- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Statue of Justice, Old Bailey (licensed CC BY 2.0 on Flickr by Ronnie Macdonald).jpgDriver who ran over cyclist on purpose, breaking his legs, then assaulted him jailed for 12 months
A Leicestershire driver who ran down a cyclist, breaking both his legs, and then assaulted him, has been jailed for 12 months.
The victim’s injuries following the incident in Melton Mowbray on 15 April last year included a broken leg, with his knee said to be facing in the wrong direction after 38-year-old Ross Marriott deliberately crashed into him.
Marriott, an unemployed scaffolder and builder, then got out of his van and kicked and punched the cyclist, reports the Leicester Mercury.
Leicester Crown Court heard that two mobile phones had been stolen from Marriott’s car shortly beforehand, and that a cyclist had been seen acting suspiciously close to the vehicle.
While he was driving around trying to find the person who had taken the phones, his passenger flagged a cyclist who was close by as the suspect, and Marriott drove at him, sending the victim into a hedge.
He then got out of his car and assaulted the victim, only stopping when a passer-by intervened.
As well as cuts and bruises, the cyclist sustained two leg fractures, one of which resulted in a bone sticking out of his angle. He needed screws and plates to be inserted in his legs, and spent several weeks in hospital.
Marriott pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm, although he was cleared on the more serious charge of causing the injuries with intent.
Defending Marriott, Joey Kwong said in mitigation that the case had “more than the usual provocation,” because his client, who was described as “remorseful and apologetic” had previously been the victim of theft, meaning he acted on impulse.
Jailing him for 12 months, recorder Stuart Sprawson told Marriott: “I'd be failing in my public duty if I did not send you to prison.”
He said: “Your decision was to take the situation into your own hands - when you could have called the police or just followed him.
“Your car hit that cyclist, without thought as to what the outcome might be. It was a reckless act and dangerous.
“You accept, when you gave evidence, you punched him about four times and witnesses also described seeing that.
“You told the jury you didn't kick him but (witnesses said otherwise) and I conclude that you did kick him on the ground when he was immobile, such was the anger you showed.
“You said you drove at him to get him off the bike, not to seriously hurt him but to prevent him from getting away and didn't realise how badly hurt he was,” the recorder added.
“You said it was 'a warning' and what you did was punishment - and that's why you did what you did. You'd clearly lost your self-control.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- bensynnock 23 min 20 sec ago
Here in Southampton we just get long lines of cars queuing for cruise ships. ...
- hawkinspeter 47 min 17 sec ago
Whilst EV cars are an improvement over ICE cars, I think they're a distraction from the possibilities of e-bikes, e-scooters and e-cargo-bikes etc....
- David9694 2 hours 54 min ago
I like how drivers make the case for making monitoring covert, not overt.
- andystow 3 hours 6 min ago
She seemed a bit upset about a minor misjudgement that could have killed someone and is going to cause months of stress and inconvenience.
- Backladder 3 hours 12 min ago
No we don't agree, personally I would take primary, even if only for a short period although I can understand why some riders might not want to...
- brooksby 3 hours 33 min ago
And which looks very like the bag produced by indy bag manufacturer Wizard Works…...
- HoarseMann 3 hours 44 min ago
If it was a 'no vehicles' sign (all white circle centre), it would mean cyclists could ride in the hours that HGVs and disabled drivers are allowed...
- stonojnr 5 hours 14 min ago
The bit at the start and end looks like a cycle lane, but the bit they drive on looks just like a patched filter lane for traffic lights.
- JOHN5880 5 hours 15 min ago
Hey, you 4 execs helped run a company into the ground and have no jobs anymore... Come work for us because you have great experience in the...
- Oakhambike 6 hours 1 sec ago
£11.5k for a bike weighing over 8kg that's 2 fingers to customers let alone UCI
Add new comment
30 comments
I know local rags bring out the worst in many but these comments are pretty low even by those standards
"Hang on. Did the cyclist Knick the phones ? This is pretty crucial....... If he did I’d say fair play to the motorist ...."
"Of he stole the phones fair plsy "
"People take things into their own hands these days because they have no faith in the police or the justice system, if he did steal the phones then he got what he deserves. "
"What if he DID know it was him. The person who took the phones has spent whole life making others miserable, karma ?"
Nuts isn't it? If serious long term injuries is the just penalty for nicking a phone (a f*cking phone ffs), what is the just penalty for inflicting serious long term injuries?.....
I sometimes feel this way about police inaction on dangerous driving and endangering vulnerable road users, not that drivers should be injured, but vigilante decomissionning of deadly weapons.
This needs to be reported as an unduly lenient sentence for review. 12 months for deliberately breaking someone's legs with a motor vehicle.
Thats beyond a joke.
Unemployed scaffold rage - can't get an erection up.
Joey Kwong can get fucked as well. I've previously been the victim of a few crimes, does that allow me free reign to nearly kill people? Typical legal arsehole.
Joey Kwong can get ****** as well.
The lawyer only did what lawyers are paid and permitted to do. That is: think up shameless mitigations and justifications, when are no genuine ones. The judge and the jury are supposed to reject them. They failed. This is a joke sentence- even more so if it is true that there was no driving ban and retest.
My mate is one, it's all a game to them. He was annoyed that he didn't get a paedo off as he thought he should have been able to. I asked him if the paedo did and he did! I couldn't do a job like that, dealing with people like that.
Your post got me thinking, I was sure that even the defence is not supposed to misrepresent facts, and there are all sorts of ethical hurdles for a defence (or prosecution for that matter) to negotiate. Had a search and this came up - proved quite an interesting read
Apologists often talk about the "war on motorists", but only one side of this "war" is beating other until bones stick out of their legs and then being allow to keep using the same weapon.
Motorists are the only ones fighting. (Obviously not all of them.)
#notalldrivers
I wouldn't even trust the drivers account of the supposedly stolen mobile phones.
No evidence produced in the article that this actually happened at all. Could simply be a story fabricated by the driver to try and justify an act of serious road rage and assault .
Feel sure if the cyclist had been found in possession of stolen phones it would have been worthy of mention in the article.
Why would an unemployed scaffolder need more than one phone?
its worth noting that had he been found guilty on the intent charge , it would likely have been at least a 9year jail sentence, so why the jury cleared him of the intent is probably key to understanding it.
Staggeringly lenient sentence, and the excuses were flimsy enough to be totally transparent. How do you drive a car at someone and not expect them to be injured? He'd have a much longer sentence if he'd used a hammer, but because it's a car, it's treated like an accident that he broke the guy's legs. Maybe if it had been a pedestrian he drove into and broke their legs he might have got longer. Let's face it, it's only luck that he didn't kill them.
He deliberately drove his car into somebody when he had no idea if the person had taken his phones or not, and even if they had taken them, is driving a car into them severely injuring them, an appropriate response?
No mention of loss of driving licence, which should happen for at least ten years, followed by an extended driving test and psychological assessment of whether he's stable enough to be in charge of a killing machine.
12 months seems incredibly lenient for such viscous attacks.
He clearly shouldn't be allowed to drive if that's how he behaves.
So, pretty much the same as if someone saw a crime being committed by a Black man and then just randomly assaulted a neaby Black man "cos they all look the same, innit?"...
Collective responsibility, what a wonderful thing... 
Almost as if it was a hate crime aimed at a specific group
Not strictly relavent, but any word on whether the victim was also the phone thief or was it just a case of "all cyclist are the same innit"
I know a number of forum users have expressed the wish in the past along the lines of of "I'd be locked in a room with a bike thief" or "carry a heavy D Lock to revenge close passes"
There's a world of difference between fantasising about it and doing it. I sometimes think about keying cars/vans that are parked inconsiderately, but have never done so (which would be wrong in the eyes of the law).
Also a world of difference between a bike and a phone.
I always say that too. But in the former example, I'd probably end up sitting down and having a cup of tea....
The accused chased down and grievously attacked someone who might possibly (can't be sure) have been acting suspiciously (whatever that means) in the rough area (not defined) of the accused's car. Oh, and the accused was pissed off that someone had nicked his phone a while back. He said. Not that it makes any difference.
To all intents and purposes, this was an unprovoked attack that left someone with serious, potentially life-changing injuries. Let's be clear, all violent attacks are carried out for..... reasons..... Excuses are like arse-holes they say.
By the by, it puts me in mind of the police attack that was reported recently, the chief difference being that one perpetrator was in uniform, and the other not.
Disgustingly lenient.
#standard
What do you get for assault with a weapon these days? If he had struck him with a hammer (everyday object repurposed as a weapon)? Got to be more than that.
Any driving ban?
(Sorry if I have missed it).
Sentence insufficient, as usual. The police and courts conspiring to get him off with a lesser sentence- not guilty of assault with intent of causing GBH?!!!
It was 'impulse'.
But fair enough, you can't play outside then if that really is the case.
I don't believe it. He would have suddenly given him a bunch of flowers, unless of course they'd met before.....
"he was cleared on the more serious charge of causing the injuries with intent."
"his client, who was described as “remorseful and apologetic” had previously been the victim of theft, meaning he acted on impulse."
Perhaps for the greater good he should not be allowed out in public given his impulses.