Man who allowed children to drive lorries on M1 and filmed avoids jail

The defendant, who is in his 40s but could not be named to protect the children’s identities, initially denied allegations of child cruelty through intentional abuse and neglect, causing both boys to suffer needlessly or be harmed.

He also denied dangerous driving assistance, age disqualification driving assistance, and dangerous driving on his own account during the September 6, 2020 incident.

In June last year, the defendant appeared in the dock at Dungannon Crown Court and pleaded not guilty to all.

However, during a review last month, a defense attorney requested that his client be tried again on three counts, which was accepted.

These included one charge of child abuse, dangerous driving and assisting a child in dangerous driving.

A lawyer for the prosecution said the guilty pleas were acceptable and the remaining matters could be left on the books.

The court heard police fall after video circulated widely on social media showing a boy in the driver’s seat, driving the truck, while the younger child stood behind him in the taxi.

The footage also captured the freeway and other traffic using it at the time.

Judge Brian Sherrard adjourned the case to allow for pre-sentencing reports and told the defendant on his return today: “You have clearly put these children and other road users at very significant risk of harm.

“Your actions show extreme irresponsibility. You allowed these guys to drive and you filmed this by posting one of the videos online, which led to a police investigation.”

He noted that while the main allegation related to child cruelty, it was based on neglect or failure to protect oneself from harm, which “was not renewed and may be considered a miscarriage of justice.” Fortunately, while you created a tremendous risk, no actual harm was done.”

Nonetheless, he continued: “The children are unfortunately but inevitably aware of this matter and are concerned about the outcome. This is hardly surprising given your decision to both record and disseminate your offense, which no doubt makes matters worse.”

It emerged that the defendant had been given a suspended sentence for molesting an ex-partner just months before the latest offence. He also held a previous record for numerous driving matters, some of which were dealt with by disqualifications.

While Judge Sherrard believed custody was deserved, he added: “With imprisonment you would be doing actual harm to the children if you think the offense did not.”

Instead, he ordered the defendant to do 240 hours of community service and did not activate the existing suspended sentence, instead ordering an extension for a further two years.

Finally, Judge Sherrard issued a 16-month driving ban, stating, “The disqualification is inevitable given the extreme stupidity and irresponsibility of your actions, which you have repeated and posted online.”