Labour MP tells court she doesn't know who drove speeding Nissan

A Labour MP facing allegations of deliberately misleading the police over a speeding ticket has been accused in court of colluding with her brother to protect her political career.

Fiona Onasanya, MP for Peterborough, repeatedly told untruths to avoid a speeding ticket and refused to answer questions from the police to avoid incriminating either herself or her brother Festus, the prosecution alleged.

Under cross-examination at the Old Bailey, she denied that her brother had pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice a week before the trial to protect her political career.

David Jeremy QC, prosecuting, told the MP: “For you, the truth comes a very distant second to your personal ambition.”

Festus Onasanya, 33, admitted three counts of perverting the course of justice a week before he was due to face trial. Fiona Onasanya, a solicitor, has denied perverting the course of justice.

A notice of intended prosecution (NIP) form sent to the MP after the speeding offence was returned with Aleks Antipow named on the official forms as being behind the wheel.

Antipow previously lived in Chesterton, Cambridge, at a house rented by Onasanya and her brother, the court heard. The prosecution claims that he was at home with his parents in Russia at the time of the incident.

Onasanya told the jury that it was likely that her brother filled in the NIP form that she received in the post in August 2017. She claimed that at no point had she asked her brother, with whom she attends church weekly, if he had filled in the form.

Asked about her relationship now with her brother, Onasanya said: “It is a bit strained.”

Jeremy said that given that his decision to fill in the form had led to the current trial, their relationship would be considerably worse “if your story was even close to the truth”. “Is everything you said true or have you lied or concocted a series of lies?” he asked. Onasanya denied lying.

Asked about her interview under caution by police officers in January and why she had refused to answer any questions from officers such as who was driving or who filled in the form, Onasanya said: “I was bamboozled with lots of questions. They said I had six months before any further action and they would be in touch.”

Jeremy said: “You did not answer those questions because you didn’t have any answers that would not have incriminated either you or Festus.” Onasanya denied this.

Onasanya has told the court that she did not read the NIP form in its entirety because once she had read the date of the offence, she was convinced that she had been in Westminster at the time.

It was put to Onasanya that if her version of events was correct, her brother had set her up by filling in the form and not telling her, leading to the current trial. Onasanya replied: “Yes.”

Onasanya told the court that she could not remember where she was or what she had done on the day the offence took place.

Nine days after the offence, when she received the NIP form, she said she had just left it for her mother or brother to deal with because she assumed that parliament was sitting and she was therefore likely to have been in Peterborough. She now concedes that her recollection was wrong.

Jeremy asked who was driving the car that day. Onasanya said: “I don’t know. Both my brother and my mother have access to my vehicle. I have aunts, friends and family that I allow to use the car when I am in parliament.”

Onasanya admitted failing to ask either her brother or mother if they were driving the Nissan Micra when it was caught speeding. “Aren’t you curious to know who was driving your car? You are an MP, a graduate and a solicitor,” Jeremy said.

Jeremy then asked: “You don’t eliminate yourself?” She replied: “No.”

The trial continues.