Theatrical Agent Takes Road Safety Campaigner 'Cycling Mikey' For A Ride

'Cycling Mikey': Michael Van Erp 

A theatrical agent, who jumped a traffic queue in his Range Rover, carried a well-known cycling campaigner on the bonnet for twenty yards when challenged about his driving, a court heard yesterday.

Paul Jerome Lyon-Maris, 60, was on his way to an appointment in heavy morning rush hour traffic at 8.25am when he ignored a ‘Keep Left’ sign and was blocked by Michael Van Erp, 50.

The jury at Southwark Crown Court were played video the Dutch cycling campaigner recorded on his GoPro camera in which he is heard shouting: “Why are you driving into me?”

Lyon-Maris, of Wychcombe Studios, England Lane, Hampstead can be heard shouting: “I’ve got an appointment at half past eight. Get out of the way!”

He has pleaded not guilty to one count of driving his grey two-litre Range Rover Velar dangerously on September 9, last year in Outer Circle, Regent’s Park.

Lyon-Maris has also pleaded not guilty to one count of assaulting professional carer Mr Van Erp, who has a popular YouTube channel called ‘CyclingMikey’.

Prosecutor Mr James Dean told the trial: “On the day in question the defendant was driving south down the Outer Circle and there was a line of traffic going back one hundred yards, caused by traffic lights at Marylebone Road.

“At the junction there is a traffic island, which is quite wide and as you approach there is a ‘keep left’ arrow.

“Mr Van Erp was standing at that island as he had on previous occasions and had a head strap carrying a GoPro camera and had a selfie stick , which had a camera on the end off it.

“He was there to see if anyone was going to avoid that traffic island to execute a right hand turn .

“He is a cyclist and he and other cyclists say they are inconvenienced or endangered by illegal manoeuvres there.

“He saw the Range Rover coming towards him, coming out of the line of traffic and stepped out accordingly, determined to stop him.

Paul Lyon-Maris (L) & lawyer Michael Epstein (R)

“The driver, who had one male passenger, stopped and immediately began to remonstrate in a very agitated manner, which you will see on the video, shouting and telling him to get out of the way because he had an urgent doctor’s appointment.”

The prosecutor told the jury Lyon-Maris moved his Range Rover forward, causing Van Erp, who moved to the UK in 1998, to fall onto the bonnet. 

“The driver continues to move forward at a walking pace and carried Mr Van Erp, who fell over the bonnet again and continued to drive on the wrong side of the road and stopped twenty yards later with Mr Van Erp still on the bonnet.”

The jury were played Van Erp’s video and he could be heard dismissing Lyon-Maris’s claim to be late for a medical appointment. “I don’t care, you’re a liar. Call 999,” he said.

“I’m calling the police, you hit me,” continued Van Erp. “You cannot be driving on me. Don’t touch me or I will smack you. Your driving is outrageous.

“Do not drive off. If you drive off that’s leaving the scene of an accident.”

A female eye-witness claimed it was the second time that morning Van Erp deliberately jumped onto car bonnets, but the cyclist objected: “I didn’t launch myself onto the bonnet. Don’t tell lies.”

Mr Dean said: “He did not fall or throw himself onto the bonnet.”

Lyon-Maris was recorded telling police at the scene: “He threw himself onto my bonnet and he would not get off. I am late for an appointment because the road is closed.”

He admitted ignoring the ‘Keep Left’ sign and was later fined for that motoring offence, telling police: “I’m so sorry. He jumped onto my bonnet.”

The police officer knew Van Erp and told him: “I’ve watched your videos. I know what you do.”

Van Erp told police: “Growing up in Zimbabwe my tolerance for risk is quite high.”

Lyon-Maris told the officers: “I apologise for ruining your morning,” insisting he was not concerned by Van Erp’s video recording. “He would have recorded me trying to avoid him.”

Mr Dean suggested Lyon-Maris simply lost his temper that busy morning.

“He could have gone back and then gone back into the queue of cars and he may have found that humiliating in front of the other queue of cars.

“He was late for a physiotherapy appointment and perhaps felt entitled to break the law.”

Van Erp told the trial he had already turned around two vehicles that morning for driving on the wrong side of the road when he saw Lyon-Maris approaching from the back of a long queue of vehicles.

“The third driver came with a bit more speed. The driver came up to me, paused briefly and then drove into me.

“The driver and passenger were screaming something about a doctor’s appointment.

Outside Court: Michael Van Erp

“The first time the driver drove into me wasn’t very hard.

“I was directly in front of him. Right in front of the bonnet.

“It was a very stressful moment because of the speed he came up with.

“I am told I do not look afraid, but I can assure you I am on the inside.

“I was reasonably sure there was no emergency. People with a genuine emergency would behave quite differently.

“The passenger stuck his head out of the window and shouted: ‘We have got to go to the doctor,’ with very high energy.

“Both were moving in a hugely agitated way, as if they were upset or stressed and the driver drove forward again.”

Van Erp took one step back and told the jury the car came at him again.

“He bumped me rather harder this time. The hardness was not enough to leave injuries, but I played ice hockey and it was as hard as an average ice hockey kick to feel ‘oof’ on the inside.

“I remember leaning forward because I had no choice, grabbing the indentation of the bonnet.

“Afterwards I realised my head camera had been knocked off, my GoPro camera, from the impact of the vehicle hitting me.

“I had no choice because I was bumped with his car. Nobody should bump anyone with their car.

“Two or three tons of Range Rover doesn’t stop very easily.

“I remember lifting my feet off the ground because I was concerned abut being dragged under the car.

“He was still driving forward, not very fast, maybe going faster and slower somewhere around walking pace.

“I was looking at the driver and passenger. I remember saying: ’Stop, go back,’ and there was more gesticulating from the passenger.

“The driver carried on driving with me on the bonnet and I was aware of much noise and commotion from people around the junction.

“I remember the driver screaming at me: ‘I’m late for the doctor and pointing at his watch.’

“It looked like quite a nice watch, a goldish colour.

“The passenger got out and pleaded with me to move out of the way so they could get to the doctor.”

Van Erp heard the unknown female passer-by complain to a police officer he had already jumped onto two vehicles at the junction.

“I don’t throw myself on any vehicles. In fact I backed away from this vehicle before this gentleman hit me,” he told the trial.

There was another confrontation with Lyon-Maris’s passenger, the court heard.

“He went to push me out of the way and said something along the lines of ‘done this before’ and said: ‘Give me that.’ in relation to my 360 degree camera and I shoved him off.”

Earlier Van Erp told the jury he often visited the junction to block cars driving the wrong way down the road.

“I accept stepping out in front of drivers is a risk on my part, but I see it as taking the keys off a drunk driver.”

Trial continues………….

Train Pervert Wanted: Do You Know This Suspect?

Transport police are hunting this suspected train pervert after two female passengers were indecently exposed to on consecutive days.

British Transport Police (BTP) have released this image and are appealing for the assistance of the public in identifying him.

They have announced they are investigating two instances of a male train passenger masturbating in front of the women.

On August 29, shortly after 6.00am, a man masturbated in front of a woman on a train travelling from East Croydon to London Bridge.

The next day, on August 30, at around 9.15pm, a man followed a woman on a train travelling from West Hampstead to Bedford and began masturbating in front of her.

Officers believe the man in the CCTV images may have useful information which could help their investigation.

If you recognise him or have any further information, please contact BTP by texting 61016 or calling 0800 40 50 40 quoting reference 2200088600. 

Alternatively, you can call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Sex Creep Who Targeted Female Students Convicted

A prowler, who deliberately targeted terrified lone young women in student accommodation, remains locked-up after audaciously failing to convince a jury the victims were flirting with him.

Troy Maurice, 29, lied that he was only looking for somewhere to sit down and relax and listen to music on his headphones when scoping student housing for potential targets.

He has remained in custody since police arrested him for his second attack and lost his bid for freedom at Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court when the jury convicted him on all five counts.

Maurice, of Beaudesert Road, Handsworth, Birmingham was found guilty of sexually assaulting two young women on March 27 and April 16.

He was also convicted on both occasions of trespassing, with intent to commit a sexual offence, and falsely imprisoning the second victim in her studio flat.

The trial heard Maurice struck after entering Cliff House, Claybrook Road, Hammersmith and Fulham Palace Studios, Fulham Palace Road.

A student was doing her laundry in the basement of Cliff House and told the jury Maurice, who she did not know, was down there and crept up behind her.

She said he placed his hands on her back and moved them up to her bra straps and even tried to pull down her leggings, while telling her “shush” and to remain quiet.

However, Maurice tried to lie his way out of the accusation, claiming: “It’s an okay place to hang around for no particular reason, somewhere to sit.

“There’s not many people around there and I was confident I was allowed to go there,” he told the trial. “I would go there to chill out and play some music.

“The laundry is the only place with seats and stuff and she was doing her laundry in front of me.

“She was bending over to pick up her clothes. I thought she was an attractive woman and I would say she was being provocative.

“The way she was bending over and bouncing and what she was wearing was revealing.

“I thought: ‘Maybe she wants me to make a move or something,’ and I was completely unaware she was going to overreact.”

Maurice denied locking the laundry door to prevent the terrified young woman from fleeing and reaching for her bra straps or attempting to remove her leggings.

“I put my hand on her leggings, assuming, I swear to God, she would give me a positive response, which she did at first and then she flipped out.

“She wasn’t having it and I was disappointed. I was 100% sure she was leading me on to make a move.

“She was very upset and after that I shrugged my shoulders and left.”

Three weeks later Maurice followed his second victim into Fulham Palace Studios, where he pushed her into her flat.

He detained her there, deleted information from her phone and attempted to unzip her trousers and touch her breasts.

However, Maurice denied he was a prowler, claiming: “It was socially acceptable for me to go there.

“I was trying to find somewhere to sit down and play music and relax,” he told the jury.

“I asked her if I could charge my phone and she took me to her room.

“She said it was okay for me to sleep there and clean and shower as well.”

Maurice denied piling suitcases against the door to prevent the terrified victim from escaping, insisting: “It was a very positive vibe, I started to like her and she started to like me.

“I knew from her mannerisms she liked me and she was behaving positively.

“First she offered to hug me and was presenting her body to me sexually and that led me to ask if I could be sexual with her.”

Maurice then pleasured himself in front of his disgusted victim. 

“She said it was okay, it was sexual role-playing. She was flirting with me and stuff and was giving me energy back.”

The victim’s ordeal lasted into the early hours and when concerned security officers checked in on her Maurice coached her what to say in an attempt to get rid of them.

However, it was obvious something was wrong and the police were called.

“She was scared of the police, not me,” claimed Maurice. “I didn’t think I was going to get arrested.”

Maurice was remanded in custody until his sentencing.

Train Passenger Threatened With Knife And Robbed: Do You Know This Suspect?

Transport cops investigating a knife robbery onboard a train in south-east London have released this image of their suspect.

British Transport Police (BTP) are appealing to the public for assistance in identifying the wanted individual.

The victim was a passenger on a Plumstead to London Cannon Street railway station when they were approached by a male at approximately 9.10pm on the evening of Monday, August 1.

The suspect is reported to have demanded the victim’s possessions. 

When the victim refused the suspect showed the victim a knife tucked into his waistband. 

He then stole the victim’s bag and their trainers.

The suspect is believed to have left the train at Charlton station.

Anyone who knows him is asked to contact BTP by texting 61016 or by calling 0800 40 50 40. 

In both cases quote reference number 653 of 01/08/22.

Alternatively, call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Architect Guilty Of Molesting Drunken 'Bottomless Prosecco Brunch' Graduate

An architect molested a drunken fellow-graduate when she passed out on a leather Chesterfield couch, following an all-you-can-drink ‘bottomless Prosecco brunch’, a court heard.

Oliver Smail, 31, who has a Master of Architecture qualification from Kingston University was convicted of touching the woman, who joined his group’s all-night pub and bar crawl, between her legs.

“I remember him trying to touch me and moving to the other side of the sofa,” she told the jury at Inner London Crown Court, adding she woke at 6.30am with her underwear and tight spanx shorts around her knees.

She insisted Smail, of St. Catherine’s Court, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire and a former Planning Support Officer with Aylesbury Vale District Council groped her between the legs as he lay alongside her on the living-room sofa.

He denied, but was convicted last Friday by the jury of one count of sexual assault by penetration at his friend’s two-bedroom apartment in Stead Street, Walworth on September 8, 2019.

Smail was bailed until October 28 for sentencing.

“I woke up and that’s what was happening,” the woman told the trial. “There was a point in the night I was aware of him.

“I was aware of this because of the way he was touching me. I think he was completely out of it. Very intoxicated.”

The woman told the trial she began drinking in Dalston’s trendy ‘Jones & Sons’ which offers a two-hour ‘Off The Wagon’ brunch of never-ending Prosecco.

“We were drinking for two-and-a-half hours,” she told the court. 

She was celebrating a birthday and she and her two female friend’s joined Smail’s mostly-male group and continued drinking cocktails at the nearby ‘Three Sheets’ bar.

Smail and friends Tom Madden and Alexander Hodgson-Doughty all know each other from the University of Kent.

They moved onto other local pubs and bars, continuing to drink and both the woman and Smail snorted cocaine during the evening and she also took an ‘ecstasy’ pill.

“I have been very honest that I took ‘ecstasy’ and cocaine. I have no recollection of who gave it to me, it was one of the three men.”

The group then took a minicab to Elephant & Castle with the vague idea of going to the Ministry of Sound nightclub, but instead bought a bottle of gin from and off licence and continued drinking at Alex’s flat.

“I am not denying I was drunk,” she added, recalling a short chat she had with Smail that evening. “I got the feeling he was flirting, but from early on I was not interested and made that clear.”

After a few rounds of gin and tonics at the flat Alex disappeared into his bedroom with the complainant’s friend, leaving her to sleep on the living-room couch.

The next morning she burst into the bedroom to complain about Smail to her friend, who asked him: “Did you finger my friend while she was asleep? Did you do that?”

The friend said Smail tried to hide under a pillow and replied: “I thought she consented.”

When cross-examined he insisted he was referring to her consent to leg touching and nothing more intimate. 

He quickly put his jacket on and left the apartment as the complainant’s friend continued shouting and demanding the police be called.

Smail, who runs his own design firm, told the jury all he did was rub the woman’s leg when he woke up in the middle of the night to find it in his crotch.

He was also drinking in ‘Jones & Sons’, where he also confessed to taking cocaine. “It is not something I regularly do, it was pushed towards me during brunch.”

Regarding the complainant he said: “I didn’t find her sexually attractive,” but admitted texting a friend during the evening to describe her as “cute.”

“I was really quite drunk,” he admitted, explaining his motivation for squeezing onto the couch was to sleep and not any sexual motive.

“I woke up with something rubbing against my crotch.

“I was in a very deep sleep, very hazy and my reaction was to feel the leg. I kind of rubbed it, squeezed it like a massage just to see if it was a girl or a guy or a reaction of some sort.

“She kind of squeezed my hand and rubbed it and nothing was said by anyone.”

Smail claims he got up to sleep in the spare room, but Alex told him it was being rented via Air B&B so he returned to the couch.

“When I woke up I was being kicked in the head. It was not as hard kick and I took it as a meaning she did not want me on the sofa I had been rubbing her calf earlier on.

“I was so dazed and confused. I did not understand why I was being kicked.”

Smail denied pulling down the woman’s underwear. “I was not aware of what she was wearing under her dress. I never moved any of her clothing.

“I only had one hand that was free at any time.”

He was questioned two weeks later and charged over two years after that. “It was upsetting. I remember my heart racing and having this massive weight on my shoulders and having to trust in this system that I am going through.”

When questioned by the officers Smail admitted: “Obviously she is a pretty girl and I am a man so I may make a few moves.

Insisting he would do nothing without the woman’s consent he recalled the moment she kicked him in the head. “I remember thinking: ‘Oh God. I totally misread that situation.’

“I grabbed a pillow and slept on the floor until I was woken up by her friend pulling it away.”

Ex-Dulwich College Music Teacher Denies Molesting Pupils

A former music teacher at prestigious Dulwich College appeared in court for the first time yesterday, accused of molesting two boys during piano lessons at the private school three decades ago.

Martin Ball, 88, indicated not guilty pleas at Croydon Magistrates Court, which declined jurisdiction and bailed him to appear at Inner London Crown Court on October 28.

He is charged with two counts of indecently assaulting the boys, both aged under sixteen years-old, at the school between January 1, 1990 and January 1, 1995.

Ball, of The Drive, Beckenham, is alleged to have touched both boys over their clothing during lessons a the £48,000-a year school.

Prosecutor Dwaine Coward told the court: “The victims were students at Dulwich College, during which time they took piano lessons.

“The defendant was a piano teacher and the defendant would touch the victims’ bottom or groin while teaching.

“If convicted, the defendant would have abused his position of trust, which increases culpability.

“The sentence, if convicted, is likely to be well in excess of the Magistrates Court range.

“This conduct was carried on for some substantial time. The frequency of occasions extending over a period of time would be an aggravating factor.”

The court heard Ball is facing imprisonment on conviction of between twelve months and four years.

Notable former Dulwich College pupils include actor Chiwetel Ejiofor; authors P.G. Wodehouse and Raymond Chandler; Roxy Music guitarist Phil Manzanera; politician Nigel Farage; former Governor of the Bank of England Eddie George and explorer Sir Ernest Shackleton.

Mother With Two Children Victim Of "Hate Crime" At South Tottenham Station

Transport police are treating as a “hate crime” an incident involving a man and woman and mother with her two children at a north London railway station.

British Transport Police (BTP) have released these CCTV images of their two suspects and are appealing for the assistance of the public in identifying them.

The victim, a mother with her two children, was racially abused by a couple at approximately 4.45pm on August 6 at South Tottenham railway station.

BTP investigating officers believe the pair in the images may have information which could help their investigation.

If you recognise them, or have any information, please contact BTP by texting 61016 or calling 0800 40 50 40 quoting reference 2200079033.

Alternatively, call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

The King's Speech: Coronation Chief Duke Of Norfolk Banned From Roads

Court On The Phone: The Duke of Norfolk

An aristocrat responsible for the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II was yesterday banned from driving for six months after police caught him chatting to his wife on his mobile phone.

His Grace The Duke of Norfolk, Edward William Fitzalan-Howard, 65, failed to convince magistrates he should not be disqualified to allow him to organise the coronation of King Charles III.

Lavender Hill Magistrates Court heard the officers suspected him of jumping a red light as he crossed a junction in front of them.

In his hereditary role as Earl Marshal he told the court he is also in charge of the coronation and asked successfully for part of the hearing to be held in private in the interests of “national security.”

He pleaded guilty to one count of driving his six year-old blue three-litre diesel BMW while using a hand-held device in Battersea Park Road, south-west London on April 7.

He was fined £800, with £350 costs and ordered to pay an £80 victim surcharge.

The six penalty points imposed by the magistrates on His Grace, added to the nine already on his driving licence after two speeding convictions automatically triggered the six-month disqualification under totting rules.

He unsuccessfully argued the disqualification would cause him “exceptional hardship” in organising the coronation and running his estate, which employs 150 people.

Magistrate Judith Way announced: “We accept this is a unique case because of the defendant’s role in society and his role in the King’s coronation and even though inconvenience may be caused we do not find exceptional hardship.

“We know the need for security clearance for any driver and we do not think this is insurmountable for his high-profile role.

“We believe the defendant has the means to employ a driver.” 

Court of the King: Arriving at Lavender Hill

Apparently still respecting a period of mourning His Grace, of Arundel Castle, Arundel, Sussex wore a solemn dark grey suit, white shirt and plain black tie.

Prosecutor Jonathan Bryan told the court: “The time was just before 4.15pm in the afternoon.

“Police officers were in a vehicle on Battersea Park Road when they saw a BMW.

“They were stationary at traffic lights and their light turned green and the BMW cut across them and they assumed he must have jumped a red light. and noticed the driver was using a mobile phone and not paying attention.

“They drove up to the driver and looked through the window and saw the driver was using a mobile phone.

“The driver was His Grace and he said he did not know he went through a red light and was in conversation with his wife and that is why he was using the phone.”

The court did not hear any prosecution regarding a red light offence.

Initially His Grace fought the case, submitting a not guilty plea and was scheduled to stand trial before his late change of plea.

“He stands to be disqualified as a totter for a period of at least six months,” added the prosecutor.

Applying for the press to be excluded from His Grace’s “exceptional hardship” application his lawyer Natasha Dardashti said details of the coronation of King Charles III would have to be revealed.

“This is an extremely peculiar submission. His Grace the Duke of Norfolk, as Earl Marshal was responsible for the preparations of the funeral of her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth II and is now the person in the country responsible for the coronation of his Royal Highness King Charles III.

“His Grace will need to provide some information and details of the coronation of his Royal Highness.

“The reason for this to be in camera is for reasons of national security and there are details that have not yet been discussed with his Royal Highness; the Prime Minister and the Archbishop of Canterbury.

“The application for exceptional hardship should be in camera to prevent the escape of that information, which is of an exceptionally sensitive nature.”

He is the current 18th Duke of Norfolk and a member of the House of Lords and as the Duke of Norfolk is the most senior peer in the peerage of England.

He is a member of the House of Howard and inherited his title from his father Miles Francis Stapleton Fitzalan-Howard, the 17th Duke of Norfolk.

He was educated at Ampleforth private boarding school and Lincoln College, Oxford and is married to Georgina Susan Gore and is the father of three sons and two daughters.

“Once the coronation of his Royal Highness has taken place there will be no need for these details of the coronation to remain private,” added Ms Dardashti.

“The organisation of state occasions takes years of planning and involves issues of security for world leaders attending the UK, the public and other people attending, which will require his grace to go into details .”

Lavender Hill did explore transferring the case to Westminster Magistrates Court to be heard before the Chief Magistrate of England and Wales Senior District Judge Paul Goldspring due to issues of “national security” but his office was happy for it to be dealt with “locally.”

Regarding the application for a part-private hearing Mr Bryan said: “We take a neutral position on that. It is not for the Crown to take a view one way or the other.

“There has to be a compelling reason for that course. Is it really necessary for the defence to go into such details that would compromise those arrangements?”

The magistrates agreed to hear details of His Grace’s role in the coronation in private and afterwards Ms Dardashti said: “This is a huge and very, very peculiar responsibility.

“His huge responsibility for the coronation means he needs to drive to all parts of the UK for meetings and to arrange what will be another huge world spectacle.

“The Royal Family are loved throughout this country and all over the world and are economically very, very important to the economy of this country.

“The coronation of a King is financially important to all of us.

“He does not get paid for being Earl Marshal and is working with a huge amount of responsibility and must be available at short notice.

“The logistics of having four drivers with security clearance to drive him around if he needs to go anywhere, even at 3am are not workable.

“It would be a huge extravagance to have a team of drivers. It is not workable and is not realistic.

“This is a particular point in the history of this nation. The coronation of His Majesty King Charles III.

“It is a huge responsibility for this one man.

“It is because of this timing it is so crucial that he keeps his licence.”

His Grace stepped into the witness box and appealed for the magistrates not to impose six penalty points, claiming “exceptional hardship” to his livelihood and his 150 full-time and part-time staff if he was disqualified.

“I am the Chief Executive of the Dukedom, farming, forestry, our business assets etc. That is my job.”

Explaining his Peppering Project, a conservation initiative on 3,000 acres of his estate, His Grace insisted he needed his driving licence to use the public roads to access the area.

“For twenty years we have been trying to find a way to save nature and to feed the world,” he told the court.

He was trying to save at least ten “red-listed”endangered species and needed his licence to drive, sometimes at 4am to the South Downs, to monitor this progress.

“I spend an enormous amount of time in my spare hours witnessing the revival of nature and managing bringing this change about.

“Dawn and dusk are the crucial times to count the species and I need to use the public roads to do this,” His Grace told the magistrates.

He claimed he was £45m in debt after buying back 14,000 acres of his Dukedom’s original land. “That, in effect, is my life’s work done.”

His Grace said continuing to be allowed to drive was vital to the health of his estate and its ability to repay increasing interest charges.

“The interest burden has doubled and will put enormous strain on our income flow from the Dukedom to meet the burden.”

He also owns lands in Norfolk, Yorkshire and industrial units in Sheffield.

“If there is a problem I have to be able to react and I do not know where I will be. I may go to Yorkshire and drive  or to Norfolk and the only way to get there is to drive.

“Also my office in Arundel is four miles away from where I live.”

Hiring a chauffeur would be challenging to his “chaotic schedule” the court heard.

“Obviously I have the means to hire a driver, but the trouble is life is not that simple. I do not know if I have to drive at four in the morning to see the Curlew.”

His Grace also said he preferred the informality of arriving for work in “my old BMW” than be chauffeur-driven. “I like to be straightforward and being accessible to people.”

Regarding any ban he added: “It will curtail my manoeuvrability to an extent. It could be very, very serious and my responsibility is to those 150 people and those 150 families.

“Even if one family was effected and some have been with us forty, thirty years. If Gary the tractor driver were to lose his job I’d feel responsible. If I lost twenty to thirty people that way I’d be mortified.”

The magistrates dismissed the Duke of Norfolk’s application not to be disqualified on the grounds of ‘exceptional hardship’, indicating they did not believe a ban would put the jobs of employees in jeopardy.

They also concluded he could employ a driver if necessary.

Outside court the Duke indicated he did not want to answer any questions.