Teenager, 14, came within inches of death when speeding motor boat hit his kayak near Burton, court told

A COURT has heard how a 14-year-old schoolboy came within inches of losing his life on the River Cleddau after his kayak was struck by a high-powered, dual-propelled motor boat being helmed by Haven Master Adam Russell.

CCTV footage played to Judge Geraint Walters, sitting at Swansea Crown Court, showed Russell steering the 5-litre motor boat, White Mischief, into the schoolboy’s kayak near Rudders Boat Yard in Burton.

The court heard Russell ignored warning calls from two other river users who alerted him to approaching kayaks, and continued at exceptionally high speed while remaining seated at the helm. He had six passengers on board, including children.

Because of the speed, Russell failed to see the young kayaker and struck his vessel.

“When I saw him heading towards me, I knew I was going to be in trouble,” the teenager said in a victim impact statement read to the court.

“I could see the boat getting closer and closer, and I had no idea what was going to happen. I couldn’t get out of the way… no matter what I did, the boat kept coming towards me. I felt helpless and I knew I was going to be hit.”

Prosecuting on behalf of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, Nick Cotter KC said the boy had been enjoying a day on the river with two school friends and two of their fathers. The court heard each kayaker was wearing a bright red buoyancy aid and was clearly visible, with excellent weather conditions that afternoon.

As the group paddled downstream through a designated water skiing area of the River Cleddau, they encountered Russell and White Mischief.

“Witnesses said he was travelling far too fast,” Mr Cotter said.

“The young boy tried his best to paddle out of the way but then the White Mischief changed direction and began heading directly towards him. When it hit the kayak, the boy was thrown into the water and the White Mischief passed directly over him.

“To say that the child was lucky is an understatement.”

Mr Cotter told the court that, following the incident on August 11, 2024, the teenager has been unable to return to the river despite being a keen open-water surfer and sportsman.

“My confidence and ability to go kayaking again has changed,” the child said in his impact statement.

“I get flashbacks about the sound of the running engine, and whenever my dad or my friends suggest going out kayaking, I never want to go because I don’t want that to happen to me, or to anyone else, ever again.”

After the collision, the boy was taken by ambulance to West Wales General Hospital where he was treated for minor injuries. His kayak sustained significant damage and was left unusable.

Russell, who has been employed as haven master at Neyland Yacht Haven for the past eight years, pleaded guilty to causing serious injury to another person while in charge of a boat, contravening Merchant Shipping Regulations relating to preventing collisions at sea, failing to adhere to a safe speed and failing to act on a clear risk of collision.

He was represented by barrister Jon Tarrant KC.

“From the outset the defendant has accepted full responsibility and understands that the boy was only inches away from a very tragic situation,” Mr Tarrant said.

He told the court that in Russell’s eight years in the maritime industry there had been no issues concerning his behaviour, either onshore or offshore. A number of character references were submitted to Judge Walters prior to sentence.

Russell was sentenced to 12 months in custody, suspended for two years. He was ordered to pay £1,000 compensation to the victim, £675.95 compensation for the damage to the kayak and £3,000 in prosecution costs.

He must also complete 15 rehabilitation activity requirement days and carry out 200 hours of unpaid work.

“The boy desperately tried to avoid you, but you failed to see him,” Judge Walters said when passing sentence.

“You travelled directly over him, causing him to be thrown into the water and the result of the injuries could have been so much worse. It’s pure luck that they weren’t.

“Just like our roads, the seas and the rivers are not playgrounds. We must all recognise the risks they present to others.”

MCA Investigator Paul Atkins said: “This case shows the importance of keeping a proper lookout and operating safely. It was a very close call – if circumstances had been only slightly different, there could have been a terrible tragedy.

“This prosecution, the first under new watercraft safety laws, sends a clear signal that people flouting the requirements that keep us all safe on the water are liable to be held accountable for their actions.”

Mike Ryan, Harbourmaster at the Port of Milford Haven, said: “The incident on the Milford Haven Waterway was extraordinarily dangerous with a very real threat to life, yet it was also completely avoidable.

“We support the MCA’s decision to prosecute the defendant for failing to keep an effective lookout. It is an important reminder that not only do Waterway users have a responsibility to keep themselves and any passengers safe, but also a responsibility towards every other user of the Waterway.

“Keeping watch is one of the most important aspects of staying safe afloat: look ahead, look behind and look left and right, adjust your speed as necessary and take early, clear and decisive action to avoid collisions.”

Court hears claims of controlling behaviour, repeated calls and violent incidents during relationship

A MAN accused of a catalogue of controlling, violent and sexual offences has appeared before Swansea Crown Court, where jurors heard evidence of alleged stalking, assaults and rape during a turbulent relationship.

Yogesh Parmar, 35, was arrested on Tuesday, June 17, 2025, after police spotted his vehicle. The court heard Parmar became aggressive during the arrest and had to be restrained and placed in handcuffs in Swansea.

Detective Constable Lauren Williams told the court she conducted a police interview with the defendant on Wednesday, June 18, 2025. She said she reviewed phone records obtained by police which showed a pattern of repeated calls to the complainant made from a withheld number.

DC Williams said the records indicated the complainant received five calls on March 4, 2025, twelve calls on March 8, 2025, and a further thirty-two calls on March 18, 2025.

When questioned about the calls while giving evidence, Parmar accepted he might be responsible, telling the court: “It is possible, yes.”

The jury heard the complainant discovered a second phone while the couple were living at Rosehill Terrace, which she believed showed Parmar was being unfaithful. She later told police that during this period she was allegedly forced into a car and driven somewhere against her will.

Another incident shown to the court included video footage recorded while the couple were driving towards Aberystwyth. In the video, Parmar could be seen revving the engine while the complainant repeatedly asked to put her seatbelt on. Jurors heard she appeared frightened in the footage. Parmar told the court he was “very confused” at the time and said he was “just trying to make sense of the situation”.

The complainant also alleged that while Parmar was living at Mount Pleasant Square, he struck her four times in the face after she believed he had been unfaithful again. She told the court no photographs were taken of her injuries because Parmar was “very possessive” of her phone.

As the trial continued, the complainant became visibly distressed while giving evidence. At 2.43pm, the judge ordered the jury and the complainant to leave the courtroom and reprimanded defence counsel, Mr Leathly, for what was described as a harsh and indirect line of questioning.

Jurors also heard a serious allegation that Parmar raped the complainant on one occasion. She told the court she informed him it was rape, and that approximately twenty minutes later, the assault happened again.

Prepared statements were also read to the court. One, from a close friend of the complainant, said communication with her “faded drastically” while she was in a relationship with Parmar. Another statement described how Parmar approached a work colleague asking to talk about the complainant. The colleague said Parmar “ground me down” until she eventually agreed to speak to the complainant.

Further video evidence was played while Parmar was in the witness box, appearing to show him attempting to gain entry to a property where the complainant was staying. In the footage, a woman could be heard sounding frightened. When asked who she was afraid of, Parmar admitted it was him.

The court also heard Parmar allegedly attended the complainant’s place of work and followed her home while she travelled in an Uber. When asked by the prosecution whether he believed she wanted him to follow her, Parmar replied: “I just wanted to know what was going on.”

During proceedings, defence counsel Mr Leathly referred to the defendant’s character, telling the court: “He is not a man of good character, of course.” The jury has heard Parmar has a previous conviction for stalking, committed between August 16 and November 4, 2022.

The trial continues.

Man convicted at Swansea Crown Court in 2017 has case sent to Court of Appeal

THE CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION has referred a man’s convictions for child sexual offences to the Court of Appeal because new information undermines the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s account.

The man, referred to as Mr HS, was convicted in 2017 at Swansea Crown Court of four counts of sexual assault of a child under 13, four counts of causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity, and three counts of attempted rape of a child under 13.

He was sentenced to an extended sentence of 16 years, comprising 15 years’ imprisonment with an extended licence period of one year.

There was a single complainant who alleged the offences occurred when she was in Mr HS’ company between 2005 and 2010. The complainant was aged five to 11 at the time of the alleged offences, and she disclosed the offences at the age of 15.

The prosecution case relied on evidence from the complainant and from those to whom she had made her disclosures. Mr HS gave evidence in his defence, denying any sexual activity with the complainant, but was convicted.

In March 2018, the Single Judge refused Mr HS permission to appeal against conviction and sentence. He did not renew his application to the Full Court. The CCRC received an application to review the conviction in February 2023.

During its review, the CCRC considered post-trial evidence that could significantly undermine the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s account.

The account given by the complainant at trial was the prosecution’s main evidence in this case. Consequently, the credibility and reliability of this account was, and remains, fundamental to the safety of Mr HS’ convictions.

The CCRC has found that based on this new evidence, there is a real possibility that the convictions will not be upheld and is referring them to the Court of Appeal.

Identities in the CCRC’s media release have been anonymised to protect the identity of the complainant.

The CCRC is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for independently reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe.

The CCRC has anonymised the defendant in this referral.