Simon Jenkins points out the inappropriateness of the custodial sentence handed down to Auriol Grey (A tragic accident should not have landed Auriol Grey in prison. The UK justice system is stuck in the dark ages, 28 March). That Grey should have been held solely responsible for the death of a cyclist using the pavement is a travesty of justice. Grey was visually and cognitively impaired and, as a consequence, only dimly perceived a threat and overreacted to a fear for her own safety. That the judge failed to understand those mitigating circumstances is regrettable.
The local authority was unable to ascertain whether the walkway was a shared facility for pedestrians and cyclists. But even if it had been a shared-use path, there is a duty on both parties to use it safely. When the Department for Transport first proposed the introduction of shared-use paths, blind and visually impaired people made strenuous objections. The first involved signage: a visually impaired or blind person would not be able to see this. The second involved the acceptance that a cyclist was effectively silent, so a blind person could not determine a cyclist’s approach.
