Search results

Care to explain how her leaving the scene, and going shopping afterwards, tipped the balance and found her guilty of manslaughter…which is what you suggested. Or did I misunderstand?

You clearly don’t understand how law works do you? The were not found guilty of manslaughter because they went shopping.

You are going over old ground which has already discussed in other posts with other people.

Quite. On this occasion it was a bike. Who knows what else fuels this woman’s anger. The defendant was angry and threatening. This caused a death. If you or I ventured out onto the streets and was angry, aggressive and threatening and this resulted in a death, regardless of sex, age, bicycles...

But it’s been said a number of times her health was taken into consideration at the court by numerous experts. Mental and/or physical difficulties do not necessarily preclude you from guilt.

If I threatened a 77 year old lady such that she fell into a road and got run over I’d fully expect a prison sentence.

No, it wasn’t the case.

Think you’re being unfair here.

In some respects it’s irrelevant whether or not the path is mixed use. Her response wasn’t proportionate and sadly the outcome of her response has consequences.