A Connecticut man accused of recording himself driving at extreme speeds on public highways, including runs that investigators said topped 200 miles per hour, has been denied access to a court program that could have erased the charges against him.
NBC Connecticut chief investigator Len Besthoff reported that Brice Bennett, formerly of Bloomfield, will not be allowed into Connecticut’s Accelerated Rehabilitation program, a first-time offender option that can result in charges being dismissed if a defendant successfully completes the court’s conditions.
The decision came after Judge Paul Doyle reviewed the scale of the allegations, which prosecutors and investigators described as far more than a single reckless moment behind the wheel.
According to Besthoff’s report, investigators said Bennett posted 88 videos on YouTube showing him operating a motorcycle at speeds ranging from 100 miles per hour to more than 200 miles per hour on Connecticut highways. Authorities also said Bennett was making money from the content.
A First-Time Offender Program Was On The Table
Besthoff told NBC Connecticut anchor Kevin Nathan that many viewers had asked how a case involving speeds that high could even be considered for Accelerated Rehabilitation, often referred to in court as AR.
The program is generally meant for certain first-time offenders, and if it is granted and completed successfully, it can leave the defendant without a conviction on the record. That is a major benefit, which is why the judge’s discretion mattered so much in this case.
Besthoff reported that Judge Doyle explained in court that he had met a couple of times in chambers with Bennett’s attorney to discuss the possibility of AR. The judge said Bennett technically qualified for consideration, but qualification did not mean the court had to approve it.
That distinction is important. A person can meet the threshold for a diversionary program and still be denied if the court believes the facts are too serious, too repetitive or too dangerous for that kind of leniency.
In this case, Judge Doyle concluded that Bennett’s alleged conduct crossed that line.
Videos Showed Repeated Extreme Speeds
According to Besthoff’s report, the state’s case was built around dozens of videos Bennett allegedly posted online over roughly two years.
A court clip included in the NBC Connecticut report described the motorcycle being operated in the videos at speeds from 100 to 200 miles per hour, with multiple clips allegedly showing speeds over 150, 180 and even 200 miles per hour.
That kind of speed is difficult to process in ordinary driving terms. At 200 miles per hour, a vehicle is covering nearly 300 feet every second, leaving almost no margin for a driver, another motorist or a pedestrian to react if something goes wrong.
This is where the case becomes more than a speeding story. Public roads are shared spaces, and the danger is not limited to the person making the choice to ride that fast.
Besthoff reported that investigators also said Bennett was earning money from the videos, which made the alleged conduct appear not just reckless but performative. In other words, the state’s argument was not simply that Bennett drove dangerously; it was that he allegedly built an online identity around doing it and then profited from the attention.
Bennett Apologized In Court
Bennett, who was 22 and living in Bloomfield when state police caught up with him, apologized during the court hearing, according to Besthoff.
“I’m sorry,” Bennett said in the courtroom clip included in the report. “And two, I was incredibly stupid. I was an idiot, and I understand the severity of 88 videos.”
His attorney argued that the arrest had been a turning point. According to Besthoff, Bennett’s lawyer told the court that Bennett had taken a driver’s education course, attended therapy and moved to Tennessee since the arrest.
The attorney said the case may have served as a complete stop to the behavior, describing the arrest as something that “acted as a complete shut off and a deterrent.”
Those are the kinds of facts defense attorneys often present when asking a judge to give a defendant a chance at rehabilitation rather than a traditional conviction and sentence. In many cases, a sincere apology, treatment steps and the absence of a prior criminal record can matter.
But Judge Doyle made clear that remorse after arrest did not erase the repeated risks taken before it.
Judge Says The Pattern Was Too Broad
Besthoff reported that Judge Doyle found the behavior too serious and too frequent to fit the purpose of the Accelerated Rehabilitation program.
The judge said Bennett’s conduct endangered the public dozens of times and amounted to a “broad pattern,” not a one-time mistake. In a court clip aired by NBC Connecticut, Doyle said the AR program could not satisfy the terms of the case because of “the quantity” and “the risk,” though he also acknowledged the progress Bennett had made since the arrest.
That balance is what makes the ruling notable. The judge did not appear to dismiss Bennett’s apology or the steps he had taken afterward. Instead, he ruled that the court could not treat 88 alleged videos of extreme speeding like a lapse in judgment that happened once and then stopped on its own.
That is a reasonable distinction. Rehabilitation programs are important, and courts should have room to recognize genuine change, but there is also a public interest in drawing a line when conduct repeatedly puts strangers at risk.
The Online Persona Remains Active
Besthoff also reported that Bennett’s YouTube page remains active, though Bennett now describes the channel as having gone through a “content switch.”
According to the report, the newer videos no longer show the same “Fast Boy” content, as Bennett called it. Besthoff said Bennett covers his speedometer in the new videos, but is also selling T-shirts with his mugshot on them.
That detail complicates the public-facing apology. A defendant can be genuinely sorry and still make poor branding choices afterward, but selling merchandise tied to a mugshot in a case about extreme highway speeds does not exactly project quiet reflection.
It also raises a broader question about the online incentive structure around reckless behavior. If dangerous driving becomes content, and content becomes income, the legal system is not only responding to a traffic violation but to a culture that can reward escalation until someone gets hurt.
A Plea Agreement Comes Next
Bennett is expected back in front of Judge Doyle next month, Besthoff reported, as the case moves toward a plea agreement.
That agreement is expected to come with stiffer consequences than Accelerated Rehabilitation would have brought. Because AR was denied, Bennett no longer has the option of completing conditions and potentially walking away with the charges erased.
The case is part of NBC Connecticut’s continuing “Reckless on Our Roads” series, which has examined dangerous driving and public safety concerns across the state.
For Connecticut drivers, the case is a reminder that extreme speeding is not just a private thrill or an internet stunt. When someone treats a public highway like a closed course, every person sharing that road is forced into the risk without consent.
Judge Doyle’s ruling does not decide the final punishment, but it does send a clear signal: a pattern of 100-to-200-mile-per-hour videos on public roads is not the kind of case the court is willing to wipe clean through a first-time offender program.
Ed spent his childhood in the backwoods of Maine, where harsh winters taught him the value of survival skills. With a background in bushcraft and off-grid living, Ed has honed his expertise in fire-making, hunting, and wild foraging. He writes from personal experience, sharing practical tips and hands-on techniques to thrive in any outdoor environment. Whether it’s primitive camping or full-scale survival, Ed’s advice is grounded in real-life challenges.
