Jailed for manslaughter

I know nothing of it, but if that’s the court’s decision there will be good reasons which you won’t know unless you heard all the evidence.

Just been discussing this. According to the Judge the path was dual cyclist/pedestrian.

The cyclist concerned was 77, I believe. I doubt she was going at breakneck speed.

I agree about the dangers of cycling on pavements.

However, the aftermath of this accident must have been quite horrific. The innocent car driver will be devastated. Witnesses as well saw this poor lady crushed. Horrifying scene.

I think the woman's lack of remorse was taken into consideration when sentencing. Also the fact that she just carried on walking and went to Sainsbury's. She didn't stop to offer assistance. She will obviously have known what had happened.

The comments from the cyclist's husband about the loss of his wife are heartbreaking.

The path was more than 2.4m wide and it was designated as a shared path. It appears to have been solely the action of the convicted individual that caused the cyclist to swerve off the path into an oncoming car. The driver was a woman with her 2 year old child in the car.

I think it’s a very sad case for everyone involved and I’m not sure that imprisonment was the right outcome for someone described as having a ‘cognitive impairment’.

I don't think she had a cognitive impairment, she had mild cerebral palsy, which, according to the judgement, paid no part in her actions. I would have felt more sympathy if she had stopped, shown remorse, tried to help. The poor woman who hit the cyclist has only just been able to get back behind the wheel again, it was a horrifying experience for all concerned. I don't think a 77 year old retired midwife would have been zipping about on the pavement being a nuisance and danger to pedestrians.

2.4m is not wide enough to have a shared path designation. In any event, a cyclist is meant to show consideration
to other path users. I think very sadly the cyclist should not have been on the pavement. The cyclist had other options - stop cycling and dismount? I imagine the cyclist panicked and an error of judgment resulted in her untimely death which was caused initially by being shouted at by the pedestrian. So are pedestrians allowed to shout at cyclists when on a pavement? Clearly not in this case.

I don’t know how the judge thought this through.

Just read that pedestrian is partially blind which might explain why she waved her arms at the cyclist.

Without knowing everything about it, I thought she was judged very harshly.

Such a sad case for all concerned

There seems to be a dispute whether the pavement/path was a shared path. So if even legal people dont know, knowone can expect ordinary people to know.

I wonder if it is a case of one side is presumably wealthy[may have good lawyers] whereas the other woman has virtually no one and is on benefits.[not so good lawyers?]

I think this is sending out completely the wrong message to cyclists. I hope there is an appeal and the sentence over-turned. If she had pushed the cyclist, causing her to fall off, that would have been manslaughter. The camera shows that this is not what happened. The cyclist should not have been on the path to start with, and she should have stopped and allowed the other woman to walk past. The cyclist was in the wrong, it's just a pity that she died as a result of her own lack of manners.

If the pavement is shared and it appears it is (and certainly other cyclists came past while the presenter was presenting then the walking lady was in the wrong and should not have had a go at the cyclist, but should she be in prison I m not so sure She didn’t set out to murder the woman she did show an angry side though, watching the clip it almost looks as if she pushed her but the clip I saw stopped at that moment so hard to judge

Very very sad case for the poor lady killed, the car driver and now the one sent to prison
Seeing as many true murderers go free or have limited sentences then it’s way too harsh and will probably get overturned she ( imprisoned lady) didn’t seem to show any emotion in clips I saw which probably didn’t help I was surprised at how young she is I thought she was a much older lady

Curtaintwitcherif it’s a shared path the cyclist was NOT in the wrong

I live in the town where this incident took place. The police admitted it wasn't designated as a shared space at the time of the incident. It is very deceiving because that area goes from shared cycling to not shared cycling and is confusing.
I agree that the lady was wrong to wave her arms around and scare the cyclist but if she is partially blind that may account for it. Her lack of empathy is appalling in my opinion.
I don't think she should have received a prison sentence.

ronib

Just read that pedestrian is partially blind which might explain why she waved her arms at the cyclist.

She also has cerabal palsey. That would account for her arm waving

Whatever happened, the path was absolutely wide enough at that point for both a cyclist and a pedestrian to be using it at the same time, at almost 8 feet. It was the pedestrian’s behaviour that led to her being jailed. The detective sergeant said
“Everyone will have their own views of cyclists on pavements and cycleways, but what is clear is Grey's response to the presence of Celia on a pedal cycle was totally disproportionate and ultimately found to be unlawful, resulting in Celia's untimely and needless death".
I don’t think we should be doubting the decision of the judge in a case like this, as jailing the perpetrator is not something they would do lightly, so her behaviour (also in front of witnesses) must have been dreadful.

First of all I thought it was illegal to ride a bike on the pavement, if that's not the case, as cars are expected to give priority to cyclists by giving them a very wide berth, I feel they, cyclists, should do the same when on the pavement as a curtesy to pedestrians, or if that's not possible dismount. Whilst I think the death of the cyclist was absolutely awful, given the woman coming towards her was disabled in several ways I can imagine she was alarmed and possibly didn't have the cognitive control that someone would have if they didn't suffer from her disabilities. Once again, the death of the cyclist was awful, but I fail to see what purpose a custodial sentence would serve in this case.

A good decision

A wide enough path. The perpetrator went home, as though nothing had happened. Poor behaviour on her part

The judge heard the evidence and made a judgement based on that. We didn't so can only make up a scenario to form an opinion. There is a right to appeal the sentence so it will be interesting to wait for the outcome of that.

Casdon

Whatever happened, the path was absolutely wide enough at that point for both a cyclist and a pedestrian to be using it at the same time, at almost 8 feet. It was the pedestrian’s behaviour that led to her being jailed. The detective sergeant said
“Everyone will have their own views of cyclists on pavements and cycleways, but what is clear is Grey's response to the presence of Celia on a pedal cycle was totally disproportionate and ultimately found to be unlawful, resulting in Celia's untimely and needless death".
I don’t think we should be doubting the decision of the judge in a case like this, as jailing the perpetrator is not something they would do lightly, so her behaviour (also in front of witnesses) must have been dreadful.

Thanks Casdon. The Judge will have considered all the circumstances in detail. Imprisonment is a last option, particularly an older person of previous good character.

The pedestrian's behaviour was appalling and caused someone's death- but I was surprised about the 3 year prison sentence. There must be some information we don't know.

ronib

2.4m is not wide enough to have a shared path designation. In any event, a cyclist is meant to show consideration
to other path users. I think very sadly the cyclist should not have been on the pavement. The cyclist had other options - stop cycling and dismount? I imagine the cyclist panicked and an error of judgment resulted in her untimely death which was caused initially by being shouted at by the pedestrian. So are pedestrians allowed to shout at cyclists when on a pavement? Clearly not in this case.

I don’t know how the judge thought this through.

So are you saying it's the cyclist's fault??? A 77 year old lady on a designated shared path? And you believe the judge and jury, with all the evidence before them, didn't "think it through"

Wow.

Calipso For the life of me, I disbelieve the evidence that the pavement was legally designated as a shared path. It wasn’t.

Doesn’t mean that the pedestrian was blameless but I don’t think due weight was given to mitigating circumstances. I hope the pedestrian goes to appeal.

What is at fault is the supposition that it is safe for cyclists and pedestrians to share the pavement. I don't know if the cyclist was approaching the pedestrian or came up behind her, but cyclists approach so fast and so quietly that they take pedestrians unawares.
I used to go running with a trainer on a route that included a shared pavement into town, used by mamils out to beat their personal best and used as a race track. Their attitude was: get out of my way now which scared me to the extent that we changed to a longer route to access the recreation grounds, (where the dog walkers let their dogs loose to chase the runners but that is a different story).
Cyclists are not safe in heavy traffic, but they are not safe on pavements either.

I trust the decision, I question the length of sentence. It also depends on the degree of "cognitive impairment", which we are not party too.it could be the defence making much of little. and whether the defendant was ever really in any danger but didn't like the shared path rule and took it upon herself...