Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Gallimore's Fine Restaurant
 
 
Tuesday, 9th February 2010

Drug death driver jailed

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 December 2009
A speeding driver who had taken a cocktail of drugs has been jailed after admitting knocking down and killing a loving grandfather.
Carl Bostock, 21, was found to have traces of cocaine, cannabis and diazapam in his blood after the collision which killed 58-year-old widower, Peter Riley.

Warehouseman Bostock, of Stuart Avenue, Hindley, admitted that he regularly spent £400 a month on his cocaine habit and admitted taking cocaine the day before the tragedy, at 11.25pm on March 27.

Experts could not say when he had last taken drugs or if they had impaired his driving. Jailing him for three years, Judge David Aubrey, QC, issued a warning to motorists not to drive after taking drugs.

He said: "It must be understood that those who use drugs cannot go anywhere near the wheel of a motor car.

"While forensic experts may not themselves be able to state that the presence of a drug demonstrates impairment, common sense does so dictate."

A family torn apart - see page two (click next page at bottom of this article)

He said that the slogan not to drink and drive should also emphasise not to drive and take drugs.

Judge Aubrey told Bostock: "Not only were you impaired in consequence of the consumption of drugs, you were driving in excess of the speed limit. Speed can kill as you now readily appreciate."

Liverpool Crown Court heard that after his arrest Bostock and friends put remarks on his Facebook site which upset the victim's family.

Judge Aubrey said he disregarded the remarks, but said he was concerned about whether Bostock appreciated the enormity of what he had done and its consequences on the whole family.

Bostock, who had admitted causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drugs, was also banned from driving for four years.

Members of the victim's close family sat in the public gallery and the judge told Bostock that his driving had devastated the family.

He added: "You have caused that family insurmountable grief.
"No term of imprisonment, whatever its duration can, nor will, reconcile the bereaved family with their loss or cure their grief."

Graham Pickavance, prosecuting, said that Mr Riley, an agency worker, was crossing Leigh bridge in St Helens Road, Leigh, on his way to his nearby home when he was hit by Bostock's Ford Escort.

He said: "He was thrown over the car and sustained severe injuries."

Investigations showed that Bostock had been travelling through the built-up area at 47mph before the collision. At the time of impact he had been doing between 33 to 40mph on the road, which has a 30mph limit.

Geoffrey Whelan, defending, said that Bostock had no previous convictions and was genuinely remorseful.

He said that a remark by Bostock on his Facebook page last month: "Court on Monday, oop not" was just a youthful way of indicating he was dreading it. He said he condemned flippant remarks by his friends and he had not intended to cause hurt.

The headline on a previous article regarding Carl Bostock incorrectly read 'Drunk driver admits killing a loving grandad.' We have been asked to point out that he was under the influence of drugs and not drink. He was initially charged with causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs.

Page 1 of 2

  • Last Updated: 01 December 2009 9:21 AM
  • Source: Wigan Evening Post
  • Location: Wigan
 
Prev
1
2 3
1

A Grafter,

01/12/2009 12:30:32
Three years for a self admitted druggie, banned for 4 yrs, presumably that means he can't drive whilst in jail.
What a loser this person is, and seemingly his mates think he is a role model. He should be banged up with some lonely big guy for 10 yrs minumum.
2

Dilbert,

Wigan 01/12/2009 12:33:06
This low-life scum junkie killed an innocent member of the public while speeding and he only gets 3 years.

33 would have been lenient!

3

sickoffitall,

01/12/2009 13:42:41
What else can you expect from our liberal minded hand wringing lefty society, surprises me he got so long, only for the public outrage they'd just "Tag" him and let him loose then bleat on how he was just a victim circumstances and "misunderstood", Lock the waste of skin away for 50 years, after all, its nothing short of murder.

We need to get ALL these wasters off our streets NOW!
4

leviticus,

wigan 01/12/2009 14:29:13
3yrs? as it involved the death of an innocent person he should have been given 10yrs, what sort of deterrent is 3 yrs ? he won't be in jail that long,and back on the streets probably driving around again because people like him don't give a damn wether they are disqualified or not, the cps should look into this with a view to appealing against what is an unduly lenient sentence
5

jomc,

01/12/2009 14:45:15
3 years , be out in 18 months or less , low life scum of the earth should throw the key away , hope he gets what he deserves in jail.plus he willget 3 square meals a day pc`s and all the goodies that goes with prison cushiness , and they call it a sentence ?
6

Lomra Greener,

01/12/2009 15:54:20
I've said it before; mandatory capital punishment for dealers, very long sentences for users such as this. No drugs in jail, go cold turkey. Any user wanting to kick the habit, support them but don't supply drugs to them.
7

trucker john,

wigan 01/12/2009 17:12:55
never mind he will soon be walking the streets,with the do gooers to help him, give him a lethal injection
8

robbie,

01/12/2009 17:51:45
hang the druggie scum
9

mediasensationalism,

Leigh 01/12/2009 20:38:44
There appear to be a lot of bigoted people out there, quick to judge others when they believe they know all the circumstances, from a sensationalised media report.

While it is very sad that someone has lost their life, the accident happened in the road, where cars belong, he was not knocked down on the pavement. After a night out, he decided to cross the road on a bridge, notorious for accidents.

As the report states it could not be determined that drugs impaired the driver's ability, and I doubt that all the quick to judge people stick to the speed limit at all times.

There were 2 parties to this collision. One pedestrian and one driver, I wouldn't mind guessing that both were at fault. 1 pays with his life the other will live with the burden for the rest of his.
10

Dannn,

01/12/2009 21:14:09
hang him
Prev
1
2 3

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.