- 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
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Pregnant cyclist lost baby after hit and run by drunk driver who had previously been spared a ban
A pregnant cyclist lost her unborn child after being hit by a driver who had drunk eight vodkas. Gary Marston, who fled the scene and continued drinking, had hit 12 penalty points on his driving licence earlier in the year but persuaded magistrates not to ban him on the basis it would have caused 'exceptional hardship' by making it difficult for him to run his flooring business.
Leicestershire Live reports that shortly before 9.30pm on December 2, 2019, Marston drove his work van into the back of the unnamed woman as she rode in a cycle lane on Aylestone Road in Leicester.
He had just emerged from a pub in which he had been drinking. He then drove away, leaving her in the road and went to his mother’s house, where he continued drinking and took cocaine.
The prosecution said the woman was a cyclist of vast experience, and clearly visible with lights on her bike and clothing.
She was taken to hospital and two days later Leicestershire Police confirmed she had lost her baby.
Leicestershire Police traced Marston and arrested him. Examination of his mobile phone showed that it was being used when the crash happened.
A collision investigator’s report found that he had been driving at approximately 46mph in a 30mph zone. At the point of impact, or shortly after, he had been travelling at 54mph.
The victim said she had been told she should be "grateful" she did not die herself and that being fit and healthy had saved her.
"All I can think is it that it was not enough to save my little girl," she said.
She continues to suffer with the injuries she sustained.
"Physical pain is the first thing that greets me every morning and then the memory that this is not a nightmare, it is all real.
"I will never be able to forgive myself for being in his way and I will have to live with that feeling of guilt for the rest of my life.
"I'm now scared by the speed of cars and vans and no longer feel safe around roads. I can't drive now and I have to be ferried to hospital by other people. I can't work because of my injuries and I can't be sure I will ever be able to again."
Marston has previous convictions for violent disorder, burglary, possession of a bladed article, affray and criminal damage.
He had also reached 12 penalty points on his licence earlier in 2019, the point at which a driver would ordinarily face a six-month driving ban.
However, he argued this would have caused 'exceptional hardship' by making it difficult for him to run his flooring business and so avoided the ban.
Marston pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and failing to stop at the scene of a collision and both the woman and Judge Timothy Spencer QC questioned the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decision to charge only those two offences.
The latter said doing so limited the length of sentence he could impose.
The woman said the death of her child was not reflected in the charges.
Judge Spencer jailed Marston for 18 months and banned him from driving for six years.
"You caused her very serious injury which stays with her and has blighted the nearly a year that has passed since. But all of that pales against the fact that you caused the miscarriage of that baby, who was stillborn.
"Any sentence I impose, any words that come from me, again pale against the guilt and responsibility that go with you Gary Marston for the consequences of your actions.
"It's clear from CCTV footage you drank no less than eight vodkas. You had absolutely no business getting behind the wheel of a vehicle and you must have known that even if you were impaired by drink.
"But your own selfish concerns no doubt dictated your behaviour. The consequences of your actions have been utterly devastating."
Marston’s defence team said he suffered anxiety and depression and had suffered a relapse having previously made progress overcoming his 20-year alcohol and drug addiction.
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
- bensynnock 17 min 22 sec ago
Here in Southampton we just get long lines of cars queuing for cruise ships. ...
- hawkinspeter 41 min 19 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 48 min ago
I like how drivers make the case for making monitoring covert, not overt.
- andystow 3 hours 28 sec 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 6 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 27 min ago
And which looks very like the bag produced by indy bag manufacturer Wizard Works…...
- HoarseMann 3 hours 38 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 8 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 9 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 5 hours 54 min ago
£11.5k for a bike weighing over 8kg that's 2 fingers to customers let alone UCI
Add new comment
28 comments
Genune question... can someone educate me why the drunk driving wasn't prosecuted, why causing serious injury (and arguably the death of the unborn baby) through dangerous driving was not prosecuted?
It sounds as thought the judge / CPS were trying to minimise jail time from the outset.
Probably because his victim was only a cyclist
"The victim said she had been told she should be "grateful" she did not die herself and that being fit and healthy had saved her."
I think that rather sums it up.
I don't understand why he wasn't charged with Causing serious injury by dangerous driving.
Or Child Destruction - assuming the pregnancy had passed the threshold for that charge.
That 'exceptional hardship' is a bullshit excuse. There's a saying - "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime" and drivers need to consider that if they're going to drive around like idiots.
Everyone makes mistakes and I can sympathise with a driver that has a crash due to momentary lack of attention, but unfortunately our culture has normalised driving to the extent that it's seen as acceptable to drive over the speed limit ("everyone else is driving that speed").
What we need is much greater enforcement of traffic offences - stick cameras up everywhere and start clamping down on the obvious offences such as speeding and using a mobile whilst in control of a car. Also, make it a common penalty that you lose your license for a period of time for even small offences - "sorry mate, can't give you a lift as I'm banned for 3 months for going 35 in a 30 zone". To add teeth to that, make jail time a common result for being caught driving whilst banned - most people just won't take the risk when they know that there's ANPR equipped cameras on most street corners ready and waiting to shop them in.
To my mind revokation of licenced is not a punishment. It is a necessary sanction to reduce the risk to others presented by an incompetent individual.
Everyone makes mistakes and yep, judges need to account for that. But this guy had 12 points on his licence already. His behaviour showed a pattern of offending and an inability to understand risk. That he was going to commit more offences should've come as no surprise. He shouldn't have been allowed to carry on driving, despite the exceptional hardship claim, which I feel is too easily asked for.
My sypmathies are with the victim and her loss.
Everyone does make mistakes - that's why we have a points system which takes account of that - so that magistrates don't have to. If someone believes their driving licence is of the utmost importance to their livlihood then all the more reason for them to do the maths as the points tot up. I think magistrates overstep the authority we invest them with when they make concessions for individuals who believe their livlihood trumps others' lives.
If we must have this stupid "undue hardship" crap to get some idiots back on the road (and I dont see why we have it), perhaps it should come as a seriously final warning in the form of - any further driving offences automatically come with twice the punishment that is normally laid down, so double the jail sentences and ban etc or any subsequent ban is automatically served as jail time
Proper justice.
Step 1: Put Gary Marston in his car.
Step 2: Put the car in a car crusher.
You know contaminating recyclables makes them worthless. We don't crush cars here, we shred them then separate the metals from the dross 😈
(Marston) "had hit 12 penalty points on his driving licence earlier in the year but persuaded magistrates not to ban him on the basis it would have caused 'exceptional hardship' by making it difficult for him to run his flooring business."
I do not understand why this is taken into consideration by magistrates. Surely it is the driver who should take this into consideration and drive accordingly. Absolutely outrageous. Not that I think a driving ban would have stopped him from driving but it would have hopefully been reflected in further sentencing. Why oh why is this man allowed to get his driving licence back?
1000% agree. That is why it is 12 points before you get a ban, it gives you a chance to make a minor mistake, learn from it & move on. It isn't & shouldn't be treated as a 'get out of jail free' card.
I would suffer financial hardship if I lost my licence, I've not had a single point let alone 12 in 30 years driving.
Just feed him feet first in to a wood chipper.
He's obviously defective and needs returning to the manufacturer.
Time and time again we hear of cases where judges fail to ban dangerous drivers after they plead exceptional hardship. It's time this loophole was abolished. If you reach 12 points on your licence then obviously you should no longer be allowed to drive. Everyone in this case was let down by the previous judge, who gave in and let this irresponsible man continue his dodgy lifestyle. Perhaps Gary Marston would have ignored a ban anyway, but at least he wouldn't have been allowed back out on the roads legally, to wreak havoc with other people's lives.
Would have probably been a magistrate court mate, so probably 3 of them, drivers themselves I guess.
I'm hoping they might be feeling a little bit of guilt about now, and maybe slightly less inclined to believe the bullshit of "exceptional hardship" next time, though I doubt it...
And also, CPS, why only 2 charges?
My thought are with the unnamed woman and her family.
I'm a driver. I don't feel tribal kinship with twats who accumulate points.
Apparently 98% of drivers believe themselves to be above average ability. Why on earth does anyone feel sympathy with c*nts like this and be willing to give them "second chance". They had that when they got 3 points ffs
It’s not easy being a magistrate and there is a growing shortage. But it’s time that we introduced some kind of liability, so that when a ban is waived due to hardship the magistrates have some skin the game.
Why can't hardship include a temporary ban of a month? That should be enough to drive the message home.
The list against this guy is unbelievable. Too long to list!
He will carry on as he was as he is obviously a career criminal!
Words cannot describe this sentence
What do you have to do to get maximum sentences in the UK?
Just clocked the 'punishment' from the newspaper article
"He was jailed for a total of 18 months and banned from driving for six years."
I mean, what the actual? Clearly a serial dangerous driver, doesn't learn, so why not a life ban? I'm just so sick of this stupid charade.
"The woman said the death of her child was not reflected in the charges.
Judge Spencer jailed Marston for 18 months and banned him from driving for six years."
Yet another case where the driver is let off the hook, having been let off the hook by the previous court because he claimed exceptional hardship. What's the point of a totting up system for banning drivers if they don't then get banned when the reach 12 points? They've proved that they are incapable of driving safely and completely lack responsibility, so they should lose their licence, no ifs, no buts; immediate ban for a year at least.
OK, 18 months is more than a slap on the wrist, but he'll do half that, and given his record and the severity of this crime, that is a very, very lenient sentence. As for the driving ban, that's just ludicrous; should be a lifetime ban.
When the hell are cyclists going to get justice?
CYCLISTS' LIVES MATTER
CYCLISTS' LIVES MATTER
CYCLISTS' LIVES MATTER
CYCLISTS' LIVES MATTER
CYCLISTS' LIVES MATTER
CYCLISTS' LIVES MATTER
Hawkinspeter's last para says it all. Why not have cameras everywhere or dedicated officers. Make it a 1000 quid for every mph over the limit and you would soon pay for this. 1 error to allow for the stupty of making a mistake and then banned. Minimum a year. Anyone still driving should have a prison sentence.
You'd fill the jails, partly with those who didn't pay the fines. I don't think 3 strikes and out worked in the US (certainly not for the guy who got life for allegedly stealing a pizza when hungry and penniless), and US jails are even nastier than the UK. So harshness, understandable though it is as a reaction, will not really work.
Your idea of raising the probability of getting caught makes much greater sense. There are plenty of people who think 40 in a 30 is ok, but this would change if they knew that they'd get 3 points almost every time.
In my work I have to take various training courses that remind me of penalties for crimes, with a quiz at the end. I always think it's pointless my knowing that I could get 5 years for something. 5 minutes is enough of a deterrent. So to reset the attitude of _most_ drivers (not the nutjobs like this one) and remind them of the utmost care they need to take, we need much greater fear of being caught.
There are many studies supporting what you say, that it is the fear of getting caught that is the deterrent, not the sentence. The trouble is, at the moment, drivers know that their chances of being caught are only just above zero, so there is no deterrent. Maybe more plain clothes police on bikes, with a squad car just around the corner might work?
Just like close pass operations. It would work, but it needs investment and prioritising vs all the other stuff the police do.