- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Everton FC CrestCTC questions why Everton footballer Darron Gibson was not charged with dangerous driving
National cycling charity CTC has welcomed the 20-month driving ban handed out to Darron Gibson after he hit a cyclist while driving drunk before fleeing the scene. However, the organisation has also questioned why the Everton footballer was not charged with dangerous driving.
Gibson ploughed into three cyclists who had stopped on a pavement to fix a chain in Bowdon last month before driving off at speed. Shortly afterwards, he drove into a petrol pump at which point a garage attendant contacted the police. When breathalysed, the level of alcohol in Gibson’s breath was found to be 57mg per 100ml with the legal limit 35mg.
CTC Road Safety Campaigner, Rhia Favero, said that it was not uncommon for drivers who committed similar offences to Gibson to escape without a driving ban, but believes that more serious charges should have been brought.
“Not all drivers that commit the types of offences Gibson did have their licences taken away so it's reassuring to see the judge in this case used his power to ban Gibson from driving. It's not surprising though, given the number of offences he committed.
“What is baffling is why he wasn't charged with dangerous driving. Speeding, losing control, hitting a group of cyclists: if that's not dangerous behaviour, what is?”
Favero says that because Gibson was only charged with driving without due care, not dangerous driving, his victims are not entitled to victim support or information about the criminal case. This is because the current definition of victim in the Victims' Code – which defines the rights of victims of crime – doesn't include victims of careless or drink driving.
“Had Gibson stolen their wallet, not run them over, they would have more rights. This crazy situation could change if the government's recently announced proposals to broaden the definition of victim come into force.”
CTC is backing proposed changes to the Victims' Code that would stop road crime victims being left out from it. Favero says that nearly 2,000 CTC supporters emailed the Ministry of Justice to back the proposals.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 4 hours 27 min ago
Could it be that an industry * with vast wealth and long cultivated influence, which is now seen as providing something both practically and...
- chrisonabike 4 hours 46 min ago
Presumably a) expense b) for something that (mostly) works against your customers' convenience? And the usual "but emergencies - what about when...
- Aluminium can 4 hours 45 min ago
Is there any real world evidence that slightly reducing the weight of your crank arms actually makes your bike faster? Seems like a hell of lot of...
- David9694 5 hours 52 min ago
Remembrance event driving incident sees woman reported (paywall)...
- quiff 9 hours 11 min ago
I was going to suggest the Fairlight Strael too, and went to check if it came in on budget. While there, I finally ordered the frameset I've been...
- quiff 12 hours 7 min ago
"No darling, I said a cactus bike holder, not a bike cactus holder."...
- Andrewbanshee 14 hours 22 min ago
I have visited Guernsey and my wife goes there a few times a year for work. This act of premeditated violence shocks me. There are quite a lot of...
- hawkinspeter 14 hours 48 min ago
You could well be right. Personally, I think Avonvale Rd is just a disaster for having two way traffic. So many drivers think the traffic calming...
- hawkinspeter 14 hours 55 min ago
Although Muller Rd isn't great to cycle on (the north end, anyhow), it's certainly not the worst. I'm definitely in the "brave and bold cyclist" at...
Add new comment
8 comments
No dangerous driving charges as the CPS are useless and incompetent. Then as already mentioned courts and juries would let him off as they are drivers themselves, probably none hearing the case would be cyclists. Then the footballer can slip a few grand to some one at the CPS, jurors or the judge to get the charges reduced or to go easy on him as footballers earn £250k a week. So there are quite a few ways he can get off very very leniently. He's laughing, no penalty whatsoever, as he'll have some one drive him around if he doesn't drive whilst disqualified. People like this stick two fingers up to the law. The guy should be behind bars, he should have got a prison sentence of 5 years plus £50k fine for each cyclist he hit. They were ON the pavement NOT even the road. They were pedestrians. Had they not had bicycles then the footballer would probably have been jailed.
FFS the plod or CPS won't even do anything or charge these fuckers when we are riding on the roads and they drive dangerously into us, knocking us down, injuring and killing us. It's a total joke.
They are only cyclists, pesky cyclists.
It's very simple, the CPS wouldn't be able to get a conviction for dangerous driving out of a jury of motorists.
no not at the moment because the law is an ass and that is what has to be changed.
He was not even charged with driving away from the scene of a crime, why ? probably because they felt he was too drunk to know his own actions.
Tell me the law makes any sense
Let's be fair to Everton, lots of clubs would try and sort all this out with cash and fixers, they have kept back and let the prosecution continue.
Is there any reason why the picture for this, and the other related article is the Everton crest? Why not a picture of the player himself, rather than the (blameless) employer?
“What is baffling is why he wasn't charged with dangerous driving. Speeding, losing control, hitting a group of cyclists:"
I can understand why speeding wasn't pursued, probably no evidence, other than un corroborated witnesses. That is insufficient for speeding. Dangerous driving should of been pursued and still could be, because he was involved in not one but several accidents. I believe there is no cut off point for this offence. A complaint to the cps to review the case might instigate a new charge of dangerous driving.
The cyclists and petrol station owner could pursue a private prosecution for compensation.
He's doled out a bunch of money to the cyclists he hit already, although only about £100 plus the cost of the wrecked bike!
spot on by the CTC
I would add they should be calling for all drink driving offences to be considered dangerous driving regardless of the impact of what they do.
If you are drunk in charge of a wheel you are dangerous, simple.
I will admit when younger I took what people may say are 'risks'. I learnt that was wrong and can not afford to do it now. Should we not be talking as Scotland have done and lower the limit so low as to make drinking and driving impossible legally ?
If you want alcohol, leave the car at home or drink soft drinks, simples eh ?