No driving ban for ex-lecturer (From The Oxford Times)
When It Happens Panel Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting 'OXFORD NEWS' to 80360 or email
No driving ban for ex-lecturer
6:00pm Saturday 16th June 2012 in News By Thom Airs
Maureen Thomas
A FORMER college lecturer has escaped a driving ban despite refusing to provide a breath test after a car crash.
Maureen Thomas was in her Citroen Xsara with her ex-husband when it hit an oncoming car on the A415 near Millets Farm at Frilford.
The 53-year-old, who is the registered keeper of the vehicle, told police she was not driving but refused to say if her ex James Naughton was at the wheel.
Thomas, of Longfields, Marcham, admitted failing to provide a specimen for analysis at Oxford Magistrates’ Court and was fined and given penalty points on her licence.
Prosecutor Sarah McKay said there was no evidence to prove Thomas, who was picked up by police as she walked away from the scene at about 7pm on March 22, was driving.
She said: “The Crown are not in a position to say that Maureen Thomas was the driver or whether it was the male person.
“Police officers saw her walk around the corner on to the A338 heading towards Frilford Heath.
“They spoke to her, suspected that she was the female who had been in the Citroen Xsara, could smell alcohol on her breath and her speech was slurred.
“She was arrested and at Abingdon Police Station was required to provide a sample of breath, but she refused and stated that it was because she was not driving.”
Crash victim Sarah Holloran was driving her 15-year-old son home from school when she was hit head-on by Thomas’s car.
She said after the court case: “I’m just incredulous that the two of them cannot say who was driving and can escape without a driving ban. It seems like a bit of a loophole.”
Martin Bourne, defending, said his client taught IT and cookery to people with learning difficulties for 10 years before becoming a carer at the Home Farm Trust in Milton two years ago.
Previously she taught at Abingdon and Witney College for a decade.
Mr Bourne said Thomas knew Mr Naughton, whom she divorced nine years ago, was a heavy drinker and had consumed alcohol on the day but thought he was “capable” of driving.
Mr Bourne said the mother-of-three also thought she was under the limit, despite having had a drink that day.
She was fined £150, a £15 victims’ surcharge and £85 costs. She was also given 10 penalty points on her driving licence.
Comments(32)
Lord Palmerstone
says...
8:02am Sun 17 Jun 12
Lord Palmerstone
says...
8:10am Sun 17 Jun 12
CPS, if the criminal is caught, the charge is wanton and furious riding NOT dangerous cycling. You got it wrong last time and the District Judge couldn't impose an appropriate penalty.
sparro
says...
9:00am Sun 17 Jun 12
tomwb1
says...
9:20am Sun 17 Jun 12
John Lamb
says...
1:52pm Sun 17 Jun 12
Simon33
says...
2:43pm Sun 17 Jun 12
So much for CSI Oxford with those topmost partial prints on the steering wheel.
Jess91
says...
6:54pm Sun 17 Jun 12
Walton Manor Webmaster@oxford
says...
9:35pm Sun 17 Jun 12
Dr bob is my hero wrote:The law would allow for a further prosecution for perverting the course of justice, but it seems that the will was not there from the CPS for some reason.
Oops forgot to add she didn't get the mandatory ban because she said she was not driving, she had taken good advice and played the game to the rules. Nick Freeman isn't a very wealthy man for nothing. The trouble is that TVP do not train their traffic officers in the complexity of the law, just how to nick somebody who they think is breaking it, without thought to the fact that the motorist may know the law better than them.
SaraHolloran
says...
11:04pm Sun 17 Jun 12
Lord Palmerstone
says...
8:06am Mon 18 Jun 12
If the drunken woman had fled the scene and the drunken man remained shouldn't PC Bigears have got him to sign a pnb entry that he wasn't driving so the drunk woman could be rebutted? .
You who were involved as victims, did this never go to trial? There must surely have been a Newton.
However Dr Bob, she doesn't appear to have been represented by Nick Freeman's firm.
SaraHolloran
says...
8:40am Mon 18 Jun 12
sparro
says...
10:17am Mon 18 Jun 12
oafie
says...
1:43pm Mon 18 Jun 12
So even if one witnesses something then unless there is someone else to back you up the police don't give a fig!
And as for evidence ...well if they don.t look for it, they can pretend it isn.t there.
Don.t expect help or knowledge of the law from the police.
Dr bob is my hero
says...
7:35pm Mon 18 Jun 12
SaraHolloran wrote:She will never admit he drink driving as it will open her up for various charges. This has been covered up. My advice would be to pop down to Oxford county Court (Crown Court) and speak to a lawyer free of charge, looking at taking out either a private prosecution, or a small claims court summons. You have witnesses and will win the case.
Myself and the two independent witnesses gave statements at the scene of the accident, but have not been contacted again in relation to the court case to give further evidence/statements etc. The accident seems to have been pushed aside and afforded little relevance. However, whilst Ms Thomas still refuses to accept responsibility and liability for the accident, three months down the track I have not had my no claims bonus reinstated, my excess and other expenses following the accident reimbursed, and my new insurance premium has been affected as a consequence. I am significantly more out of pocket than Ms Thomas, which is unjust and absurd.
SaraHolloran
says...
8:00pm Mon 18 Jun 12
Lady Penelopee
says...
10:31am Tue 19 Jun 12
I really can't believe they got away with this. One of them had to be driving, so why not breathalise them both? The owner of the car should have to state who was driving it.
Bet it's one of those scenarios where you wish you'd lied and stated you HAD see who got out the drivers door?!?!
SaraHolloran
says...
11:15am Tue 19 Jun 12
SaraHolloran
says...
7:56am Wed 20 Jun 12
lazy day wrote:It's hard to believe therefore that Ms Thomas will give up driving whilst under the influence of drink, particularly as she has shown absolutely no remorse whatsoever for causing my accident.
Maureen Thomas has been a drunk for at least the last 10yrs if not longer...Working with a woman who is drunk and reeks of booze at 9am in the morning I am so surprised she has not killed some one.
I hope you are able to get some good advise and take out a private claim against her, I really do feel for the family who was hit by Ms Thomas.
Dr bob is my hero
says...
5:26pm Wed 20 Jun 12
sparro wrote:Generally when somebody has got away with Drink driving on a loophole, the police will target them, but as she seems savvy enough to give the right story to get away with it this time, she probably knows not to drive for a long while.
This is disgusting, she should have been prosecuted, as the owner, if she would not name the driver. If your car is caught in a speed trap & you do not name the driver, they do you. so what is wrong here?? A cover up, yet again. Hope the police are watching her, as she will drink drive again.
Dr bob is my hero
says...
5:28pm Wed 20 Jun 12
SaraHolloran wrote:Good luck Sara, perhaps you could let us know how you get on. Maybe by posting on another driving story after the outcome.
Thank you, that's good advice.
SaraHolloran
says...
6:04pm Wed 20 Jun 12
Dr bob is my hero wrote:I certainly will ... thank you for your support
SaraHolloran wrote:Good luck Sara, perhaps you could let us know how you get on. Maybe by posting on another driving story after the outcome.
Thank you, that's good advice.
BackontheMainland
says...
8:30pm Thu 21 Jun 12
Dr bob is my hero
says...
10:00pm Thu 21 Jun 12
BackontheMainland wrote:It seems like a few people support the drink driving criminal judging by the thumbs down votes. Shame on you.
oh Sara, my heart goes out to you. Where is the justice in this land of ours?
cricklewood
says...
2:39pm Fri 22 Jun 12
SaraHolloran wrote:I agree totally. On top of committing an horrendous crime they are also refusing to accept responsibility. They are showing no respect for you and your son whatsoever, and showing total disregard for the law. I am disgusted that they have been able to effectively get away with this! If neither of them was prepared to own up then they should both have been banned.
I was the driver of the car that was hit by Ms Thomas and her partner. Because it was dark, it was not possible to see who was driving the vehicle. However, two independent witnesses verified at the scene that Ms Thomas' car was way over on my side of the carriageway and an accident was inevitable. My car was totally written off by the accident and the other parties appear to have shown no remorse whatsoever. I am just amazed that two individuals who were arrested at the scene, clearly drunk/over the drink drive limit, who refused to give any of the three tests to ascertain how over the limit they were, and refused to say between them who was driving the vehicle (it had to be one of them!) escape a driving ban. This is an obvious loophole in the justice system and enables drink drivers to continue driving and putting innocent peoples' lives at risk.
Concerned of Abingdon
says...
5:26pm Fri 22 Jun 12
SaraHolloran
says...
12:23pm Sat 23 Jun 12
Concerned of Abingdon wrote:Due to the unbelievable absence of a driving ban for Ms Thomas, it would seem that is inevitable and only a matter of time before she causes another catastrophic accident to completely innocent victims. Whilst friends, family and work colleagues may not agree with her conduct, unless they take action and speak out, they are condoning her (and Mr Naughton's) outrageous behaviour.
Ms Thomas is a person of poor character, despite her lawyer's defense to the contrary. She is well known for swaying all over the road driving between Marcham and Tesco after downing copious amounts of booze. Even drunken driving doesn't justify the appalling and cowardly action of hit and run. I hope the law eventually metes out the justice she deserves and that Sarah Holloran no longer needs to experience such frustration at the failure in our penal system.
SaraHolloran
says...
12:16pm Wed 27 Jun 12
SaraHolloran wrote:3 months following the accident and due to Ms Thomas lying to her insurance company and saying that her car had been stolen, her insurance company are yet to pay out! To say that Ms Thomas is of poor character is quite right, but also very much an understatement.
Concerned of Abingdon wrote:Due to the unbelievable absence of a driving ban for Ms Thomas, it would seem that is inevitable and only a matter of time before she causes another catastrophic accident to completely innocent victims. Whilst friends, family and work colleagues may not agree with her conduct, unless they take action and speak out, they are condoning her (and Mr Naughton's) outrageous behaviour.
Ms Thomas is a person of poor character, despite her lawyer's defense to the contrary. She is well known for swaying all over the road driving between Marcham and Tesco after downing copious amounts of booze. Even drunken driving doesn't justify the appalling and cowardly action of hit and run. I hope the law eventually metes out the justice she deserves and that Sarah Holloran no longer needs to experience such frustration at the failure in our penal system.
Ian Cambell
says...
12:45pm Wed 27 Jun 12
Ms Thomas walked away from the scene - why ?
Ms Thomas pleaded guilty to the crime she was charged with - her lucky day !
Look at the photo in the article - they look very different heights. Did TVP look at the positions of the front seats ? If not, why not?
Ergo, no evidence that Mr Naghten did anything wrong.
Biased vitriol is simply that - vitriol .
SaraHolloran
says...
1:19pm Wed 27 Jun 12
Ian Cambell wrote:It has been suggested that Ms Thomas pleaded to the Court that she needed to retain her licence to get to her place of work, which incidentally is working with vulnerable people within our society with learning difficulties. As one of the previous commentators suggested, Ms Thomas arrives for work 'reeking of booze at 9am in the morning'!
Unbiased observer :
Ms Thomas walked away from the scene - why ?
Ms Thomas pleaded guilty to the crime she was charged with - her lucky day !
Look at the photo in the article - they look very different heights. Did TVP look at the positions of the front seats ? If not, why not?
Ergo, no evidence that Mr Naghten did anything wrong.
Biased vitriol is simply that - vitriol .
Ian Cambell
says...
1:31pm Wed 27 Jun 12
My posting was directed at the abuse that I have read against her former husband.
SaraHolloran
says...
7:42pm Wed 27 Jun 12
Ian Cambell wrote:Thank you for your sympathy, which is appreciated. I understand that all is not over for Mr Naughton regarding this incident. I cannot say who was driving the car at the time of the accident, but I sense Ms Thomas is responsible for more than she is alluding to.
Ms Hollaran, I have every sympathy with your position and wish you luck with Ms Thomas.
My posting was directed at the abuse that I have read against her former husband.
Whitto says...
8:45pm Sat 16 Jun 12