UK - Car drives into pedestrians at Liverpool FC victory parade. Man detained, 26 May 2025

  • #141
  • #142
Simon Csoka KC, defending, applied for more time to consider the case.

He said Mr Doyle had only been served with the full list of charges this morning and had not had chance to properly assess the witness statements or 'marry' them with the timeline of his alleged driving.

Mr Csoka said his client was also waiting for a decision from prison authorities regarding his application for access to a laptop to help him view CCTV of events.

Judge Menary, the Recorder of Liverpool, agreed to adjourn the case until September 4 when Doyle, a former company director, will be expected to indicate a plea.

He said: 'I'm willing to give you more time, these are serious matters that are not uncomplicated. I shall adjourn this plea and preparation hearing for a couple of weeks.'

The maximum sentence Doyle could face is life imprisonment.



 
  • #143
Listed for tomorrow - will he plead to something I wonder or straight to trial ?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9501.webp
    IMG_9501.webp
    9.2 KB · Views: 20
  • #144


Appearing via videolink from prison, Doyle entered not guilty pleas to dangerous driving, affair, 18 attempts of attempting to cause GBH with intent, nine of causing GBH with intent and two of wounding with intent.

Wearing glasses and a grey t-shirt, he appeared to be looking at papers as charges were read to him, and shook his head points during the hearing.


After his pleas were filed, Doyle was remanded in custody once again. A trial date was set for November 24.
 
  • #145
Wow.
JMO.
 
  • #146
  • #147


Appearing via videolink from prison, Doyle entered not guilty pleas to dangerous driving, affair, 18 attempts of attempting to cause GBH with intent, nine of causing GBH with intent and two of wounding with intent.

Wearing glasses and a grey t-shirt, he appeared to be looking at papers as charges were read to him, and shook his head points during the hearing.


After his pleas were filed, Doyle was remanded in custody once again. A trial date was set for November 24.
on what basis does he plead not guilty?
 
  • #148
  • #149
The thing that’s troubled me with this is the drugs element at the start.
It was later dropped and I’m wondering if there had been a rogue reading from his prescription drugs ( if he take any of course ) which triggered the charge initially then it was dropped at a later date.
Possibly running a defence of having some medical episode during the parade ?
I’m clutching at straws here as it’s going to be a tough one !
Just my opinion obviously.
 
  • #150
on what basis does he plead not guilty?
It'll be very interesting to hear what defence he's going to put forward, tbh. I suppose he might claim that he felt threatened and so it was self defence. I don't know how far that will take him given that he shouldn't actually have been there in the first place.

All very strange.
 
  • #151
Later in the hearing, he removed his glasses and put his head in his hands while appearing to be in tears.

A pre-trial review will take place on October 27.
Honorary Recorder of Liverpool Judge Andrew Menary KC said: Again, you will appear remotely for that hearing.


 
  • #152
PTSD possibly? Ex-military man.

I'm sure I read somewhere (but can't provide sources) that he was doing his wife a favour and had just run a friend of hers to the station.
 
  • #153
The thing that’s troubled me with this is the drugs element at the start.
It was later dropped and I’m wondering if there had been a rogue reading from his prescription drugs ( if he take any of course ) which triggered the charge initially then it was dropped at a later date.
Possibly running a defence of having some medical episode during the parade ?
I’m clutching at straws here as it’s going to be a tough one !
Just my opinion obviously.
I assumed that he was behaving so wildly/erratically that they arrested him for drug driving, but then once rested he had none in his system, so wasn't charged.
 
  • #154
PTSD possibly? Ex-military man.

I'm sure I read somewhere (but can't provide sources) that he was doing his wife a favour and had just run a friend of hers to the station.
I'm not sure PTSD will wash.

If it is only mild it won't wash. He might try to claim that crowds are a specific trigger, but unless he has evidence of that specific trigger, again, it won't wash. Also, he was in the military some 30 years ago. So again, unless he has recent evidence that his PTSD is still present (& linked to crowds) I can't see him having a leg to stand on.

And if it is currently that bad, then he shouldn't be driving, as that's an element of the dangerous driving rules ie to be fit and well.

On what we know so far (v little), I can only see him getting significant prison time.
 
  • #155
PTSD possibly? Ex-military man.

I'm sure I read somewhere (but can't provide sources) that he was doing his wife a favour and had just run a friend of hers to the station.


A close friend previously told the Daily Mail that Doyle was not a football fan and had been dropping off a friend in the city centre as a favour when the incident occurred



 
  • #156
They would have to have done a drug swab at the scene or at the station, that’s what isn’t making sense.
 
  • #157
They would have to have done a drug swab at the scene or at the station, that’s what isn’t making sense.
That's interesting, I didn't know that. When he was first arrested his friends were apparently particularly confused by that, as he had been teetotal for 20yrs
 
  • #158
Just read that you can be arrested for drug driving for either failing a roadside swab test or 'field impairment test'. I assume it was the latter to not then be charged with it. Imagine he behaving very erratically at that point so it made the police assume he must be under influence of drugs, and then he failed the field impairment test
 
  • #159
Sounds like that’s what’s been assumed on arrest then dropped.
Strange that his driving was erratic from the moment he got in his car that day.
All very odd.
 
  • #160
Just read that you can be arrested for drug driving for either failing a roadside swab test or 'field impairment test'. I assume it was the latter to not then be charged with it. Imagine he behaving very erratically at that point so it made the police assume he must be under influence of drugs, and then he failed the field impairment test
We don't have field impairment tests in this country as far as I'm aware. I'm always amazed that the US uses them as they are really just pseudo-science which can be abused by officers. If someone is clearly impaired then they'll be asked to blow into a breathalyser and if they don't they'll get arrested.

Depending on his behavior at the time, it may just be the case that they arrested him on suspicion of being under the influence of something or other which they are perfectly entitled to do.
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
124
Guests online
2,131
Total visitors
2,255

Forum statistics

Threads
635,350
Messages
18,674,205
Members
243,172
Latest member
TX Terri
Back
Top