Gransnet forums

News & politics

Jailed for manslaughter

(107 Posts)
Jaffacake2 Thu 02-Mar-23 17:24:16

Interested to know other opinions on the case in the news of the woman who has been jailed for 3 years for manslaughter following the death of a cyclist. She has cerebral palsy and was walking along the pavement when a cyclist came towards her. She gestured with her arm and said to " get off the f.... ing pavement " The cyclist swerved and fell into oncoming traffic and sadly died. The pedestrian who also has cognitive issues has been jailed for manslaughter.
On the video it does not appear to be a wide path with a designated cycle section.
I get very frustrated by cyclists on pavements as I have balance problems and reduced hearing. I become nervous and worry that I will be knocked over.
What does everyone think of this tragic case ?

icanhandthemback Sun 05-Mar-23 10:52:18

Shared pavements work perfectly in other countries, say Germany. It is the attitude of cyclists and pedestrians that cause the problems, It seems to me that neither are tolerant of each other.
As to the lady jailed, it does seem disproportionate when you look at other offences but the judge would have looked at the police interviews, pre-sentence reports and listened to all the evidence before making that decision. No doubt the defence would have put up medical reports too. By all accounts, this lady does have anger issues so that and the lack of empathy may have swayed the judge.
Whilst the lack of liberty will be a salutary lesson, I can't help thinking that the loss of her home which has been specially adapted is going to be the most terrible sentence for the defendant. When I think of the terrible crimes committed where the defendants get the same sentence it does seem harsh. However, I don't suppose it is long enough for the victim's family or the lady driving the car.

ronib Sun 05-Mar-23 10:30:21

If anyone on this forum lives in Cambridgeshire, it might be worthwhile asking local counsellors about pavement dual use. I think that Cambridgeshire County Council has shown negligence in assigning a narrow pavement as dual use.
In my area, we have workable dual use routes with firm signs to cyclists to dismount at various intersections. Also with sufficient space for both pedestrians and cyclists.
Some comments online suggest that the pavement in question was not dual use at the time of the accident. Again local knowledge would help.

JaneJudge Sat 04-Mar-23 14:14:19

I've found this re sentencing

How does sentencing take into account an offender’s disabilities?
By Jill Gramann, Magistrate member of the Sentencing Council

When judges and magistrates are faced with offenders who have targeted victims who have disabilities, the law and sentencing guidelines are clear: courts are obliged to treat this as an aggravating factor which will increase the sentence given.

It is sometimes asked, however, how sentencing is influenced when it is the offender who is physically disabled.

Sentences must reflect the seriousness of the offence while taking into account the personal circumstances of the offender. These may affect both the type of sentence imposed and the length of the sentence. In all cases, regardless of disability, there may be circumstances that increase the seriousness of the offending, such as previous convictions. On the other hand, courts may take into account other aspects that could reduce seriousness, such as previous exemplary character.

So should an offender’s disability be taken into account in sentencing? Should it affect the type of sentence that is given? In relation to mental disability or disorder, it may affect what type of sentence is passed – for example, in some cases it may be appropriate for offenders to be given a hospital order so they can be given psychiatric treatment in a secure location. The court would consider medical reports in reaching its decision.

Although there are no specific sentences for those with physical disabilities, the disability will nevertheless be considered in the sentencing process where it is relevant. The court would again consider medical reports and any personal mitigation. Although they do not make explicit mention of physical disability, sentencing guidelines produced by the Sentencing Council include a mitigating factor of “serious medical conditions requiring urgent, intensive or long term treatment”. These considerations may affect both the type and length of sentence, depending on the circumstances.

However, the weight given to the offender’s disability when deciding the sentence would depend on the nature of the offence.
For example, in one Court of Appeal judgment in a robbery case where a disabled offender appealed against his sentence of a substantial jail term, the original sentence was upheld. The judgment stated: “There is no absolute rule that a sentencing judge must reduce a sentence because the offender is disabled” but went on to say that a judge could do this depending on the situation. While the judge in this case took account of the offender’s disability, he concluded that the offender had taken part in a very serious robbery in which the victim was subjected to a brutal attack and that his disability had not stopped him from doing so.

In another Court of Appeal judgment, a sentence of three years’ imprisonment given to an offender for importing Class A drugs was reduced to 18 months because of his exceptional personal mitigation – he suffered from a combination of extremely serious medical conditions.

The judgment stated:
“A court passing sentence should not concern itself with the adequacy of medical arrangements in prisons, unless the mere fact of imprisonment would inevitably expose the prisoner to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to art.3, in other words, arrangements could not be made which would avoid that consequence. However, a sentencing court was fully entitled to take account of a medical condition by way of mitigation as a reason for reducing the length of the sentence, either on the grounds of the greater impact which imprisonment would have on the offender, or as a matter of mercy in the circumstances of the case.”……

“Those who were gravely ill, or severely disabled, might have to be imprisoned if they committed serious offences. Their condition could not be a passport to absence of punishment.”

In essence therefore, judges and magistrates can take physical disability into account in the sentencing process and will do so in appropriate circumstances, but it does not excuse offending behaviour.

Oreo Sat 04-Mar-23 14:11:27

You can read the report on it online, just look it up.
She was accused of shouting and swearing and gesturing in an aggressive manner.

Callistemon21 Sat 04-Mar-23 14:09:35

It's not clear from the video if she pushed her or not, it would seem she could have, looking at it.
However, if the report says she didn't then we must believe that.

A tragic case, a needless death.

And a woman convicted of manslaughter who may not be aware of the impact of her actions.

JaneJudge Sat 04-Mar-23 14:09:01

Oreo, if you watch the full video it does look like she makes contact with the other woman. I haven;t read the report as I don't know how to find it

JaneJudge Sat 04-Mar-23 14:06:42

Callistemon21

JaneJudge

Callistemon, it says in the reports that she is cognitively impaired and the fact she has shown no empathy could be because of this. We don't need to know her medical history or mental capacity but it would explain how/why this happened and why she doesn't comprehend the enormity of what she has caused and cannot express regret. Maybe she required more support when out in the community but that would be a massive judgment for any of us to make without knowing more and about how her conditions presented.

Probably prison isn't going to help, is it.

no but hopefully her sentence can be carried out in specialist provision (which does exist, thankfully) unfortunately people with additional needs that don;t quite reach thresholds for appropriate support are often let down like this. It's difficult because I don;t want to defend what ultimately caused another woman's death but if the offender was known to find certain situation challenging and was known to 'hit out' like this, then support should have been in place in the way of safeguarding to limit this happening. Sometimes that just means guiding someone to take a different route so they don't use shared pathways for example.

Oreo Sat 04-Mar-23 14:06:31

fancythat

Cambridgshire County Council says

"We cannot categorically say it is a shared use path as we could not find any legal records to evidence this. "

That’s what I read too.

Oreo Sat 04-Mar-23 14:04:41

Stormystar

Such a tragedy, my compassion goes to all involved. A fear reaction from the lady partially sighted and cognitively impaired to a lady heading towards her on a bicycle, maybe unaware the pavement is legally shared by bicycles - although this point is unclear from the police and the council if it is. The effect on the lady driver, all adds up to a terribly unfortunate tragic accident, and I see absolutely no purpose in a prison sentence.

This.

Oreo Sat 04-Mar-23 14:03:55

lemsip

she pushed her! she didn't mean to kill her but actions have consequences!

No she did not so just stop it, read the report.

Oreo Sat 04-Mar-23 14:01:49

Callistemon21

^This is a very sad affair for those involved and to my mind an uncomfortable judgment which should be reviewed at appeal. There seems to be some doubt about the pavement being properly designated for both cyclist and pedestrians in terms of its width^

I agree Grantanow, very sad all round.

However, notwithstanding why she did this, the pedestrian must have been aware of the consequences of her actions but just blithely carried on as if nothing had happened.

From the video it appears that she pushed the cyclist.

Leaving the scene was unforgivable.

She did not push or hit the cyclist, simply gestured.It’s in the report.

Oreo Sat 04-Mar-23 13:59:28

TerriBull

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.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Having watched the video clip, the cyclist was very close to the woman on the path.It was not a painted designated cycle path just a pavement.
She shouted and gestured at the cyclist, who having passed her then wobbled into the road.Tragic all round.
She is partially sighted and has other health issues and lives in a unit for people with special needs and has been in sheltered housing for most of her life.
She may not have turned round but continued on her way to the supermarket, or just didn’t know what to do in that situation.
IMHO the judge in this case is an ass.
Cycling on pavements should be a no-no, and only on proper cycle paths, I’ve been nearly run down by one several times.
Makes you think hey? If you shout at a cyclist and they wobble into a road or a river you will be done for manslaughter.
Even if they are the one in the wrong of it.
I expect she will have her appeal upheld, prison is simply the wrong outcome.

Callistemon21 Sat 04-Mar-23 13:50:26

JaneJudge

Callistemon, it says in the reports that she is cognitively impaired and the fact she has shown no empathy could be because of this. We don't need to know her medical history or mental capacity but it would explain how/why this happened and why she doesn't comprehend the enormity of what she has caused and cannot express regret. Maybe she required more support when out in the community but that would be a massive judgment for any of us to make without knowing more and about how her conditions presented.

Probably prison isn't going to help, is it.

pascal30 Sat 04-Mar-23 13:45:59

I agree with the judge in this case. It was a very busy road and the cyclist ex-midwife was 77 and therefore obviously used the pavement to cycle on.. There appears to have been plenty of space on the pavement and the yet the perpetrator walkedin the middle of the it and hit outat her causing her to be killed. and thus creating unknown trauma to the poor young driver. She has shown no remorse apparently

JaneJudge Sat 04-Mar-23 13:04:52

Callistemon, it says in the reports that she is cognitively impaired and the fact she has shown no empathy could be because of this. We don't need to know her medical history or mental capacity but it would explain how/why this happened and why she doesn't comprehend the enormity of what she has caused and cannot express regret. Maybe she required more support when out in the community but that would be a massive judgment for any of us to make without knowing more and about how her conditions presented.

Callistemon21 Sat 04-Mar-23 10:43:29

This is a very sad affair for those involved and to my mind an uncomfortable judgment which should be reviewed at appeal. There seems to be some doubt about the pavement being properly designated for both cyclist and pedestrians in terms of its width

I agree Grantanow, very sad all round.

However, notwithstanding why she did this, the pedestrian must have been aware of the consequences of her actions but just blithely carried on as if nothing had happened.

From the video it appears that she pushed the cyclist.

Leaving the scene was unforgivable.

Grantanow Sat 04-Mar-23 10:36:20

This is a very sad affair for those involved and to my mind an uncomfortable judgment which should be reviewed at appeal. There seems to be some doubt about the pavement being properly designated for both cyclist and pedestrians in terms of its width.

I am not supportive of shared pavements having been shouted at with obscenities by cyclists in London some of whom seem to think the rules - red traffic lights, zebra crossing priority - don't apply to them. I think cyclists should be clearly identifiable for enforcement purposes.

ronib Fri 03-Mar-23 14:52:44

Fleurpepper

2.4 metres is about 8'- you'd have to be a ginormous to feel there was no space for both.

It’s possible to suffer from spatial awareness problems and so I hope an expert was asked to assess the defendant. In addition to partial sight, I think it’s clear that walking on a pavement was problematic for the defendant.

I knew a person from a farm who had problems negotiating space on London pavements. It does happen.

Stormystar Fri 03-Mar-23 14:50:50

Such a tragedy, my compassion goes to all involved. A fear reaction from the lady partially sighted and cognitively impaired to a lady heading towards her on a bicycle, maybe unaware the pavement is legally shared by bicycles - although this point is unclear from the police and the council if it is. The effect on the lady driver, all adds up to a terribly unfortunate tragic accident, and I see absolutely no purpose in a prison sentence.

lemsip Fri 03-Mar-23 12:36:54

she pushed her! she didn't mean to kill her but actions have consequences!

JaneJudge Fri 03-Mar-23 12:33:27

crazyH

Watch the last 2 seconds of the video, that’s all I’m saying ….

I apologise for saying she doesn't touch her as it looks like she does on the full video.

Fleurpepper Fri 03-Mar-23 12:27:53

2.4 metres is about 8'- you'd have to be a ginormous to feel there was no space for both.

JaneJudge Fri 03-Mar-23 12:07:20

I have watched the video and the incident was quick and the pedestrian didn't touch the cyclist who appears to to try to stop but just veers into the road. It must be bloody awful for her family that the video is being shown at all, let alone in all the online newspapers. I hope they find closure from the sentencing.

Wrt the pedestrians cognitive impairment, it could explain the lack of empathy and remorse. I hope she will be suitably housed somewhere that will meet her needs as she will be vulnerable in prison.

crazyH Fri 03-Mar-23 11:30:56

Watch the last 2 seconds of the video, that’s all I’m saying ….

Germanshepherdsmum Fri 03-Mar-23 11:25:57

If a court has decided it’s manslaughter that’s good enough for me.