A source close to Grey's defence team said she plans to appeal, having expected only a suspended sentence.Yes, it's the conclusion to this case.
The court heard that until pre-sentencing Grey had expressed 'no remorse' for her actions...
So what? At least that's more honest!
'Her lawyer had desperately tried to get her out on bail during an appeal process but it was a failed application.'
They've really got it in for this woman, haven't they? I wonder why...
It comes as the local council was unable to confirm today whether or not bicycles are allowed on the pavement where the incident took place - despite the judge declaring it a 'shared footpath' at court.
Wait, what? So neither the police nor the local council can decide, but 'his honour' can opine from the bench? Surely someone should be looking at this fool's competence to be a judge?
At the sentencing hearing, Judge Sean Enright acknowledged Grey's health issues, but told her they 'do not reduce your understanding of right or wrong'.
Strange, since my blog is littered with cases where the judge has fallen over himself to be lenient and award the benefit of the doubt. And this particular one has no hesitation showing it to drug dealers and burglars.
Following Grey's conviction, Detective Sergeant Mark Dollard, who interviewed her, said: 'I am pleased with the verdict and hope it is a stark reminder to all road users to take care and be considerate to each other. '
Of course you're pleased. Low hanging fruit is always easiest, isn't it? And what consideration did the cyclist show to pedestrians?
2 comments:
I'll say it again.
You might like to examine the bio in the local paper citing their business, and close ties to the local 'golf fraternity', being "well respected and liked members in good standing of the local golf club" (even regularly travelling extensively around the world to golf in sundry exotic locales).
Whereas the 'murderer' is just some poor local nobody subsisting on disability benefits who got in the way of her betters (and is convenient to blame for an incompetents accident).
Purely coincidentally I'm sure, the lawyers (on both sides) as well as 'all' the senior police, the judge and local MP are all 'likewise' members of the local golf club (as a matter of record - like they care about such niceties any more).
Prejudice, conflict of interests? Familiar and not just friendly, but friends with the family involved? Surely they would have all recused themselves, right? Please don't make me laugh, welcome to modern Britain!
That the family search for someone/anyone to blame, even when it was no-ones fault but her own, is hardly unusual. What isn't is that all those family friends in positions of power lining up to crucify an innocent party to satisfy the families vindictive bloodlust.
If this doesn't get thrown out at appeal (hopefully somewhere well away from the friends and family influence) then it's yet more of a sign that we are now living in a totalitarian state (where it's not what you know, or even what you did, but who you know that's important).
I'm at the point now where I say, burn it all down, and (in particular) ensure everyone who is, or ever has been, close to the reigns of power ends up decorating street furniture. The alternative is Orwell's boot.
"You might like to examine the bio in the local paper citing their business, and close ties to the local 'golf fraternity'..."
Indeed! I'm getting Max Coopey vibes about this case.
Let's hope the disability rights organisations assist her appeal, much as I don't like 'special rights' being used as a fulcrum...
Post a Comment