A driver who used his car as a “highly dangerous weapon” to run over a cyclist in a road rage incident, leaving him with life-changing injuries, has been jailed for 18 months in order “to deter similar attacks”.
62-year-old Richard Caseby was cycling back to his home on a Saturday morning in January last year, when the driver of a Vauxhall Corsa almost hit him at the Sun in the Sands roundabout on the A2 in Blackheath, London.
Once he drew level with the driver at a traffic light, Caseby, a former managing editor of The Sunday Times and The Sun, asked him politely “to keep an eye open for cyclists as I’d had a narrow escape”, but the driver swore at him and said, “F*** off or I’ll f*** you”.
As soon as both of them set off, Caseby said that he was carried along on the bonnet of Georgiou’s car, which hit the kerb, throwing him against a brick wall. He suffered serious fractures to his left leg and ankle and a damaged shoulder.
The driver, Marios Georgiou, 52, has now been sentenced by the Woolwich Crown Court to 18 months in prison. The Times reports that Judge Philip Shorrock told the driver: “You used your car as the equivalent of a highly dangerous weapon, albeit you intended to scare him.”
He said a jail sentence was required to “deter you or anyone else from behaving that way in the future”.
Georgiou claimed that he was only trying to scare Caseby, who he feared would damage his car as another cyclist had left a dent after punching the vehicle during a confrontation five weeks earlier. He claimed as a result of hitting Caseby he now suffers from anxiety and depression and is being assessed for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Caseby suffered a broken left leg and ankle in three places and spent months on crutches, having to learn to walk again. A year on, he still suffers permanent pain and walks with a stick and a permanent limp and has been diagnosed with PTSD.
He told the court: “Marios Georgiou mowed me down in his car and left me with life-changing injuries.
“The attack has destroyed my basic fitness and dreams of an active retirement with my wife and friends. My orthopaedic consultant told me that my injuries are truly ‘life-changing’. In short, I will never be the same again.”
Caseby, who used to cycle “everywhere”, said: “Drivers are in a lethal weapon and if they lose their temper for a moment, they can kill you. I knew when I was clinging to the bonnet that if I let go, I would fall under the wheels and be killed.”
The lawyer in mitigation, said Georgiou admitted the offences on the basis that he did not intend to injure Caseby but intended only to “scare” him.
Georgiou, a barber from Kent, declined to give evidence. He has been jailed for 18 months after admitting maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm shortly before the start of his trial last month.
He has received a nine-month concurrent sentence for dangerous driving. He has also been banned from driving for two years and nine months and ordered to take an enhanced driving test before being allowed back on the road.

60 thoughts on “Driver who “tried to scare cyclist” but ended up running him over jailed for using car as “highly dangerous weapon””
“He has also been banned from
“He has also been banned from driving for two years and nine months and ordered to take an enhanced driving test before being allowed back on the road”
If a gamekeeper fired “warning” shots over someones head, they would never be permitted a shotgun licence again, yet this is the equivalent of that gamekeeper actually shooting someone yet the still get a gun licence back all be it they have some hoops to jump through first
We’re often told there are
We’re often told there are too many drivers on the road and too much traffic. How about lifetime bans for incidents like this or for totting up twelve points?
Well done Judge Shorrock. Can
Well done Judge Shorrock. Can we clone him and install him elsewhere?
Maybe so, but the punishment
Maybe so, but the punishment is still a joke.
He claimed as a result of
He claimed as a result of hitting Caseby he now suffers from anxiety and depression and is being assessed for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
Yet another example of the now-routine attempt by the shyster lawyer to portray the violent offender as a hapless victim.
We’re gonna need a bigger
We’re gonna need a bigger violin.
David9694 wrote:
This is the only one playing for this driver.
Oh come on.
Oh come on.
Everyone is entitled to a defence.
Don’t blame the defence brief. Blame the shit state of the law and the sentencing guidelines around dangerous driving.
Eton Rifle wrote:
The defence is supposed to be the truth which in this case is he is not suffering anxiety, depression and ptsd as a result of the incident but as a result of it going to court, not the same thing at all.
I’m only surprised he’s not
I’m only surprised he’s not claiming for the damage to his car.
wtjs wrote:
When I worked in insurance many moons ago (so long ago, in fact, that all the companies had hundreds of local offices across the country and employed local versions of every role they needed), our loss adjuster had a good expression for that (presumably widely used in the industry) ..
[i]… the author of their own misfortune![/i]
“You used your car as the
“You used your car as the equivalent of a highly dangerous weapon, albeit you intended to scare him.”
1. It is a deadly weapon, no equivalent about it.
2. He didn’t intend to scare him.
Eighteen months for attempted murder?
eburtthebike wrote:
Attempted Murder requires proof of intent. The defendant claims his intent was to scare the victim not kill them (or even hurt them), so unless the prosecution can prove otherwise, there is no way that charge is getting anywhere near a courtroom.
Point taken, but it’s a bit
Point taken, but it’s a bit like the Parliamentary Standards Committee not knowing what was in Boris’s mind when he lied: the fact was that he lied. In this case, the driver used his car as a weapon against a defenceless individual, but we don’t know what was in his mind, so it can’t be attempted murder. I beg to differ.
If you drive a car at someone you aren’t trying to scare them, you’re trying to cause serious injury or death: you don’t need to know what’s in their mind, their actions clearly display what their intent is.
“Georgiou claimed that he was
“Georgiou claimed that he was only trying to scare Caseby, who he feared would damage his car as another cyclist had left a dent after punching the vehicle during a confrontation five weeks earlier.”
Sounds like the driver has form for putting cyclists lives at risk!
Honestly this is such a
Honestly this is such a depressing read.. ‘I only meant to scare him’ as I drove into him with him on my bonnet up a curb and towards a wall.. ‘ FOR FUCKS SAKE.
Life changing injuries.
The law of this land is fucked.
‘I only meant to scare him’
‘I only meant to scare him’ as I drove into him with him on my bonnet up a curb and towards a wall.. ‘
It is necessary to point out that offenders must be allowed to defend themselves, no matter how stupid the comment. I can’t see anything to suggest that anyone paid any attention to such tripe.
Except:
Except:
“Judge Philip Shorrock told the driver: “You used your car as the equivalent of a highly dangerous weapon, albeit you intended to scare him.”
peted76 wrote:
It’s not really the law, which is doing something positive here (albeit with caveats).
It’s the widespread cultural values that let people think they are permitted to do violent things like this. Lifetime ban required (and enforced). Make the bully walk.
“widespread cultural values”
“widespread cultural values”
That’s a good one. I think if you looked around you’d see Woke idiots across this country are currently doing their very best to destroy any semblance of its culture. One violent lunatic in a car is not an example of a cultural value.
Whereas the fascists…
Whereas the fascists…
Which Fascists?
Which Fascists?
The ones demanding lockdowns, vaccines, masks, insisting on banning their version of ‘misinformation’, banning protest, arresting people for Faceboook posts, etc.?
Troll off.
Troll off.
You really are a right Nigel aren’t you.
Whereas the Trolls…
Whereas the Trolls…
Still going with the
Still going with the misinformation on the Facebook arrest.
Roulereo wrote:
Except it isn’t ONE violent lunatic, is it?
peted76 wrote:
Oh, but, but, but, he has suffered anxiety and PTSD since…
Daveyraveygravey wrote:
best ensure he is never triggered by being behind the wheel of car in proximity to cyclists ever again. Lifetime ban.
Maybe I’m just looking for
Maybe I’m just looking for victories anywhere, but it is really quite good here to see the use of offence against the person (GBH) here. Normally when cars are used as weapons, it is treated as a driving offence, rather than a violence offence. Hopefully this becomes a norm – threaten someone and deliberately drive at them, and you get an assault/ABH/GBH/god-forbid-something-more-serious charge.
Agreed. This is great to see.
Agreed. This is great to see. The language used in the sentencing makes clear his intent. What a complete moron driver who frankly should be banned for driving for life.
Clearly mentally unfit to
Clearly mentally unfit to ever hold a driving licence if capable of claiming such a provocation as mitigation for an act of extreme violence!
So his mitigation was he’d
So his mitigation was he’d already been involved in another road rage incident…
Sounds like the incompetence
Sounds like the incompetence paradox – what should make an offense worse is used to excuse it. “In mitigation, it is harder for my client to control his violent rage than most – previous offences are the proof…”
Seems lenient – although if
Seems lenient – although if you look at violent offenses occasioning actual harm in general you can find some surprisingly low sentences.
This one is one of the few where I’d be entirely happy with a lifetime driving ban though – if only we could be bothered to enforce it.
Spoiler – that wouldn’t be remotely cheap. It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be thinking now about these (even before the Great Review Of Road Crime ™ coming real soon) though. At least until we’re up to the level of cycling the Dutch are at now…
Anyone know if this 18-month
Anyone know if this 18-month sentence for GBH could be appealed under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme?
Croydon Cyclists wrote:
Unfortunately not, there are only a limited number of offences that will be considered under the scheme and (as far as I know, not a lawyer) GBH isn’t included.
Not a great sentence, but we
Not a great sentence, but we do need more judges like this who recognise this wasnt careless or dangerous driving but an assault with a deadly weapon.
“he was only trying to scare
“he was only trying to scare Caseby… another cyclist had left a dent after punching the vehicle during a confrontation five weeks earlier. He claimed as a result of hitting Caseby he now suffers from anxiety and depression and is being assessed for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Every word of that defense makes this guy sound like a complete c$$t.
“another cyclist had left a
“another cyclist had left a dent after punching the vehicle”
And now in our story on things that never happened….
If a previous cyclist hit his
If a previous cyclist hit his car he was obviously too close. Anyway “I was worried about him damaging my car so I smashed right into him makes no sense.
No one knows if that happened
No one knows if that happened as it was only a claim not a fact.
Even if the vehicle was damaged it would be rather important to find out how and why before drawing any conclusions. Was it self defense? Why was the vehicle so close ?
Do you actually have a bike ?
Do you even cycle?
Yes, n+1 bikes if that even
Yes, n+1 bikes if that even matters.
Do I meet your “requirements” to be able to discuss this, Sir?
Your comment is confusing, perhaps you need more time to think about it. The perpetrator was claiming to be a victim of violence, which had no evidence whatsoever. I’m suggesting this was a lie.
Hmmm imagine one innocent
Hmmm imagine one innocent driver harassed by cyclists or much more likely the driver consistently drives dangerously.
Hopefully someone in stir
Hopefully someone in stir will ‘f**k’ him over. Just to scare him, mind.
BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP wrote:
I’ve never understood why some people glorify prison rape
hawkinspeter wrote:
Hopefully someone in stir will ‘f**k’ him over. Just to scare him, mind.
— hawkinspeter I’ve never understood why some people glorify prison rape— BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP
You do understand that the use of f**k in this sentence is not literal right? Its a synomyn for “do over” “beat up” etc etc
Secret_squirrel wrote:
You are likely correct on the semantics but I’m not sure it indicates a great difference in mentality.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
Well, that wasn’t how I interpreted it, but I also don’t agree with prison as a means of enacting violence.
Read most of the comments
Read most of the comments here regarding this story and as a cyclist who commutes daily and does a lot of road miles at the weekend to me, this idiot should be banned for life – no question. It’s not at all comforting to leave the house each day knowing you could come across people like this and believe me there are many.
The driving ban of two years
The driving ban of two years is too little for using car as lethal force.
A life time ban should be considered or if it seems too hard maybe a law should be made for people clearly responsible for serious accidents to be life time forced to drive Citroen Ami class cars that may not exceed 30mph.
Yep. If you use your car
Yep. If you use your car deliberately as a weapon thats it. You are done. Lifetime ban. For less serious but still bad offences you should be forced to install a GPS tracker that monitors your driving.
“I feared the cyclist would
“I feared the cyclist would damage my car, so I scooped him up onto the bonnet then crashed into a wall.”
“I feared the cyclist would
“I feared the cyclist would damage my car, so I pre damaged it myself, that’ll teach him!”
At least it was a custodial
At least it was a custodial sentence, wonder if the profile/standing of the victim helped that as so often we read about similar situations where the attacker is let off with a suspended sentence.
Imagine going round waving a
Imagine going round waving a knife or a gun trying to scare people and actually stabbing/shooting someone by accident – now tell me that person would get away with only 18 months.
I will scream it until I turn blue that until we treat cars like the lethal weapon they are, we will never have truly safe roads – if someone uses a car as a weapon they should be treated as if they were using a gun!
If I was the victim I’d be
If I was the victim I’d be suing for damages. The driver has proven he’s not fit to be behind the wheel. A permanent driving ban would be appropriate.
Totally agree with you on the
Totally agree with you on the permanent ban. The legal aspect may be trickier, as third party liabilty might not be accepted by the vehicle insurer if it was a deliberate act. So any legal action may be against the driver directly rather than the insurer.
“I was scared he was going to
“I was scared he was going to punch my car with his mighty fists so I drove into him and then drove into a curb and towards a wall.”
I feel like a judge should just sit there and say “and thats another year, and thats another year” every time they wheel out some BS excuse for why they killed or nearly killed someone when they were driving like an utter bellend.
After nearly 50 years I’ve
After nearly 50 years I’ve given up road cycling as this kind of aggressive sh1t happens all too often now
used to road ride 120mls a week and out with club on sundays and every ride was becoming a constant nag as to whether i would actually get home in one piece , so much so that it affected my mental health, so,,, gave up and confined meself to only riding on trails now maybe 2 times a month
Absolutely miss the road bikes but the motoring tw4ts have done me in
Even fitted camera’s but local police ain’t worth sh1t and refuse to act on anything
Unfortunately there is
Unfortunately there is certain sort of person who sees going to prison as an occupational hazard of their lifestyle.
This type sees being jailed as a minor inconvenience and knows that it will increase their standing and move them up the ‘ranks’ in their little community when they get out.
This cell time will mean that they will have a never ending stream of anecdotes to share around the crack pipe on a cold winters night.
They are quite happy to drive without a license if they get banned.
Sounds crazy? Well no, there really are people like this living around me in the south Wales valleys.