Ped gets 3 years for manslaughter of cyclist hit by car…

[Getragdogleg]

The Pedestrian is 49 ? WTF ?

I thought she and the cyclist were similar ages.

[Muzzer79]

Getragdogleg said:

The Pedestrian is 49 ? WTF ?

I thought she and the cyclist were similar ages.

Yeah, I thought she'd definitely had a difficult 'paper round too.......

[Gareth79]

Vixpy1 said:

'Although it is illegal to cycle on the pavement, the court was told police could not "categorically" state whether the street was a shared cycleway.'

Thats just odd

I think they were probably referring to unclear signage which meant they would have been unable to prosecute for cycling on the pavement in that location, which might have explained that somebody of 77 may genuinely believed it was legal to cycle there. According to people who live/cycle/drive there it's a bit of a nightmare road in general, you wouldn't want to cycle along the road at age 77, and the paths switch sides.

Getragdogleg said:

The Pedestrian is 49 ? WTF ?

I thought she and the cyclist were similar ages.

I thought the same, apparently cerebral palsy can cause premature ageing, and there's probably other linked lifestyle factors too.

[CT05 Nose Cone]

Can't imagine what it must be like for the driver, knowing that even though it wasn't your fault, you still killed someone.

[spikyone]

Gareth79 said:

Vixpy1 said:

'Although it is illegal to cycle on the pavement, the court was told police could not "categorically" state whether the street was a shared cycleway.'

Thats just odd

I think they were probably referring to unclear signage which meant they would have been unable to prosecute for cycling on the pavement in that location, which might have explained that somebody of 77 may genuinely believed it was legal to cycle there. According to people who live/cycle/drive there it's a bit of a nightmare road in general, you wouldn't want to cycle along the road at age 77, and the paths switch sides.

The victim was a 77 year old woman on a shopping bike. She may well have not been confident cycling in the road. Had this been some "lycra lout" (copyright - Daily Mail) barrelling along at warp speed, or a kid on a BMX acting like a tt, I might have some sympathy for the view that it wasn't a bike path (and given the width, it appears that it isn't). Whether or not it was a designated bike path in this case shouldn't even come into the discussion.

That's not to advocate for the law to be changed or ignored; simply that "is it acceptable to cycle on a footpath?" is not always black and white. Was it reasonable for the cyclist to be there? On balance, yes. Was it reasonable for the pedestrian to behave as she did? Probably not.

I completely understand the point of view that a jail term feels harsh if there was no contact or push. If there was contact then she deserves every minute of it.

[Lotobear]

The waddling woman could have easily moved across to the railing side but instead dominated the middle of the pavement like a PBCD.

...deserves absolutely everything she got IMO

[sugerbear]

She was pushed, you can see that from the video, her body movements indicate that, you just can't see that on the video.

It doesn't matter if the cyclist was on the pavement. If you push someone into the path on an oncoming car then that will, quite rightly, have consequences.

[anonymous-user]

BikeBikeBIke said:

Am I alone in thinking I can see a very distinct push which exactly coincides with the fall?

I can clearly see it. I have watched it several times. The body of the accused turns/jerks towards the cyclist, and at that exact moment the cyclists jerks towards the road and falls.

She clearly pushed her and caused her to fall into the road.

When I first read about this, I thought it was really harsh against the accused. However now I have watched the video a few times, there is no doubt in my mind that she pushed her over onto the road, and that resulted in her death.

The conviction and sentence seems entirely appropriate, if not slightly lenient IMO.

[usn90]

I’m sorry, It’s not in my nature to be on the cyclists side, but what are some of you even smoking as I’d like some.

The accused clearly makes a pushing action, at the very same time the cyclist loses control and falls in the direction the force of the push would have sent her, I’d bet a good proportion of young/middle aged cyclists would
Struggle to remain in control let alone a 77 year old lady

The cyclist shouldn’t have been on the path no, but then again getting killed over it is extreme

Sentence well placed, but then again if that was my mum I’d be pushing the cow off a bridge

Edited by usn90 on Thursday 2nd March 12:47

Edited by usn90 on Thursday 2nd March 12:48

[BikeBikeBIke]

CT05 Nose Cone said:

Can't imagine what it must be like for the driver, knowing that even though it wasn't your fault, you still killed someone.

Indeed. The article described how it's utterly ruined her life.

[Patrick Bateman]

This is the reason I try and keep a bias away from the pavement when I see a cyclist/similar going along. Passed a teenager the other day who was nipping along 'no hands'.

fk having this weighing on your soul even though you've done nothing wrong.

[anonymous-user]

usn90 said:

I’m sorry, It’s not in my nature to be on the cyclists side, but what are some of you even smoking as I’d like some.

The accused clearly makes a pushing action, at the very same time the cyclist loses control and falls in the direction the force of the push would have sent her, I’d bet a good proportion of young/middle aged cyclists would
Struggle to remain in control let alone a 77 year old lady

The cyclist shouldn’t have been on the path no, but then again getting killed over it is extreme

Sentence well placed, but then again if that was my mum I’d be pushing the cow off a bridge

Indeed.

If you full screen the video and watch carefully, you can even see the elbow of the accused move in the pushing motion towards the cyclist, as her body twists, at that exactly moment.

Absolutely pushed her. If you can't see that, then I have no idea what to say.

[yellowjack]

HTP99 said:

poo at Paul's said:

mondeoman said:

Looks like she actually pushed the cyclist into the road...

Angry bitter old woman does angry bitter old woman stuff and kills someone.

There was a slow mo close up of them passing earlier on the suns site, and it doesn’t look like any contact and certainly not any with any ‘force’.

The statement about her reaction being disproportionate is unusual, who’s to say how she should react. To be fair, as a 49 year old, she seems to be in not the best shape and not walking well. I’d say any cyclist there has a duty to steer well clear, give way to her, stop if necessary etc.

So I guess there must be more to it that we don’t know. Maybe some history?

The offender has cerebral palsy and is partially sighted, so one would assume she is probably not particularly the most confident when out and about and on edge a bit.

I'm registered disabled (deaf). Anyone who is naive enough to think that disabled people are all sweetness and light is sadly mistaken. I had a pass to get onto disabled access platforms at the Reading Festival a few years in a row. There was BSL signing available for deaf and hard of hearing patrons up there. It opened my eyes, I can tell you. You'd think that there'd be some solidarity among the disabled but some of them/us have the sharpest elbows you can imagine, are inconsiderate to their very core, and behave to each other and the non-disabled in the most vile fashion. Most are easy to get along with, but just as in the able bodied population there is a small percentage of utterly horrible people. It was bad enough at Reading that I stopped using the platform pass to get away from the militant deaf mafia and inconsiderate folk in electric wheelchairs who'd milk their confinement to their chair to get to the front of the platform then push a button which raised the seat to make them the equivalent of about 9 feet tall, thereby punishing anyone behind them for their kindness. Surely any considerate person with an elevating wheelchair would stay at the rear of the platform where they could see over the heads of others not so equipped?

Relevance to the case being discussed? I suppose just to point out that the guilty party here may well have just been a horrible, angry person whether or not she had cerebral palsy and limited sight. I mean, would my deafness be a 'reasonable excuse' for me to get angry and punch a person in the face just because they "snuck up on me" and appeared at my shoulder? I'd certainly hope not.

As for comments about whether or not the old lady ought to have been riding "on the pavement"? Well it's about time something was done about incomplete cycling networks in that case. There are far too many areas where it is clear from signage that cyclists can legally share what used to be a footway with pedestrians, but that legal status becomes unclear when a corner is turned or that footway narrows. I can think of three places local to me where signs proclaim that a path/pavement/footway is also, legally, a shared use cycle path, yet all three have sections which are incredibly narrow. They ought to not be labelled as legal to cycle on, in my opinion. Yet, if you dare to ride on the road to avoid conflict with pedestrians on them, car/van/truck drivers will leave you in no doubt that they feel strongly that you should "get on the fking cyclepath you ct". Damned if you do, damned if you don't. And don't pull that "she should have slowed or stopped to allow the pedestrian to pass" nonsense, unless of course you're one of them unicorn drivers who'd stop and wait for a cyclist in the carriageway. At the end of it all, if the Police couldn't be sure that it wasn't a cycle path/lane, then how the hell was a 77 year old cyclist meant to be sure of the status of the pavement? Hmmm?

[Ian Geary]

One thing strikes me - how many cameras there are around these days. 10 years ago this would have been the driver in the dock, case closed.


It's a bit Swiss cheese model for me:

- cyclist seems unable to control her bike (I can't see anything that confirms a push, and the police would have definitely drawn this to the judge's attention were it confirmable)
- road is narrow, and car unable to avoid in wrong place at wrong time
- pedestrian taking up the pavement and unwilling to cede any space to her

The safest place for the cyclist is on the road - holding her position in traffic and forcing cars to wait for a space before overtaking.

I think cyclists refer to it as "taking the lane"

The second safest would have been to pull to the side of the path and wait for ped to pass. That's would be what I'd have done if I was riding with my kids.

I can't believe the police couldn't ascertain (in conjunction with the council) whether it was a shared footway or not? It would be a conscious decision to make one. Looks too narrow though.

Finally, it brings to the fore what actions someone takes to make them guilty of manslaughter.

Sad all round really.

[Muzzer79]

Watching the video again, it does seem to indicate a push right at the end.

However, this isn't referred to in the case. Indeed the article states:

Article said:

Grey could be seen raising her hand as Celia cycled towards her on the pavement.

The retired midwife then loses her balance and staggers into the road in the path of an oncoming VW Passat.

Seems like the verdict is she pushed her, without actually saying she pushed her.

Lack of remorse clearly doesn't help the defendant.

If she did push her, she deserves everything she gets.

[Electro1980]

spikyone said:

I might have some sympathy for the view that it wasn't a bike path (and given the width, it appears that it isn't).

Width means bugger all. There is quite detailed guidelines on what size cycle paths and shared spaces should be but councils take absolutely no notice of that. I know of a few cycle lanes that are narrower than my bikes handlebars. Take this utter mess for a start:

[JQ]

Lord Marylebone said:

BikeBikeBIke said:

Am I alone in thinking I can see a very distinct push which exactly coincides with the fall?

I can clearly see it. I have watched it several times. The body of the accused turns/jerks towards the cyclist, and at that exact moment the cyclists jerks towards the road and falls.

She clearly pushed her and caused her to fall into the road.

When I first read about this, I thought it was really harsh against the accused. However now I have watched the video a few times, there is no doubt in my mind that she pushed her over onto the road, and that resulted in her death.

The conviction and sentence seems entirely appropriate, if not slightly lenient IMO.

Based on the slow-mo video on the DM website on a big screen I'm 100% certain she pushed her. You can clearly see her step towards the cyclist then her elbow pop back after the push. All compounded by the fact she then walked off leaving a human being dying in the road, probably didn't think she'd ever be caught in all the commotion.

Deserves everything she's got.

[J4CKO]

Suspect this is in part down to all the anti cyclist rhetoric, the disabled woman was full of righteous indignation having been building up a froth like so many do, looks to me she decided that an elderly lady on a shopping bike was a valid target given her limited physical ability.

I imagine if it was 220 pounds of me and not 120 pounds of old lady, she may have left me alone and muttered something, not that I would have been on the pavement.

What Yellowjack says is correct, not all disabled folk are pleasant, I have a mate with CP and he is a star, never hides behind his disability, wife has a freind who has a non specific disability who always rattles on about it and has a real sense of entitlement.

Think a custodial sentence was right, she caused that ladies death, she wasnt really a threat to anyone toddling along on her Raleigh Twenty.

Annoys me being told as a cyclist we all are s who ride on the pavement, we dont all ride on the pavement, I told a kid off the other day on an illegal EBike doing about twenty on the pavement a couple of months back, just because you ride a bike doesnt mean you condone the actions of every other person who rides a bike.

[neilr]

She got the sentence she deserved. Its quite worrying that there are some on here trying to make excuses for either her or the sentence given.

Forget whether she is a pedestrian and the deceased is a cyclist. Person A pushed person B into the road resulting in person b dying. Anyone pushing someone into the road knows this might happen. Throw the key away, they are a cancer on society.

[Steve vRS]

neilr said:

She got the sentence she deserved. Its quite worrying that there are some on here trying to make excuses for either her or the sentence given.

Forget whether she is a pedestrian and the deceased is a cyclist. Person A pushed person B into the road resulting in person b dying. Anyone pushing someone into the road knows this might happen. Throw the key away, they are a cancer on society.

Quite right. I spotted the headline for this case in the Torygraph yesterday. It was very biased against the cyclist to whip up the usual anti-bike frothers.