Good Morning Britain presenter Richard Madeley has ignited a fierce backlash from viewers after appearing to question the severity of a 21-year prison sentence handed to a driver who deliberately targeted Liverpool football fans.
Viewers' Outrage Over 'Excuses' for Attack
During a segment on the ITV breakfast show on Wednesday, 17th December 2025, Madeley and co-host Susanna Reid discussed the case of 54-year-old Paul Doyle. Doyle was sentenced the previous day to 21 years and six months in prison for driving into a crowd of celebrating fans at a victory parade.
While stating he did not necessarily agree with the arguments, Madeley put forward several points suggesting the sentence might be disproportionate. He questioned whether such a punishment could deter someone from the "terrible grip of road rage" and floated the idea that Doyle's actions stemmed from a sudden "psychotic episode" or "red mist".
The Details of the Violent Crime
Paul Doyle had pleaded guilty to a catalogue of serious charges. These included dangerous driving, affray, and multiple counts of attempting to cause grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, causing GBH with intent, and wounding with intent. The court heard how he deliberately drove into the crowd, leaving numerous people injured.
Susanna Reid countered one of Madeley's points by noting the conviction was specifically for acting with intent, a key factor in the lengthy sentence. Madeley, however, continued to probe, asking: "How much can you deter somebody from losing their temper?"
Social Media Erupts in Criticism
The discussion prompted an immediate and angry reaction on social media platform X (formerly Twitter). Viewers accused the veteran presenter of defending Doyle's actions and making unjustified excuses for a serious crime.
One viewer wrote: "#GMB Why are they trying to justify and making excuses for this Paul Doyle." Another compared Madeley's line of questioning to something from the fictional broadcaster Alan Partridge.
Further criticism focused on the show's decision to challenge a court sentence so soon after it was delivered. A comment read: "It doesn't seem right that a TV show should question the sentence the very next day after the court case."
The controversy highlights the delicate balance broadcasters must strike when discussing high-profile sentencing, with viewers clearly expecting a firm stance against such violent acts rather than philosophical debate about the perpetrator's state of mind.
