Slick
Guru
That was my basic grasp of the situation. Well that and the fact she's a nasty old bat.
Woman convicted of manslaughter after swearing and gesturing at 77 year old cyclist.
- Thread starter Cycleops
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
That was my basic grasp of the situation. Well that and the fact she's a nasty old bat.
That was my basic grasp of the situation. Well that and the fact she's a nasty old bat.
nasty old bat = damaged and vulnerable individual with limited sight and impaired mobility
Bonefish Blues
Banging donk
Although she was found by the Judge at trial to be capable of answering the charges, i.e. to be in the court in the first place. She didn't take the witness stand.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
Do crimes only exist if proven in court?
As others have said, thoughts for the Ward family. This must feel awful to them. I wonder if prosecutors or trial judge will comment further.
Slick
Guru
And obviously very dangerous.
OP
OP
Cycleops
Legendary Member
I have a son who is on the autistic spectrum. He knows right from wrong and would not intentionally or unintentionally cause anyone harm. It's not a 'get out of jail free' card.
OP
OP
Cycleops
Legendary Member
But still capable of giving a good shove.
tom73
Guru
Not forgetting having proven capacity.
Bonefish Blues
Banging donk
None. CPS applied, was rejected.
Slick
Guru
Exactly.
Obviously don't know anymore than anyone else, but I'd be very surprised if this was the first incident she'd been involved in. I could imagine her being a menace locally.
Slick
Guru
Obviously the spectrum is huge, and is different for everyone, but from my limited experience it has absolutely nothing to do with knowing right from wrong.
Because she wasn't prosecuted for gross negligence manslaughter, she was prosecuted for unlawful action manslaughter, which DOES require a crime.
Time Waster
Veteran
I know there's two kids of a wider family member who is autistic. Right and wrong for one of them isn't the issue. When he's in what could be called a meltdown knowledge of right and wrong isn't a factor. He's violent and not in control. I could quite easily see how he could have put that woman into this road if he'd been there in the wrong circumstances, such as agitation.
This guy is about 40 now and a 6 footer plus heavy set. It's seriously amazing how much his mum is able to control him when things are going wrong with him. Nobody can do that anywhere close to her. Not even carers who have been with him for a long time.
The other kid, who is about 3 years younger, is higher functioning but less social. Not as violent in meltdown but still. It isn't guaranteed that the younger sibling would be safe in this original situation.
I do not know enough about this woman to know how much of an issue her ASD was but a bit of compassion for her difficulties is warrantied. She might not be a nasty old bat. I think that's unfair. However, an unnecessary death is always a bad thing. Imho the biggest takeaway I can see is that pedestrians and cyclists aren't exactly compatible. We really need better provisions and infrastructure for cycling and pedestrians. Holland and Belgium do this well. We need that too!
Slick
Guru
To be fair, I think I lose a fair chunk of compassion when someone causes someone else to die.
Even in your example, all it illustrates is the guy is capable of a meltdown, it doesn't mean he doesn't know its wrong.
Anyway, its all just semantics now.
