Jacob Crawshaw’s parents ‘will never know truth’ about A14 death

The family of a 19-year-old who died when the work van he was a passenger in crashed fear they “will never know for certain” if the driver was on drugs at the time after police failed to carry out a roadside test.

Jacob Crawshaw’s parents say there are still unanswered questions after their son died on the A14 in Northamptonshire in 2021.

The van driver, Christopher Hicks from St Neots in Cambridgeshire, was convicted of causing death by careless driving, but a drugs test, which was positive, was only carried out the day after the crash.

Northamptonshire Police said the case was being reviewed by the police watchdog.

Jacob was being driven by Hicks on the westbound carriageway of the A14, between junctions 11 and 10 near Barton Seagrave on 17 October 2021, when it hit the back of a slower moving lorry.

He was pronounced dead at the scene but Hicks was not drug tested until the following day.

A forensic report stated he was over the legal limit for tetrahydrocannabinol, which is the main psychoactive compound in cannabis, but the test was deemed to have been carried out too late to establish whether he was under the influence at the time of the crash.

Mr and Mrs Crawshaw pointed to a text their son sent to a friend minutes before the crash which stated: “My driver is stoned. Lovely”.

“It felt like we had been hit again,” his father James said after they had learned about the text.

“Unfortunately, because the police didn’t do a drugs test on that morning and only did it the day after, we will never know for certain whether the driver was stoned or not.

“All we do know is Jacob believed he was stoned.”

Jacob’s mother Tracey said: “Knowing it wasn’t investigated properly, the collision and the lack of true justice that we got. is devastating.

“The police didn’t do what they needed to do.”

The BBC has approached Hicks, who lived in the Eynesbury area, for comment but we have not had a response.

In a letter to the family, Northamptonshire Police acknowledged they should have done more.

“The delay in obtaining this sample has had a significant impact on the case and the investigator’s ability to include a significant aggravating factor,” it said.

Hicks was jailed for 30 weeks in February 2024 at Northampton Crown Court.

Upon his release, he obtained a job at a branch of Timpson in St Neots but was moved after the family complained that he was working on the same retail site as Jacob’s sister.

Timpson said it did not comment on “individual colleagues”.

The shortcomings in the way the crash was investigated has similarities with the Harry Dunn case, according to Jacob’s family.

19-year-old Mr Dunn died when his motorcycle was hit by a car outside the US airbase of RAF Croughton in Northamptonshire.

The car driver, American diplomat Anne Sacoolas, subsequently left the country.

A recent report into Northamptonshire Police’s handling of that investigation disclosed how a roadside drug test had not been conducted on that occasion either.

Tracey Crawshaw said: “I could see so many similarities with what happened with our case.

“There could be other cases where they haven’t been investigated properly”.

Harry’s mother, Charlotte Charles, is supporting Jacob’s parents.

“I was really shocked and quite devastated to learn there is another family. I now fear that this is the tip of the iceberg,” she told the BBC.

“Yet again the same mistakes were made. There are huge parallels.”

The Crawshaw family is due to attend a meeting with a senior Northamptonshire Police officer later this month.

They are also hoping to meet the county’s Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner, who is responsible for oversight of the police force.

A spokesman for the force said: “Our Professional Standards Department have confirmed the matter is now with the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) for review.

“This was done at the family’s request in line with their legal right to review.”

The IOPC said: “Upon conclusion of a complaint investigation by a police force, complainants are entitled to an independent review if they are dissatisfied with the outcome.

“A review is not a re-investigation, but it assesses how the complaint investigation was handled and any outcomes” it added.

“The request for a review is to be progressed by the IOPC”.