In the news

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

Sure they didn't.

edited

According to other articles the culprit has cerebral palsy…

https://metro.co.uk/2023/03/02/government-considered-killing-all-pet-cats-at-start-of-covid-pandemic-18372157/amp/

Tiberi has got nothing on the Tories.

We'd have so many songbirds.

According to other articles the culprit has cerebral palsy

Not sure that has much bearing on it, does it?

No it doesn't excuse her behaviour.

It's an interesting (and sad) case. Ultimately it was her aggression that caused the incident so its on her for manslaughter. And the fact that she showed no remorse, left the elderly cyclist for dead and went shopping is the aggravating factor making it a big 3 year jail sentence.

It doesn't have a bearing on the case, but it does/did have a bearing on the (now edited) post - Hefty isn't trying to excuse her behaviour

What a dreadful crash. This is the site:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.3318311,-0.1798557,3a,35.7y,102.32h,86.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sP7suqAnP9IbPAk_hiAISlg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It's quite clear from StreetView that this street carries very high volumes of through motor traffic, and while none of the footways are shared-use, it's understandable that riders would use them. In the face of the enormity of what happened, this is all irrelevant. Tragic.

Is this the dead cat story to keep Johnson, Hancock and lock down off the front page?

none of the footways are shared-use

This was up for debate in the case, apparently (according to local press). Cambs council cycling maps would appear to disagree - but there is no signage - so the police were unable to determine whether or not the path was shared use. *caveat - this is just my own reading of the local reports

Thanks.

And the edited comment was innocent and unintended I’m sure.

It's quite clear from StreetView that this street carries very high volumes of through motor traffic, and while none of the footways are shared-use, it's understandable that riders would use them.

I’ve cycled that road once and as you say it’s horrid, I used the paths.

Having grown up less than 15 miles from there, I’ve been round that ring round 100s of times. It’s a 30 but most cars race to at least 40 between the lights.

I wouldn’t feel comfortable cycling that road if at all avoidable.

Totally agree with the charge and outcome of the case. The lack of remorse is astonishing.

This was up for debate in the case, apparently (according to local press). Cambs council cycling maps would appear to disagree - but there is no signage - so the police were unable to determine whether or not the path was shared use. *caveat - this is just my own reading of the local reports

I did look at that earlier, and the only evidence of shared use that I could find was a little west of the crash site, where there are several such signs.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.3330653,-0.1843117,3a,75y,178.54h,83.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNVSX-i0_8wMT47OITjmOTw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.3325105,-0.1821375,3a,75y,171.33h,87.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4_RnzRBXK-ryuPraB3cSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Whether or not something is shared-use doesn't depend on signage, though, but on whether there is a Traffic Regulation Order in force (Traffic Management Order in London), which obviously the signage should advertise. The police can find out about this very easily by asking the highway authority, probably Cambridgeshire County Council, which is tasked with knowing what orders there are. (I realise that highway authorities sometimes fail in this duty.) As traffic orders are generally not available on-line (I'm sure there are exceptions), in most cases signage is a reliable indicator of one, or indeed the little things that traffic engineers do where there is shared use, e.g. the give-way triangles painted on the footways in the examples above.

I do think it's irrelevant in any case in view of the harm done.

Yes, I agree. It's also important to mention that it's a very large one-way system, which generally worsens driver behaviour (and would cause huge detours for riders not going contraflow on the footway).

True, though this person was cycling in the direction of traffic.

It's actually fairly easy to cross from where this accident took place to the diametrically opposite side of the ring road through the middle of the town (East to West) but a complete pain in the arse to travel north / south which is what this person may have been doing. Either way, it's totally not safe as a cycle way and the paths should at least be dual use but ideally include a segregated cycle path.

Having said that, it appears that this woman may have taken action regardless of the persons right to be there. WAFC etc.

Clearly there is far more evidence in the case than is being presented by the press

Why so? It's gone to a crown court so surely what happened is now a matter of public record?

Yes, it will be public record. But the press is very selective about what it actually reports. Plus those reports keep getting updated through the day. Her lack of remorse & the judge's summing up weren't on the reports earlier either I note. It wasn't the best way to put what I was getting at, I admit. But some of the reporting has read as very anti-cyclist (surprise), appearing to blame the poor victim.

I feel like I'm missing something here. I can't see how that gesture can be classed as manslaughter. Surely it's just an accident? It's not as if she actually pushed her into the road. If I walk out on my street and gesture a car to slow down because they're clearly doing 40 in a 20 and they they rap their car around a lamp post and die will I be charged with manslaughter?

Agreed that whether she was cycling on the ‘footway’ or not is irrelevant in this case.

For academic purposes, as far as I can tell RE actual signage having scooted around the ring road on streetview. Only the inner footway of the ring road seems to be signed as shared use. The outer footway of the ring road (which she was on), doesn’t have any shared signs at all.

The fact that the police couldn’t establish either way sums up just how bad our cycling infra is.

Other observations. I am astonished that the jury decided against the pedestrian, knowing the general hatred of cyclists I’d have thought at worst the case would have been thrown out.

Verbal abuse (swearing) is classed as abuse. It’s the unprovoked aggressive abuse from the ped that frightened the cyclist into taking evasive action into the road without looking.

If you did that and distracted a driver who then caused an accident then maybe. It’s the cause and effect.

Surely it's just an accident?

That's basically the definition of manslaughter. Murder you meant to kill someone. Manslaughter you didn't mean to kill someone but they died as a result of your actions.

If you jumped out shouting at someone walking past and they shat themselves and walked in front of a passing car, then yeah, manslaughter innit.

Oakeshott had obtained leaked memos that took down the UK’s ambassador to the UK
The Guardian finds Britain's cushiest job.