Whats is this Woman Guilty of

How is that what the Judge described as a Shared pavement ?

She Should not have sworn , but the Cyclist should not have been on the Pavement and aged 77 What is she doing on a Pushbike anyway

I think it is a multi use pathway, she was entitled to cycle.

Looks to be Just enough room to Walk Saddo ,Never the less she has not hit the cyclist ,I have never heard of a shared pathway tbh , I would not have known

Will be further incidents if that is the case

Case

The answer to your question is in the article you posted.

She was convicted of manslaughter .


3 years, out in 18 months for manslaughter.


Following on by answering silly questions….
What is she doing on a Pushbike anyway…

Errrrr. Cycling???

That section of Path does not have any markings to suggest anyone should be Cycling on it .The Council should be in court 

As for 77 year old's riding push bikes ,What could possibly go wrong ? 

Some other rsole actually comes flying by on a push bike while they are Filming

Swearing at the lady and leaving the Scene before an Ambulance turned the Actions of a nutter tbh , But Manslaughter ?

If your mother was 77 Mexico would you be happy with her cycling on 2 foot Strip on the edge of a pavement next to a busy ring Road ?

I find it astonishing that they got a conviction of manslaughter against this lady. Even allowing for that its hardly in the public interest to jail her. Total waste of money.

Exactly Dotchinite.

Where does it say you have to get out of the way for a cyclist who's riding on the footpath?
Where does it say that it was a shared cycle/footpath.

''A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesperson said: "We cannot categorically say it is a shared use path as we could not find any legal records to evidence this.''

So does this apply to any footpath? Does that make cycling on any side walk a legal matter to be decided on the whim of a judge?   

Once again the law is an ass.
Riding on the side-walk has always been illegal.
So is riding on the side walk yet another crime that's become legal do to lack of enforcement by the police?

Case

WTF has my mother got to do with the jury who answered your original question.

It is far safer a 77 year old cycling n a pavement/ shared space than a road.
Obviously nobody expects a criminal who is 30 years younger to cause their death.

Doubt this 77 year old woman was speeding along, it isn’t clear she did anything wrong , she may have been allowed on the path & if not then it isn’t a capital offence.

Perhaps read the article before asking questions which have already been answered.

Dot

What has the judge done wrong!
She has been found guilty of manslaughter , 3 years, out in 18 months for being responsible for a death through her criminal actions.

Hardly threw the book at her.

Shared use paths should be clearly signed as such, sounds a bit of a mess all round.

I think it is harsh,she seemed to think the cyclist shouldn't be on the footpath and made that known. She hadn't intention of causing harm.

It is a very sad case.

Hard to argue that the streets aren't safer now she's off the streets - clearly a bit of a menace and should have probably been in a home

I mean the perpetrator of course

her gesture towards the cyclist was deemed to have forced
the cyclist to swerve and as a result she fell onto the
road and was hit by the car.
The woman then left the scene despite the incident and went
shopping. That was callous in the extreme.
I lost sympathy for her at that Case.

Mexico I asked you a Simple Question ,Should a 77 year old be riding on a two foot strip next to a Ring Road  , Would you  advice this activity to Elderly members of your family  ?

YES
OR
NO

The Woman told her to get off the Pavement there are no Markings to suggest there is a cycle Lane on the Pavement

And TBH I think the woman is correct in telling her to get off the pavement , No need for swearing , She has been given 3 years for Searing IMO

Council have caused the incident to Occur

London is at a standstill Due to pandering to Cyclists  , most of whom have no regard for Pedestrians or Car drivers  , Same in many cities in the UK

That bit of pavement should not be shared ..  And is not clearly marked as shared , The woman has poor sight and disability , and Most likely  mental issues

considering her actions of leaving the scene ..

Hard to argue that the streets aren't safer now she's off the streets

Pmsfl .Woman Shouts at cyclist to get off Payment AT all for imprisonment

Axemen and Gunmen on the streets , Never a word on such threads

I would take a guess that this woman's beahviour is well know to the authorities. It's one thing to politely ask someone not to cycle on the pavement - quite another to shout and swear waving your arms about forcing the cyclist into the road.

The pavement should be clearly marked and TBH looking at the other side of the Road there is a railing up  ,Sadly no railing on the Side where the poor Lady has died

It looks a dangerous area to me to have cyclists and pedestrians using the same path , That pavement does not look like it is 2.5 meters wide where the incident happened

Case

You have asked a lot of stupid questions. I’ve answered many

The criminal was found guilty.

The woman had every right to be cycling, it isn’t clear she did anything wrong. So of course she should cycle if she wants to.



The criminal is lucky to only be in jail for 18 months, can’t help thinking a similar aged male would be inside for longer.

So read the article and stop posting silly questions such as..
Would you advise members of your family to kill elderly cyclists?
YES
NO

Cyclists:  Pay no road tax, are uninsured and have legal precedence on the roads and pavements.
Orwell would simply never believe us if were we to go back in time and tell him.

Loyal

Many cyclists do pay road tax.

Clearly not relevant but thanks for posting your views.


18 months in jail for manslaughter ? Not exactly a life sentence is it.
She saw the crash & walked off to get shopping.

How do they pay Road Tax  ? They don't  , and in most cases billions is spent on Cycle lanes ETC  ,They can't Drive their cars in Cycle lanes so paying car tax does not cover that ?

They should be insured  as well  and have a Reg plate that is Visible , they pay little attention to traffic lights for starters

Dont know what its like in other parts of this country but by me in glorious South Wales bikes and scooters rule the roads. U often see them going through red lights....no lights on in the dark and the fuzz just ignore them....its shambolic and I have total sympathy for this poor women jailed for using a pavement as a pavement and walking on it.  Just cause she told the cyclist to get off the pavement is not an offence....would YOU put ur hand in a fire if I told YOU to??????

Case

Many cyclists do pay road tax.

You seem to live in an alternative universe where an individual either owns a car or owns a cycle.

It is irrelevant, people who drive electric cars don’t pay road tax. Cyclists on average will pay an infinite times more road tax than zero.


Road tax isn’t even ring fenced, the criminal is responsible for an elderly person’s death. 18 months in jail for manslaughter.

elderly person  .Lost control of Cycle hit by Car  ,because someone shouted at her IMO  ,Shouting at people is now Manslaughter ?

Dancing

If only this woman had a trial where a group of people could listen & watch the evidence then decide if this woman did anything wrong.

She picked on a 77 year old & the jury decided was responsible for her death.

18 months inside for that. FFS very much doubt a male would escape with that sentence for manslaughter.

Case

The court actually bothered to listen to the evidence, you haven’t.

Yet you seem to think you have a better understanding of what happened than those who examined the evidence.
How arrogant is that?

Since when was Shouting get off the effing pavement a Criminal offence please ?

When did it become legal to cycle on the pavement? Is it in the highway code?
The pavement looks about 7 ft wide there and surely the cyclist should dismount and give way to the pedestrian. From the video it looks as if the pedestrian made it more difficult than necessary for the cyclist to pass so perhaps that's why the judge considered that she contributed to the cyclist's death.
I'm the same age as the cyclist and I would consider it madness to get on one of those death traps at my age, particularly in an urban area with heavy traffic.

That the conflict has even happened is down to the Council  , that Pavement is unmarked and not safe for Cyclists and Pedestrians to share IMVHO

A group of people could listen & watch

How do we know that they were not 12 woke Pro Cycling types ?

I have looked at Twitter and even this Thread , there is a fair precentage of people who think the outcome is not right

Yet we get a Mob of 12 who find her Guilty ,Very strange imo

Were the 12 Jurors wearing Lycra ?

I've served on a jury and noticed how much depends on the summing up by the judge.

The Judge said was Shared , Yet no one else can say for Certain , Surely a Mistrial ?

Case

Do you finally understand that many cyclists pay road tax?

Do you actually understand that manslaughter is a crime?


18 months inside for manslaughter . Very very lucky to get away with that.


Glad you posted the results of the Twitter kangaroo court. We can file that information where it belongs.

Mex

Would you put ur hand in a fire if I shouted and swore at you to do it?????  Honest answer please

It's the same if you accidentally kill a burglar in your home, it doesn't seem to matter if the deceased was breaking the law at the time.

Mexico. You say she is lucky to get away with 18 months but it seems she is rather more unlucky to have been convicted in the first place. How jailing this woman at all is in the public interest is beyond me. She certainly isnt a criminal by normal peoples definitions.

Cyclists are a protected species Dotch, they can do no wrong. Goes with the green agenda.

Dance

Another stupid pointless question.

WTF has you, me & a fire got to do with this criminal getting away with only 18 months in jail for being responsible of a 77 year old death.
The criminal walked away as her victim was dying.
What a callous *****. 18 months ffs.

It's the same if you accidentally kill a burglar in your home, it doesn't seem to matter if the deceased was breaking the law at the time.

which cases are you thinking of?

Dot


It sounds in the public interest to me.

She was found guilty of manslaughter. She is responsible for the death of a 77 year old.

Very much doubt a male would escape with such a light sentence.

Imagine what the lads would be saying if it was a ethnic minority person. We'd be getting calls to bring back hanging

Nothing to do with Kangaroo Courts people voicing Opinions  ,Same as here

Just as well its was not an Ethnic minority person on the Push Bike , Would mass media coverage for a week and probable riots

Cant answer the question Mex......thought so. Adios.

Gotta take my lad to footy training

Dancing

I did answer your stupid question.
I answered by pointing out what a stupid irrelevant question it was.

It has nothing to do with the jury finding this criminal guilty & nothing to do with the judge letting her off with a slap on the wrist.

18 months ffs. She is responsible for the death of a 77 year old because of her criminal actions.

This criminal is also partially blind has cerebral palsy and cognitive issues. She also lives in sheltered housing.  That may be the sort of criminal you like to see jailed but I dont.

Dot

It is up to the prison authorities to decide if this criminal should be in prison or secure hospital.

She is guilty of manslaughter. She walked away as her victim lay on the floor dying to get some shopping. The court decided that her condition wasn’t an excuse for her crime.

She is a bully who picked on a 77 years old woman, I doubt the outcome would have been the same if she went after a 20 year old man.

Tony Martin is the infamous one A_T. There were several others but the one I remember was the Townsend one in Liverpool which was definitely OTT and he was lucky not to be serving a murder charge. Another killed a burglar and had to abandon his home because of death threats, can't remember the name offhand.

Tony Martin is the infamous one A_T

Martin didn't kill someone accidentally - he shot him in the back. And it wasn't his home it was just a derelict house that he owned.

hadn't heard of the Townsend one but looked it up. Karl Townsend stabbed a man to death who was trying to steal his drugs - hardly accidental.

This shared pavement thing seems like bollocks, def will be appealed based on judge's misdirection.

Dave

Even it it wasn’t a shared pavement, does that mean it is OK at shout, abuse, threaten a 77 year old woman.

Her death was a direct result of this behaviour.
Would she have acted the same way if a 20 year old male was on the path.

As it turns out it isn’t clear the criminal had the right of way anyway. Could have been shared.


18 months inside for manslaughter seems very soft.

Lol

Tony Martin & accidentally killing somebody.

That was years ago & not an accident.

I'm not going to argue the ins and outs of those cases A_T I know you are only allowed to use minimal force or you end up in court. How on earth do you judge what is the minimal force when confronted by a criminal? You don't have time to be picky. Anyway, this is a digression from pavement cycling.

would it have been OK for the perp to have physically pushed the cyclist into the road? after all bikes shouldn't be ridden on the pavement

What do you think?
Would it be OK for a cyclist to run into a pedestrian who didn't jump out of the way?

The answers to both questions are of course no and no and illustrate what was well understood for past decades, that cyclists and pedestrians should not share the same space on the pavements. That also goes for motorised vehicles such as electric scooters.
The real problem is that this is no longer enforced and so situations like this will arise.

Looking at the video there is no evidence that the cyclist 'obeyed' the shouty woman and rode purposely into the road.

Seems she tried to ride outside of her at the edge of the pavement but the bike caught the kerb and she lost control.

To give the cyclist enough room to safely pass without touching the kerb, the pedestrian would have needed to move out of the way pretty sharpish. That's what I would have done but I'm not sure it's a legal requirement.

It would appear that there was enough room for the cyclist to pass on the inside so hard to see why they didn't do that. Perhaps going to fast to move across in time?

And of course the idea that is obviously a 'shared pavement' is ridiculous.

There is no room for pedestrians and cyclists to share it unless they are constantly weaving and dodging each other.

Ms Grey was arrested the following day and jurors were shown a recording of her police interviews.

She told police the path was wide enough for "maybe just two people shoulder-to-shoulder".

Ms Grey, who has cerebral palsy, told officers she was partially sighted and it was "difficult" for her to "explain" distances.

She described the pedal cycle as travelling "fast" in the centre of the pavement, stating she was "anxious that I was going to get hit by it".

She said she "may have unintentionally put" out her hand to protect herself. Ms Grey believed she had made light contact with Mrs Ward.

I don't know if by light contact  has made any difference with the judgment?

Why wasn’t the motorist prosecuted?

''The Highway Code Rule 163 says to give cyclists, motorcyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would give overtaking a car.''

Where does it say, except when the cyclist is riding on the pavement?

Two people were breaking the law, the cyclist and the motorist.
The pedestrian who wasn't breaking the law gets sent to jail.

The law is an ass. And so are the people that administer it.

Prosecutor Simon Spence KC said Grey shouted at Mrs Ward and "gestured in a hostile and aggressive way towards" her, causing her to fall off the bike and into the road where she was hit by an oncoming car.

Jurors heard the vehicle had "no chance to stop or take avoiding action" and Mrs Ward died at the scene.

Don't think the driver had any chance of stopping or missing the cyclist.

It didn't seem too aggressive to me,kind of more adhd though that wasn't mentioned,still coming back to was it a cycle path or not.

''The Highway Code Rule 163 says to give cyclists, motorcyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would give overtaking a car.''

Where does it say, except when the cyclist is riding on the pavement?

where does it say the overtaking rules apply to the pavement?

Don't think the driver had any chance of stopping or missing the cyclist.

Which is why The Highway Code, tells motorists to give cyclists a wide berth.

Was the motorist giving the cyclist ''at least as much room as you would give overtaking a car?''

[b]Mexico   03 Mar 23 14:25 
Loyal

Many cyclists do pay road tax.[/b]

Please advise us which ones and what category.

why is he she or they riding on a pavement ?

pavements are for pedestrians ...ffs

re the shared issue, I don't know where the incident took place but there certainly are shared cycle/pedestrian pavements in Huntingdon, according to streetview.

Have either of you two esteemed, previous posters, ever heard of any cyclist, and of course of the pedal, self powering of their biped variety, paying a road tax?  It;s certainly new to me if it happens.

Mex will be Back on in the Morning with his Lycra gear on Loyal ... Believes he is in the Tour De France on his half mile trip to the paper shop .

Mex will be Back on in the Morning with his Lycra gear on Loyal ... Believes he is in the Tour De France on his half mile trip to the paper shop .

Mexico is correct many cyclists do pay road tax ,
if they drive a car , no need to pay twice
And council tax to maintain the pavements

STILL waiting for an answer from Mex from my silly question

whats is this woman guilty of ?

ATTENTION SEEKING

#metoo.   

No licence, no road tax, no insurance.
More rights of way than pedestrians and vehicle users.
You have to laugh.
No wonder petty crime has advanced so much in recent years - bikes are essential to the get away.  A by product of this absolute balderdash.

I actually saw a video of this on YouTube which lasts a second longer than the BBC one, and it does seem that shouty woman gives the old woman a shove as she goes past, which, as she was already on the kerb, would be enough to put her in the road.

So manslaughter seems quite appropriate, and a longer sentence too.

yes it appears to be right on the edge of the CCTV's coverage but it looks like the cyclist got pushed. That explains why she veered off so sharply. The perp got off very lightly and may be headed for secure hospital.

The "perp" was the cyclist who invaded the pedestrians space and right of way.
Let's get real here.

so she was within her rights to push the cyclist in front of a car?

No, and I didn;t say that, which of course you know already because you are not unintelligent.
If she knew a car was coming and was going to hit the cyclist she was in the wrong.  Don;t be so facile.
However, she was clearly going about her rightful, peaceable business, walking on the pavement as was her right when this cyclist encroached on her personal space.
If you disagree with that then you are as big a fool as the cyclist.

the court disagreed

I haven't seen the Push , If she deliberately pushed the lady that is a different scenario

I don't think she pushed the cyclist. I think she scared the 77yo lady who panicked and turned into a busy road. Dreadful accident imho and not helped by the fact that the lady in jail is not the full ticket. There is no justice in this case just a sad lose of life. I don't know what should happen to the lady in jail but I do not think jail is the answer.

And courts get thigs right all the time. 
"Consideration for road users" is an all-inclusive condition and doesn;t exclude cyclists from that responsibility.