Fiona Onasanya Retrial: The Missing Pieces of the Jigsaw

The jury has begun its deliberations in the retrial of Fiona Onasanya.

The 35 year-old Labour MP for Peterborough stands accused of perverting the course of justice by dishonestly identifying a Russian man as the driver of her Nissan Micra at the time it was clocked by a speed camera on the evening of 24th July 2017.

You will find much more background to the case by searching our earlier posts.

The reporting of the case has been a little bit sparse, but the Peterborough Telegraph's Stephen Briggs has been tweeting regular updates. BBC News reporter Simon Dedman has also been watching events down at The Old Bailey.

Until yesterday there was an important piece of the jigsaw missing: Who was driving Onasanya's Nissan Micra at the moment it triggered a speed camera on The Causeway in Thorney?

During the first trial she denied that it was her, but eventually conceded that it might have been. She also claimed that several people had access to the vehicle and permission to drive it, but she fell short of pointing the finger of blame at any individual.

There appears to be no dispute that cell site data places both of Onasanya's mobile phones in the locality of the speed camera at the time it was triggered. According to her that means she could not have been driving, because she never drives using her mobile phone.

So who actually was driving then?

According to Onasanya it must have been her brother Festus, who has already pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice and therefore, by implication, is a bit of a dishonest chancer.

So how could Dr DeFeo have seen Onasanya alone in her car on the evening she triggered the speed camera?

He must be mistaken about the time, says the MP. According to her diary, which clearly has all the precision and accuracy of a quality Swiss timepiece, the meeting at Dr DeFeo's home actually started at 4.30 pm. She did drive to that meeting alone, so she says.

Presumably, as sunset was at 8.58 pm that evening, Dr DeFeo was also mistaken about his claim that she arrived when it was dark and stopped late enough that he offered her a bed for the night.

If Onasanya's account is accurate, then she drove her Nissan Micra away from Dr DeFeo's property, but for whatever reason must have returned to Thorney later that night as a passenger in the vehicle.

We know from the speed camera image that the vehicle was travelling eastbound (e.g. approaching Thorney) when it was caught exceeding the speed limit at 10.03 pm, so the only obvious explanation - assuming the accuracy of Onasanya's story - is that it must have been making a second visit to the village in the space of a few hours.

Hopefully, having heeded warnings from the trial judge, the jury will not be reading this article, but if they were we'd remind them of Lord Denning's observation on the standard of proof required to convict: "It need not reach certainty, but it must carry a big degree of probability.

"Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of a doubt.

"The law would fail to protect the community if it admitted fanciful possibilities to deflect the course of justice.

"If the evidence is so strong against a man as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour, which can be dismissed with the sentence 'of course it is possible, but not in the least bit probable', the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt, but nothing short will suffice."

Update (19/12/18): Fiona Onasanya Convicted of Perverting the Course of Justice.