Women’s terror as crash debris smashes into house

A WOMAN has told of the terrifying moment a car crashed through her garden wall and sent bricks and debris crashing through her living room window.

Claire Malone and her elderly mother were in bed at their home in St Helens Road, Daubhill, when the car hit and demolished her front wall.

The 36-year-old said: “The whole house shook. It felt like an earthquake but when I ran to the window I saw it was a car and called the police.

“It was terrifying. My mum’s aged 78, so she’s very shaken up by what has happened.

“The wall has travelled 20 feet from the impact of the car and through the window into the house.

“All of the furniture is wrecked and my car was written off too.

We just keep thinking what if one of us had been in the living room.”

Miss Malone’s sofa and chair were destroyed in the crash at 12.20am on Tuesday.

She is now calling for traffic calming measures on the busy stretch of road as it is the fourth time a car has crashed into the semi-detached home.

The sales rep, who lives with her mother, Vera Malone, said: “It happened once in the 1980s, again about 10 years ago and another time a year later.

“We’re just worried it might happen again because it’s a 40 mph road and traffic can’t get out that junction.”

A council spokesman said: “While we sympathise with the resident’s situation, the junctionhas not been identified as a priority for improvement and there is no scheme proposed.”

After the crash, police arrested a 30-year-old man on suspicion of driving whilst unfit for drink or drugs.

He was also arrested on suspicion of theft, possession of class B drugs and possession of a bladed article and has been bailed until July 17. A 36-year-old man was also arrested on suspicion of theft and drugs offences. He has also been bailed until July 17.

Comments (3)

12:56pm Sat 2 Mar 13

boltonnut says...

"Unfit for drink or drugs"?????What does that mean?He seems fit enough to wreak havoc for the nexy five months whilst on bail.Drugs,weapons, theft,unfit to drive.Maybe this "unfit" person is supplying the judge with drugs because only a dopey judge would grant bail in this situation.I can't wait till July 17 to see this "unfit",unnamed person receive his 100 hours of community service.PS. would it be cruel and unusual punishment to expect this unnamed person to pay for the damage he caused out of his drug proceeds?
"Unfit for drink or drugs"?????What does that mean?He seems fit enough to wreak havoc for the nexy five months whilst on bail.Drugs,weapons, theft,unfit to drive.Maybe this "unfit" person is supplying the judge with drugs because only a dopey judge would grant bail in this situation.I can't wait till July 17 to see this "unfit",unnamed person receive his 100 hours of community service.PS. would it be cruel and unusual punishment to expect this unnamed person to pay for the damage he caused out of his drug proceeds? boltonnut

2:21pm Sat 2 Mar 13

clitheroe blue boy says...

boltonnut wrote:
"Unfit for drink or drugs"?????What does that mean?He seems fit enough to wreak havoc for the nexy five months whilst on bail.Drugs,weapons, theft,unfit to drive.Maybe this "unfit" person is supplying the judge with drugs because only a dopey judge would grant bail in this situation.I can't wait till July 17 to see this "unfit",unnamed person receive his 100 hours of community service.PS. would it be cruel and unusual punishment to expect this unnamed person to pay for the damage he caused out of his drug proceeds?
I'm quite sure it should have read 'unfit through drink or drugs?' If this is the case and it wasn't unfit through drink, then I'm guessing it must have been through drugs? This would then require a blood test to determine what drugs and how much was in his system.

Unfortunately this procedure is not a fast 1, and can take several months to get the results. Which im presuming why he's been bailed?

How do I know this? My brother-in-law went through this procedure after being on strong medication for a serious ailment and was stopped driving, and admittedly looked 'tired and with glazed eyes'. The blood results took months to come back, which proved he was on prescribed legal medication and was in fact fit to drive, but wasn't a million miles off being over the impaired limit.

There is no mention of them being charged either? Both were arrested 'on suspicion' and therefore innocent till proven guilty springs to mind. It reads to me they were bailed to go back to the Police station, as my brother-in-law was.

I'm assuming if there was enough evidence to charge them, then surely they would have?

There is also no mention of either of them being involved in 'supplying drugs' to anybody, never mind a judge!

I'm not defending either of them, all I'm saying is keep an open mind and I'm sure the truth will come out when and if the evidence is there, it sometimes just takes time! Have faith in the justice system. What other choice do we have?
[quote][p][bold]boltonnut[/bold] wrote: "Unfit for drink or drugs"?????What does that mean?He seems fit enough to wreak havoc for the nexy five months whilst on bail.Drugs,weapons, theft,unfit to drive.Maybe this "unfit" person is supplying the judge with drugs because only a dopey judge would grant bail in this situation.I can't wait till July 17 to see this "unfit",unnamed person receive his 100 hours of community service.PS. would it be cruel and unusual punishment to expect this unnamed person to pay for the damage he caused out of his drug proceeds?[/p][/quote]I'm quite sure it should have read 'unfit through drink or drugs?' If this is the case and it wasn't unfit through drink, then I'm guessing it must have been through drugs? This would then require a blood test to determine what drugs and how much was in his system. Unfortunately this procedure is not a fast 1, and can take several months to get the results. Which im presuming why he's been bailed? How do I know this? My brother-in-law went through this procedure after being on strong medication for a serious ailment and was stopped driving, and admittedly looked 'tired and with glazed eyes'. The blood results took months to come back, which proved he was on prescribed legal medication and was in fact fit to drive, but wasn't a million miles off being over the impaired limit. There is no mention of them being charged either? Both were arrested 'on suspicion' and therefore innocent till proven guilty springs to mind. It reads to me they were bailed to go back to the Police station, as my brother-in-law was. I'm assuming if there was enough evidence to charge them, then surely they would have? There is also no mention of either of them being involved in 'supplying drugs' to anybody, never mind a judge! I'm not defending either of them, all I'm saying is keep an open mind and I'm sure the truth will come out when and if the evidence is there, it sometimes just takes time! Have faith in the justice system. What other choice do we have? clitheroe blue boy

6:43pm Sun 3 Mar 13

127001 says...

Released on bail by our wonderful courts system. Why do the police even bother?
Released on bail by our wonderful courts system. Why do the police even bother? 127001

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree