In a previous article, it said that he had opted for trial before a jury for the first incident. I don't know whether this is a good idea or not.
He may be hoping that a jury will be more lenient, that they will think it's all a bit of a lark and find him not guilty, but that's a gamble that might backfire badly. The jurors might not take kindly to people (especially English people!) arrogantly deciding that the law doesn't apply to them and driving wherever they fancy. Many farmers hate people walking over their land and he drove over it. There is also the very valid point that if he had damaged the railway track or points, the trains would have had to be cancelled. Local people work for the railway and rely on tourists for their income. What was just a bit of fun to him could have had serious consequences. I don't think this will be lost the jury.
I await further developments with interest.
[LiveJournal is occasionally a bit wobbly so this was posted to Dreamwidth http://heleninwales.dreamwidth.org/14991.html and then crossposted to LJ. If you want to leave a comment, please use whichever site you find most convenient. Comments so far: .]