A tragic case or a deserved sentence?

Was a prison sentence justified in this case?

  • Yes

    Votes: 43 58.9%

  • No

    Votes: 30 41.1%
  • Total voters
    73
Laughing said:
I don't think it shows it clearly at all. I think it suggests it, but you don't see any contact in that clip. Certainly not to the standard required for a guilty verdict.

This is why I asked if you read the court transcript. I have no idea if there was corroborating evidence from an eyewitness or not.
Click to expand...

You might want to read that BBC report where the woman herself admits she made contact with her.
 
sherlock1969 said:
She definitely pushed the cyclist:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1631291726538104833

Should have been a murder charge and she should be serving life. Three years is pathetic.
Click to expand...
There is definitely no proof that she did - it looks like she may have but the video is inconclusive. The other really important factor is that the defendant is visually impaired. She is therefore going to wave her arms at somebody coming towards her on a bike - her perception of danger is going to be heightened due to her vision difficulties.

The threshold for murder is much higher than what has happened in this case.
 
Redka said:
There is definitely no proof that she did - it looks like she may have but the video is inconclusive. The other really important factor is that the defendant is visually impaired. She is therefore going to wave her arms at somebody coming towards her on a bike - her perception of danger is going to be heightened due to her vision difficulties.

The threshold for murder is much higher than what has happened in this case.
Click to expand...
A lot of assumptions there regarding her visual impairment. It was a very slow 77 year old woman coming towards her. Her vision impairment did not cause her to swear at the cyclist and aggressively gesticulate.

Maybe she is just not a very nice person? Her subsequent actions tell us all we need to know about this individual. No remorse until she learnt prison was on the cards.
 
TeaCider said:
No, she doesn't.

She said she put her arm out, which she did.

That's not saying she made contact.

If she'd physically pushed her on to the road, it would be a cut and dry case.
Click to expand...

“ She said she "may have unintentionally put" out her hand to protect herself. Ms Grey believed she had made light contact with Mrs Ward.”
 
A very unsavoury incident in which an innocent person has lost their life, I don't believe it was the intention of the aggressor to cause loss of life or signifant harm. This additional information below was in the Telegraph report of the incident, it would seem the aggressor has some form of additional needs which may further explain her reaction during and after the incident.

In a probation officer's report read in court today it stated that Ms Grey has "difficulty expressing emotions of any sort overtly, but does write them down".

Grey, of Bradbury Place, Huntingdon, Cambs, has cerebral palsy, partial blindness and cognitive and mobility issues.

Her barrister said Grey has been described as "childlike" and it was the probation officer's opinion that Ms Grey "does not pose an ongoing risk to the community".
 
Last edited:
sherlock1969 said:
“ She said she "may have unintentionally put" out her hand to protect herself. Ms Grey believed she had made light contact with Mrs Ward.”
Click to expand...

Ah, so she did, that's my mistake, I'd somehow missed that part in the article.
I'll delete my comment.

That's completely changed my opinion on the situation, to be honest.
I can understand why they've given 3 years if she's physically pushed her, whether she intentionally knocked her off the path or not.

Totally different scenario to just shouting and gesturing.
 
Ingleby_Flash said:
AET, off topic completely but you‘re another I’ve had on ignore without realising it. Apologies. I don’t interact with you much, but was getting concerned I hadn’t seen you around so looked you up and, god knows how, was ignoring you. I wonder who else I’m ignoring in ignorance 😳
Click to expand...
You’re not missing much, don’t worry.

I mean take it from someone who drives round that ring road at least twice a week, she deserves doubles the sentence.

Ill informed comments indeed.
 
sherlock1969 said:
You might want to read that BBC report where the woman herself admits she made contact with her.
Click to expand...
Made contact isn't pushing. I understand you think she should be locked up and for longer, but she was never, s far as I am aware accused of pushing the old lady.
 
Aet290204 said:
You’re not missing much, don’t worry.

I mean take it from someone who drives round that ring road at least twice a week, she deserves doubles the sentence.

Ill informed comments indeed.
Click to expand...
Why are they ill informed - you live near the place it hardly makes you the authority on the legalities of the case.
 
Laughing said:
Made contact isn't pushing. I understand you think she should be locked up and for longer, but she was never, s far as I am aware accused of pushing the old lady.
Click to expand...

Look how suddenly the cyclist’s direction changed. Whether an intentional push or not, the contact made pushed her into the road and led to her death.

The manslaughter conviction proves she killed her, we’re just talking about intent really. I’m not sure she meant to kill her, probably not, but she deserves longer than 3 years for going off to do her shopping while someone she killed lay dead in the road.
 
Redka said:
Why are they ill informed - you live near the place it hardly makes you the authority on the legalities of the case.
Click to expand...

Probably means he knows it’s a shared pedestrian/cyclist route though. Which is where much of the defence of the killer comes from eg she shouldn’t have been cycling on the pavement.
 
Lots to think about here.

I would suggest that if there wasn't CCTV the pedestrian would have got away with it.

The pedestrian has gone out of her way, in a threatening manner, to obstruct the cyclist and possibly make her move on to the very busy road. That is unnecessary. There was plenty of room to pass on the SHARED path. She has caused the death of the cyclist.

Should the cyclist have slowed and/or dismounted? Well she was an old woman so I doubt that she was going any faster than 5-10mph at best, so no, there would have been room without the pedestrian blocking her way.

Is the sentence harsh? No. I think she has been lucky being out in 18 months for causing the death of someone.

What this highlights as well is the utter inadequacy of cycling infrastructure. It is an utter joke in the UK, London aside.

A tragic incident? For the cyclist and her family yes. I think the pedestrian could have and should have got longer in prison. She showed no remorse and what is to stop her doing it again?
 
sherlock1969 said:
Look how suddenly the cyclist’s direction changed. Whether an intentional push or not, the contact made pushed her into the road and led to her death.

The manslaughter conviction proves she killed her, we’re just talking about intent really. I’m not sure she meant to kill her, probably not, but she deserves longer than 3 years for going off to do her shopping while someone she killed lay dead in the road.
Click to expand...
The manslaughter conviction proves she killed her, as a point of law only. Intent, for a manslaughter charge is neither here nor there. The law for manslaughter says

when a death is caused by the defendant’s recklessness, gross negligence or by an unlawful and/or dangerous act

There doesn't need to be intent. The question for the jury to decide was whether the womans actions could, by a reasonable person, be likely to cause death.

What the woman did after should have had no bearing on the jury's decision making process. It probably did, you would think.

On the point of law, ched evans was a guilty rapist, until he wasn't.
 
Aet290204 said:
Swore blind I wouldn’t post on here anymore but fk it.

This is near where I live, I know the road.

It was a tiny pavement along an extremely busy ring road with a constant flow of traffic.

She should have got more than 3 yrs if you ask me. But then I’m just a bigot who preaches, aren’t I? No doubt someone will come along and say I’ve got it in for people with cerebral palsy. Since you love arguing the toss.

Goodnight from Huntingdon. Xx
Click to expand...
I'm a bit confused. If it is a tiny pavement is that not a bit of mitigation? How does that make it worse?
 
Laughing said:
The manslaughter conviction proves she killed her, as a point of law only. Intent, for a manslaughter charge is neither here nor there. The law for manslaughter says

when a death is caused by the defendant’s recklessness, gross negligence or by an unlawful and/or dangerous act

There doesn't need to be intent. The question for the jury to decide was whether the womans actions could, by a reasonable person, be likely to cause death.

What the woman did after should have had no bearing on the jury's decision making process. It probably did, you would think.

On the point of law, ched evans was a guilty rapist, until he wasn't.
Click to expand...
That’s it there really isn’t it. She was reckless to move towards a cyclist, shouting and making contact right next to such a busy road.

It’s reasonable to suggest that those actions caused the cyclist to swerve, move, fall into the road which caused her death.

Tragic, unnecessary, possible shocking for people to find out that unreasonable behaviour can lead to 3 years in prison. Most people on here have probably shouted at a motorist or pedestrian in some way for causing a perceived threat to their safety.
 
Yep, looking at that footage, and the background of the case, I think a murder charge would be incredibly unlikely to stick in those circumstances. Intention to kill would be fairly easy to argue against and I think you'd struggle to argue she intended to cause GBH.

Charge is therefore likely correct, the sentence, as ever in cases like this, is fairly subjective (albeit I haven't read the verdict). Traffic and pedestrian incidents historically result in fairly small sentences though, so if previous sentences are a factor here (they're likely to be), that's probably where this sentence emanated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top