so that man wasn't prosecuted. I often used to go to Richmond Park and it's full of really aggressive lycra clad cyclists (99% men) who think they own the place, they career around like lunatics whilst drivers crawl along behind them, overtake them at your peril. Having said that, I know such cyclists are a minority, I'm not suggesting anyone on this forum would behave in such a way.
Going back to Auriol Grey, this was a catalogue of unfortunate events she had a gamut of issues and I believe visually impaired, I agree she behaved in an abusive, aggressive manner, no doubt part and parcel of not really understanding how to interact. The other poor lady panicked and fell into the path of an oncoming car, which happened in a nano second, ultimately, I don't think she should have been on the pavement. I feel sorry all round for her, her family and the poor woman driving the car. Having said all that I just don't think Auriol Grey should have had a custodial sentence.