TV and radio presenter Kirsty Gallacher broke down in court as she was banned from driving for six months, tearfully telling the judge, “I’m broken.” The 49-year-old former Sky Sports presenter appeared at High Wycombe Magistrates’ Court on Monday to plead for leniency after reaching 12 points on her licence. She asked to keep her licence under the exceptional-hardship rules, citing her role as sole carer for her two teenage sons and her ongoing battle with a fast-growing brain tumour (The Standard; The Times).

Despite her emotional testimony, District Judge Arvind Sharma dismissed her plea. He ruled that although her situation was “difficult,” he did not find it constituted exceptional hardship and therefore imposed a six-month driving ban (The Times). Kirsty revealed in court that she is undergoing radiotherapy for a benign but rapidly growing acoustic neuroma. She told the court: “I have a brain tumour. It is benign, but it’s growing very fast… They have monitored it for the last three years. I am now doing radiotherapy last week. We don’t know if [it] is going to work.” (The Sun; The Standard).

She added that she suffers from dizziness, tinnitus and anxiety due to both the illness and the steroids she is currently taking. “It’s not easy for me or my children. They are worried about the outcome,” she said. Kirsty argued that she needs her car to manage her responsibilities as both the sole carer and the financial provider for her sons, aged 18 and 15, especially given their home is in a rural area where public transport is limited. “We live in the middle of the countryside. Public transport is not a feasible option,” she said, adding that she takes her youngest son to school every day and that a ban would impact his ability to attend his extracurricular golf and rugby activities. (The Standard)

Kirsty Gallacher ‘banned’ from driving for six months

Kirsty also revealed she earns around £150,000 annually but claims she has “no savings” and cannot afford regular taxis or a driver. Despite that claim, the judge ruled that while the situation was hard, it did not meet the legal threshold for exceptional hardship. The ban was imposed for six months; she was also fined £660, with a £264 surcharge and £120 in costs for the speeding offence. (The Sun)

Speaking to reporters afterwards, she said: “There’s no empathy. I’m just an ordinary mum with plates spinning, I do everything. With my health as well, it’s going to be very difficult.” (The Standard)

Additional context: assault and health issues

In a further emotional revelation, Kirsty publicly spoke for the first time about a recent assault she suffered just weeks ago in central London. She described how, while walking to her car, a man “dressed all in black” kicked her violently from behind. She said he “brushed past her and kicked her very hard”. She admitted to the court: “I’m broken at the moment, from everything.” (The Standard)

Her health situation has been well-documented: Kirsty was diagnosed in 2021 with a benign acoustic neuroma (a tumour on the nerve connecting the ear to the brain). It left her deaf in one ear and suffering from tinnitus and hearing loss; she took a step back from a major presenting role in 2024 due to the condition. (The Sun; The Standard) She told the court that losing her licence would hamper her ability to attend hospital appointments and manage her treatment schedule, which includes frequent radiotherapy sessions and monitoring. (The Times)

Previous driving-related convictions

This is not Kirsty’s first court appearance for driving offences. In 2017, she was banned for two years for drink-driving after being found to be nearly three times the legal limit; at the time, she attributed the offence to the stress of her marriage breakdown. (The Standard) Her current ban follows a recent speeding offence on April 1, when her car was recorded travelling at 35 mph in a 30 mph zone near her home in Berkshire (The Times).

Why this matters

The case has drawn significant public attention not only because of Kirsty’s profile as a television and radio personality, but because of the compassionate pleadings she made in court. She emphasised her dual role as both caregiver and wage-earner for her family, coupled with serious health issues and recent trauma. While the law sets firm rules around driving offences and point-accumulation, her emotional testimony — “I’m broken” — underscores the heavy personal toll such rulings can have. Critics argue the court’s decision lacked empathy; supporters highlight the need for accountability regardless of personal hardship.

Ultimately, Kirsty’s situation raises broader questions about how the legal system balances fairness and hardship, especially for individuals facing serious medical conditions and caring responsibilities. The ban means she must rely on alternative transport for six months while continuing treatment, which she says will make an already difficult period even harder.