Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Drug driver who killed cyclist staged fake crash to hide damage to car

Alex Roberts was fatally injured when Craig Howick, who fled the scene, crashed into him

A court has heard how a drug-driver who fled the scene of a crash that left a cyclist with fatal injuries later staged a fake collision to hide the damage to his vehicle.

After police stopped him following another crash two days later, Craig Howick, aged 38, claimed that damage to his Audi A4 car caused when he hit cyclist Alex Roberts, aged 47, had happened when he swerved into a hedge to avoid a badger.

Cardiff Crown Court heard today that Howick, from Caldicot, left Mr Roberts “bleeding like an animal” after he struck him from behind on the B4245 between Rogiet and Undy in Monmouthshire on 5 August last year, reports Wales Online.

The victim sustained multiple injuries to his abdomen as well as a hypoxic brain injury and died from a cardiac arrest six weeks later.

Howick was arrested after a separate crash two days later, but despite his excuse that his car had been damaged when he tried to avoid a badger, police established that he had been trying to cover up the crash that resulted in Mr Roberts’ death.

The motorist failed to stop at the scene and police were called at 7.07pm by a passer-by after Mr Roberts was found lying injured in a grass verge.

An off duty paramedic stopped to help him, and due to his critical condition he was taken to Royal Gwent Hospital in a police vehicle rather than wait for an ambulance, but died there from his injuries on 25 September 2019.

Police seized Howick’s car following another crash on 7 August. Officers had found window trim at the scene of the collision two days earlier, and discovered that similar trim was missing on his vehicle.

He was arrested on 9 August but claimed he had not been involved in a collision on 5 August, insisting that he had been sleeping that afternoon after “partying with two sex workers” and that he had taken cocaine.

He told officers that later that evening he had driven into a hedge while trying to avoid a badger, which he said had resulted in the damage to his car.

When interviewed by police for a third time, he confessed to having damaged his car on purpose, saying that when he saw police investigating the scene of the fatal crash, he felt “scared for himself,” and that he had not seen Mr Roberts before the collision because he was distracted through using his car radio.

Traces of cocaine were found in Howick’s system and he pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving as well as perverting the cause of justice, having earlier pleaded not guilty to the latter charge.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

20 comments

Avatar
Jenova20 | 3 years ago
0 likes

How many months will this piece of filth be sentenced to? Anyone's guess.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to Jenova20 | 3 years ago
1 like

Already been mentioned in the comments as it was in a seperate story the same day.

Quote:

Howick was jailed for three-and-a-half years and banned from driving for 47 months.

It doesn't mention whether that will be served time and also whether it includes the Guilty Plea time off or not. 

Avatar
PRSboy | 3 years ago
11 likes

Good work by the Police in this instance, who found the missing trim pieces and matched them to the car.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to PRSboy | 3 years ago
0 likes

Agreed. Although it was lucky he crashed again as well.

Avatar
RobD | 3 years ago
7 likes

So he 'carelessly took cocaine before driving' I really hope drug driving starts to get the stigma that drunk driving at least seemed to have until recently.

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
8 likes

Again - kill someone whilst driving and you should never be allowed to drive again. Lifetime driving ban would just seem sensible - it's a privilege not a right, whereas the poor cyclist DID have a right to life. (It's not like we have a shortage of cars/drivers on the roads)

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
7 likes

See, I personally would have a fixed ban of 5 years if found guilty of causing death by careless driving with a license retake to get it back and the new license restricted to low power cars for x amount of years the same as Motorbikes are now. Also these affected drivers should also have a smaller points limit for bans (6 instead of 12) for the same period as the restrictions on engine power.

Any driving whilst banned or driving powerful cars when not allowed should be an extension to the ban and auto jail sentence of x months increasing for repeat offenders.  That way they either reform their driving habits or lose it altogether. 

But then I would also have license retakes every 10 years for normal drivers as well as too many pick up bad habits driving without realising and also don't know the HC changes as mentioned in previous articles. I would also throw in a cycle proficiency at the same time unless medically exempt to cycle as it will give drivers only a glimpse of life as a cyclist and also give car AND Cyclist people an update on the cycling skills and HC rules for cyclists.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 3 years ago
7 likes

I can relate to a limited ban for causing a collision that leads to damage and/or injury, but if a driver has caused the death of another road user (driver, cyclist or ped), then I just don't see that society is served by allowing them back on the road. They had their chance and unfortunately, they've shown beyond doubt that their driving is not safe. I appreciate that people can learn and improve skills etc. but I consider it an insult to the victim's family to turn around and let them back behind the wheel.

To be honest, I find it disturbing that someone would want to ever drive again after causing the death of another person. That mindset alone makes me suspicious of how they behave around other people.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
1 like

So do you ban ex cons from doing anything or do you think that a second chance is allowed once sentences are served? 

I prefer the latter at least once to see if they have improved but with limitations. 

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 3 years ago
2 likes
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

So do you ban ex cons from doing anything or do you think that a second chance is allowed once sentences are served? 

I prefer the latter at least once to see if they have improved but with limitations. 

Depends on the nature of the crime and the work. e.g. I wouldn't want sex offenders to be allowed to work with children or other vulnerable groups. Similarly, I don't think that a disbarred lawyer should be allowed to practise law and a doctor that has been struck off shouldn't be allowed to run a surgery.

Edit: just to clarify that I've got no problem with employing or working alongside ex-cons, but it does depend on the nature of employment and the crime. The issue I have is when someone has proven that they are unsuitable for a particular career (e.g. driving) - why give them a chance to ruin another person's life?

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
1 like

And those are specific rules in place by those organisations and even with some of those there is an option for reinstatement/employment if certain conditions are met. And it is these conditions I'm stating for the ability to prove to drive again after a long period of time then seems to be set currently. 

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 3 years ago
0 likes

Well, for driving, I'd consider that when the victim is fully recovered, then you can re-apply for a license again. That seems fair.

As far as I know, getting disbarred is permanent except under very specific conditions.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
6 likes

Personally, I would want to see the same sentencing regardless of whether an injury has been caused, the severity of any injury, or whether it resulted in a death.

If you take a blind bend at 70mph and there happens to be no-one there, your driving isn't somehow less bad than the person who does the same and knocks someone down. You've both taken the same, equally unacceptable, risk. The difference is one of (literally) blind luck, and neither of you should be on the roads until there can be a reasonable expectation that you've changed your attitude to driving.

Having a different approach depending on the outcome is essentially saying "it's fine, as long as you get away with it".

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
1 like

Nice idea in theory, but in practise it does make a huge difference on the specifics. If you drive badly, but manage to not hit anyone, then it can be considered a learning experience. If you do the same manoeuvre, hit someone and leave them for dead, then that's obviously a more serious offence even though it's the same actions (obviously you wouldn't stop and call an ambulance for when you don't hit someone).

Avatar
mdavidford replied to hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
0 likes

That assumes that people will actually learn, though. I suspect that it's actually far more common that they just think 'that idiot could have got themselves killed', and carry on driving exactly the same unless and until they eventually do kill or seriously injure someone.

The leaving someone for dead is a slightly different issue, and a separate offence.

Avatar
visionset | 3 years ago
1 like

Yeah but, he felt “scared for himself”

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism | 3 years ago
6 likes

So he deliberately lied, deliberately tried to cover it up, deliberately drove with drugs in his system and deliberately left the scene of the crime, and only gets careless driving?

42 months but when will he get out being as he pled guilty. 

Avatar
geomannie 531 | 3 years ago
1 like

And......?

£300 fine & 18month ban? It really wouldn't surprise me.

Avatar
HoarseMann replied to geomannie 531 | 3 years ago
7 likes

Howick was sentenced to 42 months imprisonment and was disqualified from driving for two years and 21 months

At least some jail time, but it really doesn't seem enough.

Avatar
NZ Vegan Rider replied to HoarseMann | 3 years ago
1 like

Agreed. ;-(

What a scumbag.

Latest Comments