I nearly came of my bike this morning on the way to work - a woman in a car pulled out straight across me and I only just stopped in time. She was texting. I have a nice photo of her and her number plate, ironically taken with my phone, which is going straight to Thames Valley Police.

How much will it take to make people realise that using mobile phones while driving KILLS!

How can Ms Triggs' mother say she didn't believe she was texting when there was clear and irrefutable evidence on the mobile phone record! This sort of head-in -the-sand attitude is going to help nobody realise just how dangerous using a mobile phone while driving really is.

This is my first ever post but felt very strongly on this one so thought I'd start typing.....

Mr Brett on his way to work? What is his job? Perhaps a full time commenter?

Anyway, I digress...

The last thing a grieving parent wants to hear is the self-opinionated Mr Brett saying there is 'irrefutable evidence'. Obviously he is not in the legal profession as this is not the case - we do not know the exact time of the crash, just the time of the 999 call record and a phone record syaing a text was sent/received. We can guess but never be certain of a direct link between the two - remember sending/receiving is different to reading/writing. Ever heard of benefit of the doubt? Ultimately, does it really matter? - the tragic loss of life far outweighs the argument Mr Brett is trying to carry over.

It must be said, though, that for once I fully agree with one of Mr Brett's points - texting while driving is unacceptable. It's just a real shame that the idea of taking photos of drivers and number plates can't be applied to the muppets on 2 wheels with no lights swerving in and out of traffic during the rush hour. I think I can safely guarantee that Mr Brett will see more of these than texting drivers on his way to/from work. Perhaps he would like to comment on this for the car drivers reading this?

Tony Brett wrote:
I nearly came of my bike this morning on the way to work - a woman in a car pulled out straight across me and I only just stopped in time. She was texting. I have a nice photo of her and her number plate, ironically taken with my phone, which is going straight to Thames Valley Police. How much will it take to make people realise that using mobile phones while driving KILLS! How can Ms Triggs' mother say she didn't believe she was texting when there was clear and irrefutable evidence on the mobile phone record! This sort of head-in -the-sand attitude is going to help nobody realise just how dangerous using a mobile phone while driving really is.

I know she was breaking the law but you do know that can be classed as infringing someones privacy, just so you are warned before you take it to the police, I wouldn't want you getting in trouble for trying to do the right thing, we all know what the police are like. These people who drive whilst using phones really are asking for trouble IMO! I know her life was lost and many others had been but what if she had have swerved onto a path where a mother/father and child were? or anyone for that matter! it disgusts me that people are still carrying on like this!!

Tony Brett & Reality Check,

This seems to be another case of blame the other road users for the danger that appear on the road, o ride a motorbike everyday to and from work... go on i know your dying to point out how dangerous motorcyclists are. I could point out how bad SOME car drivers, SOME cyclists and SOME bikers are on our roads, but that gets us nowhere!

Car drivers can have distractions when driving

Bikers overtake a lot, filter through traffic

Cyclist jump red lights, ride without lights

Its a part of life we all pose a hazzard. No one is perfect on the roads we wish we were (yes mr policeman that i followed down the A420 from a distance at 85-90mph in a 50 zone). There are those of us who are irresponsible they are the ones to blame not grouping everyone of them road users!

Sponge Bob,

It may surprise you but my opinion of motorcyclists is actually very high. The usual danger to bikers is the car driver who is not attentive enough. I'm not going to quote stats but my I suspect more bikers are injured in accidents that are not their fault. Yes, you will get a small minority who are dangerous but I would say that minority is a lot smaller than the number of cars/push bikes. I think the 'self-preservation' mentality is ingrained heavily in most bikers!

I'm not trying ot say all cyclists/drivers/bikers are bad - i was merely trying to throw a different slant on Tony's point. Someone has died and he's getting on his moral high horse saying stuf fthat isn't 100% accurate. I read these columns on a dialy basis and see this all too often.

As for the A420 and 85-90mph. For a biker, I would say you were going a bit slow :)

Reality Check wrote:
Sponge Bob, It may surprise you but my opinion of motorcyclists is actually very high. The usual danger to bikers is the car driver who is not attentive enough. I\'m not going to quote stats but my I suspect more bikers are injured in accidents that are not their fault. Yes, you will get a small minority who are dangerous but I would say that minority is a lot smaller than the number of cars/push bikes. I think the \'self-preservation\' mentality is ingrained heavily in most bikers! I\'m not trying ot say all cyclists/drivers/bikers are bad - i was merely trying to throw a different slant on Tony\'s point. Someone has died and he\'s getting on his moral high horse saying stuf fthat isn\'t 100% accurate. I read these columns on a dialy basis and see this all too often. As for the A420 and 85-90mph. For a biker, I would say you were going a bit slow :)

Very true Reality Check,

The reason for my posting was a lot of people who leave them on here are very narrow minded. The have their views and wont accept anyones side. Usually finger pointing. i now see you are pointing out a differing slant on what was already written.

You are right on the 'self-preservation' mentality that people develop on the roads. Unfortunatly with all the saftey devices/driver aids that protect people a few of them dont have this mentality.

I know i commented on people blaming but i am not, i am just going on what i have experienced over the past couple of months where 3 of my car driving friends have crashed, suddenly they realise that they are not invinsible and actually have realised that they should be more carefull.

The approach i take is treat everyone else on the road like they are stupid and will try and take you out! that way you know what is happening around you and you should be safer.

Oh i know the speed on the A420 was slow but i couldn't really go flying past the policeman, i may be a bit of an adrenaline junkie but a police chase urm no thanks (",)

Finally, people are beginnning to realise that the cause of much trouble on the road is poor attention - which causes speed to wander beyond the limit, or people to stray from lanes, or miss (or ignore) road signs.

It's the idea that you can do something else while you're driving that is the mistaken one. When you're in a car you should be concentrating on the road, and nothing else - not reading, brushing your hair, eating a sandwich, and certainly not using a mobile. We'd all be better off with skills from these guys: http://www.iam.org.uk/

Reality Check wrote:
This is my first ever post but felt very strongly on this one so thought I\'d start typing.....

Mr Brett on his way to work? What is his job? Perhaps a full time commenter?

Anyway, I digress...

The last thing a grieving parent wants to hear is the self-opinionated Mr Brett saying there is \'irrefutable evidence\'. Obviously he is not in the legal profession as this is not the case - we do not know the exact time of the crash, just the time of the 999 call record and a phone record syaing a text was sent/received. We can guess but never be certain of a direct link between the two - remember sending/receiving is different to reading/writing. Ever heard of benefit of the doubt? Ultimately, does it really matter? - the tragic loss of life far outweighs the argument Mr Brett is trying to carry over.

It must be said, though, that for once I fully agree with one of Mr Brett\'s points - texting while driving is unacceptable. It\'s just a real shame that the idea of taking photos of drivers and number plates can\'t be applied to the muppets on 2 wheels with no lights swerving in and out of traffic during the rush hour. I think I can safely guarantee that Mr Brett will see more of these than texting drivers on his way to/from work. Perhaps he would like to comment on this for the car drivers reading this?

Yes - there are lots of loony cyclists on the road too. I am not one of them. I always stop at red lights and always use lights, front and back, when lack of daylight dictates.

Somebody actually stopped and congratulated me for stopping at a red traffic light yesterday. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious.

Oh and I drive around Oxford sometimes too.

Reality Check wrote:
This is my first ever post but felt very strongly on this one so thought I\'d start typing.....

Mr Brett on his way to work? What is his job? Perhaps a full time commenter?

Anyway, I digress...

The last thing a grieving parent wants to hear is the self-opinionated Mr Brett saying there is \'irrefutable evidence\'. Obviously he is not in the legal profession as this is not the case - we do not know the exact time of the crash, just the time of the 999 call record and a phone record syaing a text was sent/received. We can guess but never be certain of a direct link between the two - remember sending/receiving is different to reading/writing. Ever heard of benefit of the doubt? Ultimately, does it really matter? - the tragic loss of life far outweighs the argument Mr Brett is trying to carry over.

It must be said, though, that for once I fully agree with one of Mr Brett\'s points - texting while driving is unacceptable. It\'s just a real shame that the idea of taking photos of drivers and number plates can\'t be applied to the muppets on 2 wheels with no lights swerving in and out of traffic during the rush hour. I think I can safely guarantee that Mr Brett will see more of these than texting drivers on his way to/from work. Perhaps he would like to comment on this for the car drivers reading this?

OK. Text sent from the phone that the deceased had with her loose in the car. 3 minutes later the 999 call is made. What other conclusions can be drawn? There was nobody else in the car was there?

Sometimes the truth is painful but that doesn't stop it being the truth.

My views about cyclists that jump traffic lights, ride without light etc. are quite well known on these forums already.

Alot of people were effected by Marnie's death. Grieving family members do not need to hear such things as''''irrefutable evidence'''' don't put comments or opinions that you no nothing about well what you got from a newspaper artical! People are still grieving and everyday is hard. Think before you speak!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As a foot note to this message I would like to thank "reality check" for his comment. I truly hope that others who have read this story have reacted with the same intelligence and compassion to read the story by miss simmonds and see through to the real issues involved with this incident. As for Mr Brett and Miss Simmonds, I hope that nothing occurs within there life to let them reflect on the hurt that this kind of misrepresantation and sensationalism can cause. They have no idea of the damage that this has caused us. Also to clarify, our family including Marni would never advocate the use of mobile phones whilst driving.

As a foot note to this message I would like to thank "reality check" for his comment. I truly hope that others who have read this story have reacted with the same intelligence and compassion to read the story by miss simmonds and see through to the real issues involved with this incident. As for Mr Brett and Miss Simmonds, I hope that nothing occurs within there life to let them reflect on the hurt that this kind of misrepresantation and sensationalism can cause. They have no idea of the damage that this has caused us. Also to clarify, our family including Marni would never advocate the use of mobile phones whilst driving.

Thankyou spongebob much appreciated

Having read the note from the Triggs I unreservedly withdraw all my comments on this story and apologise, also without reservation, for any hurt caused to those grieving the loss of the person concerned. Please accept my sincere condolences.

I apologise too for relying on the Oxford Mail Web article for the facts of the case. I should know better.

Thankyou Tony it is appreciated. I guess your comments were a symptom of the irresponsibility displayed by miss simmonds and her employees. Unfortunately this is the problem we now face.

also thankyou to anon didn't see your message before

I also apologise should my comments have caused offence. obviously we were discussing only the info we had been given, no one can get cross at some one for that as that's not our fault. in light of Oscar's posts I feel that the paper should revoke and re-write this story with all the true facts. It was unfair to this poor grieving family to have read and had to deal with these comments when they knew what was written was not the whole truth. I can't think of anything more awful! I hope the paper do the right thing and I wish your family sympathy and prayers. Gos bless.

Tony Brett is a ****, he is always spouting off on here thinking he is always right, apologies are no good once the damage has been done,He thinks he knows everything when he knows nothing.

Having read the above, I want to add my voice to those above calling for a review of this biased story and calling for the journalist to revise it and apologise, at the very least.

Also, to the family of Marni - my thoughts are with you at this bleak time, for what it's worth. Although it is probably no consolation, I wanted to tell you that I read the story in the paper and, far from thinking 'what an irresponsible girl' or anything remotely like that, I just thought that it was immensely sad that this had happened. Even if it was the case that Marni had been using a mobile phone in the car, most of us would not have made any judgement about her based on this, unlike the judgement that the reported is clearly angling for - after all, people are distracted for many reasons all of the time in cars, and most of them do not have accidents as a result of this, so there would have had to be some extra, tragic factor even if she had been texting. People do much worse things all the time and I object to the reporter's inference that this is anything more than a tragedy. It sounds like Marni was a wonderful girl, please don't think that most people would have judged her because of this stupid article.

I hope the newspaper does the right think and makes a formal correction and apology to you though, for your own peace of mind. Take care. Lina

I usually just read the articles here but I felt I had to say something about this story and all of these comments. Firstly whoever you spoke to who made remarks about 'paragraphs' sounds like a complete idiot and the staff at this paper are obviously just as bad at dealing with people as they are in getting their facts straight. The story was silly - I thought it was silly even before I read your comments - and a reporter has obviously used information in a very selective way to produce a poor article which does not fairly reflect events. This selectivity was clear to me when I first read the article and I don't think you should worry that anyone would be persuaded by it.

However Cherry Coombe, I think you may be allowing yourself to get a little bit too worried about what was essentially an article that very few people will have read properly in a throwaway paper written by the sort of imbeciles you have had the misfortune to deal with on the phone. This is just the way that local rags work - second rate journalists writing second rate articles. The best way to deal with misrepresentation in the press is to just ignore it and realise that most people really don't take papers and face value, and as they did not even know your friend it really does not matter what strangers may have thought for a split second whilst reading this article. You only have to look at the gutter press every day to see that it is full of slander and lies, often of a much worse sort than have been written here. The Oxford Mail is in the wrong for allowing such poor journalism, but at the moment you are probably doubly sensitive to such things and I think it may be best for those who knew Marni Triggs to realise that this article is not worth the bother, and certainly will not affect the way that those who knew this girl feel about her - you are the only people who count in this situation, and you have the power to not let this insensitive article upset you more than it has to. The Oxford Mail are unlikely to print a page 1 story in retraction of the article unless you pursue legal action or mount a campaign, but do you really want to go to all that trouble and create this stress for yourselves? Perhaps it would be best to let the grieving process take its course instead of keeping your anger at the paper alive. Of course you must do whatever you feel is necessary but I fear that in your sadness you may be over-reacting slightly to this article. I say this because I was in a similar situation many years ago when my sister died in a tragic housefire, and a local paper decided to report in great detail how she did not have a smoke alarm fitted in her flat, which was obviously completely unnecessary and insensitive reporting which made us very cross.

Miss Triggs was obviously a wonderful girl and the Oxford Mail will not change that, but it will cause you more suffering if you allow yourself to be riled at the sort of common bad journalism the paper is obviously keen to foster. Their opinion is unimportant and is best ignored.

All the best, I wish you well in whatever you decide to do and am thinking of your loss at this time.

We agree with both Oscar and Cherrys comments in their entirety. Is there anything that could help to push this along so that it will be put right?

After reading that article, some of the replies on this page have restored my faith in humanity. I have little to add except to say that I agree with David, and my thoughts are also with the Triggs.

To Marni's family:

Sorry if this is a bit personal but I didn't know how to contact you directly. After reading Oscar's description of Marni in his post I felt it was so tragic that she was lost and wanted to find out more about her life. I found the slideshow video in honour of her life on google. I hope you don't mind but I wanted to tell you that watching the video has affected me deeply. Even though I never knew her it was obvious just by seeing her photos that there was something deeply special and different about her. She had a beauty and natural confidence about her that leaps out even to a complete stranger. I know that nothing I can say will make losing her easier but I just wanted to you know that, even though I never met her, the photos of her life have made me realise how precious life is and how important it is to live every moment of it. Even though nothing can bring Marni back I want you to know that watching this video has inspired me to try to overcome my own limitations and to live more like Marni lived. Whenever I need inspiration I will think of her and of your terrible loss and try to overcome obstacles in her honour.

I'm really sorry if this is too personal and I don't want to upset anyone, I just wanted to you to know how deeply this affected me. I am not normally affected by what I read in the news or on the web but there was just something about this that stands out about Marni and I will not forget it. My mum told me before she died that as long as I remembered what she had taught me, she would never be truly lost. No-one's life has ever been wasted when their inspiration lives on in others, even when it is so senseless and tragic as this. Thankyou for helping me find an inspiration. My most heartfelt thoughts are with you and I hope that one day the sun will shine again for you.

Evie

Thank you, all of you above who share real feelings and sound advice.
Still no response from The Oxford Mail!

It simply isn't good enough is it on Oxfordmail's part!!

(apologies for the lateness of this - have been away without PC access)

I'd like to add my sincere condolences to the Triggs family. A passing is always a terrible event but given Marni's age, this is especially so.

I'm glad to see that the Oxford Mail has made some sort of response. However, I really do not feel that it's appropriate - nor is the removal of a lot of comments from this page (I'm sure those following this will know what I mean).

Also, if anyone saw Saturday's Oxford Mail you will see a story regarding Mr Brett's original incident. I feel it farcical that this could get to page 5 news and a response from the OM regarding the innacuracies mentioned in this forum took this long. I'm sure people will be able to draw their own conclusions.....

It is notable that the additional note made in today's paper, and the removal of my comments and complaints submitted to the paper from this site, compound my view that it is The Oxford Mail's intention to disallow the Triggs the validation of their argument that the paper has associated Marni, unfairly, with the illegal practice of texting while driving.

Below, please find a copy of my letter to the editor. Other submissions are available on request.

Dear Mr O’Neill.

The Oxford Mail and The Oxford Times purport to deliver local news.

Marni Triggs was wholly opposed to the use of mobile ‘phones while driving. She, as we, remained mindful of the responsibility inherent in driving a car. Marni spent hours of practice travelling miles across several continents in advance of taking her driving test, with a ROSPA qualified advanced driver. No one was less likely to text and drive than Marni Triggs. The Coroner ruled out “texting while driving” as a possible cause of Marni’s death before announcing a final verdict of “ACCIDENTAL DEATH” in this case.

On Friday 23rd February, your reporter, Ellie Simmonds, constructed a piece of writing after having spent an hour and a half, on Thursday 22nd February, at the inquest into Marni Triggs’ death. Simmonds’ intention was to further her own ends and gain a front page spread; why else would she subject herself to the discomfort of another family’s grief? Simmonds’ intention was not to deliver local news but rather to jump on the band wagon which allows and supports the delivery of hype in the guise of news; why else scour the Coroner’s courtroom floor for dry bones to fry? Her intention was not to honour the high regard in which Marni Triggs remains in memory but rather to diminish Marni’s reputation and to defame her name in the service of contorted editorial interests alone. Simmonds’ desperation, for a strap line to which to bind her opinion that texting while driving costs lives, which it does, allowed her to twist and manipulate the facts of Marni’s life to suit the abhorrent article so many have declaimed on the paper’s website.

Simmonds’ journalise carried the misleading and ill-informed headline, “Texting clue to driver’s death” alongside a photograph of Marni Triggs. Capitalising on the public’s current and topical concern, about the danger of the illegal and irresponsible practice of using a mobile ‘phone while driving, Simmonds secured the high profile front-page-spread for her article. Readers of your paper, seeing Marni’s photograph alongside Simmonds’ sensational headline, will have deduced the coroner found Marni guilty of texting while driving. A’ level students of English will of course be equipped to deconstruct the report’s opinion based contortion. Other readers, swallowing images whole with their lunch, will forever associate a beautiful girl with an ugly idea.
Simmonds’ cites extracts of the Coroner’s discussion of the possible causes of Marni’s accident of 7th August 2006; even though the Coroner found it impossible to consider text messaging a factor of the crash, Simmonds argues, “Pc Dave Mitchell told the inquest that mobile phone records showed Miss Triggs was texting her boyfriend just before the crash”, continuing, “Pc Mitchell could not be certain about the timings, it appeared the last text was sent at 2.16pm - three minutes before the 999 call reporting the crash”. It does not take a rocket scientist to note that a small car, travelling at speed along a dual carriage way, might be three miles away three minutes after leaving a parking space. It does not take Sherlock Holmes to wonder whether this final text had been sent to or from the phone in question; and it doesn’t take a forensic investigator to realise that Simmonds’ crafty journalism is constructed to mislead her readers. One need not wonder at the impact Simmonds’ careful editing hoped to achieve.
Sure enough, minutes after the paper reached its hungry public, the sensationalist reporting had had its desired effect. Marni’s name was being bandied about on the internet; her mother’s sound knowledge of her daughter’s nature and character slated and the Coroner’s scientific and thorough investigations ignored. The Oxford Mail convicted Marni of dangerous and irresponsible behaviour even though the Coroner had found her death the result of an accident and even though it is implausible to consider this stunning, dynamic and wholly responsible, unique and individual girl would allow herself to text while driving.
I do not condone the use of mobile phones in cars any more than Simmonds but neither do I approve the insensitive exploitation of others’ grief in the service of an already suspect career. Had it been the case that Marni had been using a mobile phone while driving (rather than answering calls from a parking space) I and the Triggs family would be the first to launch a “Leah Betts” style campaign in the hope of averting further agony for other families. As it is we find ourselves, instead, attempting to communicate with a cowardly media, too callous to respond to the copious and heartfelt responses Simmonds’ article has prompted from the many she has damaged.
Yours Sincerely.

Cherry Coombe

I now provide an idiot's guide, for the benefit of the paper's editors, to my objections to Simmonds' editorial.

1. Simmonds' piece has the appearance of a news story. It does not present facts about Marni Triggs' inquest. Rather, Simmonds presents opinion, about the danger of text messaging, in the guise of a news article.
1.b. The meaning derived from "texting provides clue ... " in justaposition with Marni's photograph is unambiguous and memorable. This interpretation will continue to inflect Marni's family's and friends' interactions with the local community forever.
2. Simmonds suggests the coroner found Marni guilty of texting while driving.
3. The Coroner considered the possibility that Marni texted while driving and ruled this out. There is no evidence to suggest Marni texted or read texts while driving.
4. Police reports show that the times texts were sent to (and from) Marni's phone do not correspond with the time of the accident.
5. Simmonds suggests that a text (and whether this was sent to or from Marni's phone Simmonds shrouds in mystery) of 3 minutes prior to the 999 call might account for her death,.
6. Simmonds fails to note that the cause of death was found to be "ACCIDENTAL DEATH".
7. Simmonds also fails to note that the Coroner was unable to assess the part Marni's propensity for thrombosis might have played in the accident.
8. Simmonds has exploited the topical and thus "newsworthy" fodder the allusion to text messaging provides to further her own Carreer and to slander Marni's reputation.
8.b. Simmonds has had a potentially fatal impact of Marni's boyfriends ability to function; the defamation of Mr. Coombe's character is implicit in Simmonds' naming him and associating his text messages with the cause of Marni's death.
9. Simmonds fails to mention that Marni was opposed to the use of mobile phones while driving.
10. Simmonds has dragged Marni's name and Rowan Coombe's name into disrepute.
11. Marni's family and friends now have the arduous task of clearing Marni's name and have so far received no help whatsoever from the Oxford Mail which is to be held entirely responsible for this defamation of character.
12.The assistant editor of the Oxford Mail seems unperturbed by the impact this so called report has had on Marni's family and on her boyfriend, Rowan Coombe.
13. No account has been taken of the eloquent and dignified attempt made by Marni's brother to redress the inaccuracies of Simmonds' story.
14. Most of Oxford Mail's staff seem unable to precis long texts. Plenty of information is contained in pieces posted onto your web site below and in response to Simmonds' piece yet even the assistant editor is unable to summarise the main points of arguments therein contained.
15. The inability of staff of "The Oxford Mail" to precis has serious implications for the verifiable content of their reports. How might they produce pieces based on fact if they are unable to locate the main points of arguments given either verbally or in text form if they have not mastered the skill of precis?
16. I take great exception to your attitude as the paper's assistant editor. If the editor must delegate responsibility for dealing with the disgruntled victims of reporters' stories to underlings he should also brief them first so they know exactly what it is they are responding to. Perhaps you, Chipperfield, should check your reading, writing and listening skills; I am sure your peers are already aware your interpersonal skills fall off the bottom of the scale.
17. I insist your paper print an immediate and high profile apology, withdrawing all implied allegations that Marni Triggs was texting while driving. This full page, front page article should then cover and be based on the evidence provided at the inquest in to Marni Triggs' death.
18. Since your reporters are clearly to be found wanting in the areas noted above I suggest your editor commission Oscar Triggs to produce an article for the paper.
19. The Oxford Mail exploits the current trend for biased, unjust and dangerous editorial masquerading as news reporting. In doing so The Oxford Mail makes transparent its devil-may-care attitude to the health and well being of the community it pretends to serve.
20. Simmonds' editorial has diminished the minimal quality of life Marni Triggs' family and boyfriend have struggled to establish for themselves since her death. I abhor the power you allow your reporters in this regard.

I will be surprised if you do not reply to this email. If I am surprised I will have no hesitation in pursuing my complaints against your newspaper with the help of higher authorities and agencies set up to protect and serve the public interest.

Cherry Coombe

It is not surprising but disappointing to note that the paper has not removed comments above about Marni's Mum but they have removed from gthe site comments which made clear exactly what it was we objected to. I have resubmitted some of my own notes.

THIS MESSAGE ALONG WITH THE MESSAGES OF CHERRY COOMBE HAVE ALREADY BEEN DELETED ONCE BY THE EDITOR OF THE OXFORD MAIL I SINCERELY HOPE THAT THIS APPALLING ACTION WILL NOT BE TAKEN AGAIN> IF IT IS THEN REST ASSURED I WILL CONTINUE TO REPOST IT> THIS ACTION BY SIMON O"NEILL AND JOHN CHIPPERFIELD WILL NOT BE TOLERATED AND IS A TRUE MEASURE OF THE LEVEL THAT THESE EXCUSES FOR HUMAN BEINGS OPERATE AT>I HAVE BEEN GIVEN RELIABLE INFORMATION THAT THE OXFORD MAIL HAVE A LONG RECORD OF TAKING ADVANTAGE OF SITUATIONS SUCH AS THIS AND COMPOUNDING THE MISERY OF VULNERABLE FAMILYS IN ORDER TO GAIN "STORYS". WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN TO US AND HOPEFULLY THROUGH OUR PLANNED ACTIONS WE CAN PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING TO OTHERS. A MASSIVE THANKYOU TO EVERYONE FOR THERE SUPPORT AND POSITIVE MESSAGES< WE WILL TRY TO KEEP YOU UPDATED ON ANY FURTHER PROGRESS.
IF YOU HAVE READ THIS STORY PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS! A MESSAGE FROM MARNIS BROTHER.
Firstly to deal with Mr Brett. "clear and irrefutable evidence". I don't know Mr Brett, but having attended the coroners court yesterday I'm guessing I didn't see him there. If he were he would have found that In fact there was absolutely NO CLEAR EVIDENCE to suggest that Marni's accident was caused by use of a mobile phone, which is what led the coroner to declare the FINAL VERDICT on the reason for death as "ACCIDENTAL DEATH", a fact that Miss Simmonds has irresponsibly, unproffesionaly and above all callously neglected to report in this story . This was the final and unquestioned verdict on Marnis death for the very reason that there was absolutely no clear evidence for any explanation of her tragic loss of control let alone the explanation that she was using a phone. The times on both her and her boyfriends phone were deemed to be completely inaccurate and totally inconclusive. The other drivers and witness' in the accident reported no sightings of her using a mobile phone. The summing up from the coroner highlighted along with other issues unreported in this story a potential and unfortunately for the memory of Marni TOPICAL problem. There were many other possible/ probable scenarios put forward to the court. One of which being that Marni suffered from a disease of which the main symptom was that she was at a very high risk of blood clots and embellisms. Having flown the day before, therefore increasing the chance of clotting, there is a good chance her loss of control could have been caused by a blackout as a result of her health problems. Unfortunately Marni was unaware of the disease at the time of her death as she had only recently been for tests, the results of which were realeased after her tragic death, for this reason her condition remained untreated and unmanaged. For the record this is actually the scenario most supported by her family and Marni's general practitioner who undertook the tests on Marni weeks before. I would like to point out that this as with the mobile phone scenario was impossible to prove with any certainty, for this reason as I have already said the coroner declared that the outcome of the case was "ACCIDENTAL DEATH" not death by dangerous driving or neglect but an unfortunate and tragic accident.
Unfortunately for the memory of Marni and the feelings of our family, this story has been used to highlight a current affairs debate and for that reason Miss Simmonds seems to have found it appropriate to bend and manipulate the facts of this case to suit her own agenda. To highlight this I would like to point out that at no point in her "story", has she felt the need or desire to report that the official verdict on the case and i'll reiterate once again was "ACCIDENTAL DEATH". On top of this there has been absolutely no attempt whatsoever to illustrate any of the other possible explanations put forward to the court.
As you can well imagine this story has caused me and my family untold grief, on top of the ordeal that we have already faced and were begining to come to terms with. We were happy with the proceedings and verdict of yesterdays inquest and having met and befriended the other driver involved in the accident it seemed that we had come to a point where all involved in this terrible ordeal could begin to move forward. Unfortunately for us one pathetic excuse for a human being decided it necessary to use this situation as a tool to further her own pathetic career. Unfortunately with the attitude displayed I am sure she will go far in her field. I hope for everyones sake that this is not the case as i'm sure there are more than enough people with her attitude in our media already.
For the record we will be making a formal complaint about this story and be pushing for an ammendment and revokation. We will also if possible be embarking on legal proceedings. Whatever the results of this action I am sure that they will not attain anywhere near the level of exposure that miss simmonds take on events has. I would therefore like to thankyou for taking the time to read this. If this has been a topic of discussion or debate for anyone reading this, me and my family would be very grateful if our opinions on this situation were represented in some way. Any feedback or comments would be greatly appreciated.

Faithfully,
Oscar Triggs and family

Marni Triggs 1985- 2006

Marni was a fun loving, extremely hard working and caring girl who did a lot of living in her short life. A talented artist and dress designer. A model for the likes of Vivienne westwood. Her main passion in life was travelling and the year before her death she worked extremely hard in an egg factory amongst other places to send her self on a year trip around the world with her beloved boyfriend Rowan Coombe. On a shoestring budget they visited Fiji, Australia, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Lao, India and Sri Lanka to name a few and I'm sure gathered a wealth of experiences that most who are lucky enough to live in to old age would have envied. She is and always will be greatly missed by all who knew her.

In light of recent conversations with the editors of the Oxford Mail I would like to ammend the above letter simply by replacing miss Simmonds name with the Oxford Mail team. It would seem that a large proportion of the input on this article came from the editorial team. Having talked to them on the phone I cannot say that i'm surprised that they were involved.

I would also like to point out that any reference to Mr Brett are simply because I have copied this message from my outbox. His apology and ammendment to his first message were gratefully received.

according to the police the Oxford Mail are very well known for doing this,especially to grieveing families in vunerable positions. Knowing that they are not in any state to defend themselves.
I just want them to know they really have picked on the wrong family here, and we r going to take it as far as we can, in memory of Marni, who had a very strong sense of justice as we all do.
If we can prevent this happening again to only one more family,it will be worth it!
They are sub-human scum to prey on people in these situations in order to make there Newspaper "topical" and "interesting" as a local newspaper they have a responsiblitlity to the comumity!
And that perthetic excuse of an apology is laughable. they have taken the Coroners words completely out of context and not mentioned Marni's illness or stated the fact that the 999 call was made imedatly after the crash, times do not match, as the coroners verdict stated.
It is Appauling that they deemed it appropriate to delete Cherry's and Oscar's comments, have they not heard of freedom of speech.

I would like to thank everyone for their support at this difficult times.

The Editor, O'Neill, has just sent me the following letter. In my view it is just slippery. It does nothing to redress the injury caused and simply covers his backside should the press complaints commission (who will by now have received all details) take this up.
The Editor's letter and my reply follow:






26 February



Dear Mrs Coombe

Following your telephone calls and emails, I am writing to you personally to apologise unreservedly for the omission of the verdict in our report of Marni Triggs's inquest in the Oxford Mail on Friday. This was an unfortunate and inexcusable mistake on our part. We published the verdict, with an apology, in today's paper. I enclose a copy.

I should stress that the omission was not the fault of the reporter, who has been much maligned by you and fellow critics. The mistake was made during the editing process.

However, having spoken to my staff, I am satisfied that the rest of the article we published was an accurate account of the evidence given at the inquest.

In particular, Pc Dave Mitchell told the hearing that your son and Ms Triggs had been texting each other and that the last text was sent three minutes before the 999 call reporting the crash.

This statement was qualified in our report with a statement by Pc Mark Howard, who said it was possible that Ms Triggs had stopped to use her phone.

We also reported Ms Triggs's mother as saying: "We don't believe she would have been texting. None of us do. She was very anti-using mobile phones."

Our report pointed out that your son did not realise she was driving at the time.

We also quoted the coroner as saying that the cause of the crash was "guesswork". We never said that Ms Triggs was 'guilty' of texting while driving, and I would draw your attention to our comment article of the same day, which I have attached.

The coroner, however, clearly felt that the case raised an important issue in that he took the opportunity to comment on the dangers of phoning or texting while driving. He presumably would not have done so had the question not arisen during the inquest.

The coroner's comments formed the basis of our front-page headline, Switch it off. In fact, after the hearing, the police said they hoped we would highlight the coroner's comments.

You and others seem to be arguing that because the coroner recorded a verdict of accidental death and described the cause of the accident as guesswork, any mention of texting was irrelevant. This was clearly not the case, since the coroner felt the need to comment on it.

Our general policy as a newspaper is to report inquests which, by law, are open to the Press and public. Clearly, these are often distressing occasions for relatives, but there was no intention on our part to slander the name of Ms Triggs, your son or their families. The report we published was a straightforward account of what was said at the inquest.

My assistant editor, John Chipperfield, who spoke to you on Saturday afternoon, tried to be helpful by inviting you to show where our report wavered from the evidence. I will reply to the relevant points in your email as follows:

1) Our reporter presented opinion about the danger of text messaging. It was the coroner's opinion, not ours.

2) The coroner found Marni guilty of texting while driving. He did not say that, and we did not say that.

3) There is no evidence to suggest Marni was texted or read texts while driving. The coroner said the cause of the crash was guesswork, as we reported.

4) Texts did not correspond with the time of the accident. There was a three-minute gap between the last text and the 999 call, as we reported.

5) A text three minutes before the 999 call might account for her death. We did not say that.

6) Accidental death verdict omitted. I accept that, and again apologise unreservedly.

7) Thrombosis. No medical support from the pathologist at the inquest for this possibility.

9) We failed to mention that Marni was opposed to the use of mobile phones while driving. This was mentioned in Mrs Triggs's quote.

In conclusion, I have apologised for the lack of a verdict in the story, explained how we published the story and answered your questions.

I fully understand your distress and anger at this time and can assure you that we take our responsibilities in covering inquests very seriously indeed. We will be taking this oversight (the verdict) up with the individuals concerned to ensure there is no repeat.

If you are dissatisfied with my response, you are entitled to contact the Press Complaints Commission at Halton House, 20/23 High Holborn, London EC1N 2JD (telephone 0845 600 2757), and we will abide by any adjudication it hands down.

Yours sincerely



Simon O'Neill
Group Editor

MY REPLY:
Mr O'Neill.
Really, as you know, the inclusion or exclusion of "Accidental Death" from an article constructed as Ellie Simmonds pieced hers together makes little difference. The impact of the picture of a pretty girl in juxtaposition with the headline is all you needed to sell the paper. Having sold it you must hold yourself accountable for associating Marni with text messaging while driving.
You know this. That's how newspapers work. Thus, we object.

There are a myriad other equally sensational and tragic stories you might have constructed from Marni's inquest: how about a mysterious thrombosis and all that might have implied had she lived? what about the dangers of travelling on our pot-hole ridden roads - even though Marni had travelled extensively she died a few minutes from home? This is all quite sad enough to sell a local paper. There was absolutely no need to seize the obviously topical - and completely inaccurate - association with mobiles. But you allowed this to go in to print. Further, your small inclusion in today's edition does nothing but compound the implied sense of the first article, associating Marni and Rowan still further with textual crimes. This is exactly what the Triggs do not need.
Sort it out.
Cherry Coombe

maybe u could set up ur own website for this. call it marnitriggs.com or something so ppl can find it easily and put all ur stuff on there so they cant delete it! i saw what they deleted and i think its out of order, u have a right to express ur anger. if u linked to ur own site here then every1 who reads this here would see the link and click on it 2 find out the real story. u could put stuff up about Marnie too. that woud be a good way 2 remember her. just an idea :)

Personally, I am apalled that this newspaper has used the untimely death of a young woman in order to make the papaer more 'newsworthy'. The role of the journalist is to provide facts, not to twist them.

Considering the corroner stated that establishing the exact cause of death is 'guess work', i find it intriguing how your newspaper somehow managed to reach a concrete and reliable conclusion when the corroner could not.

I am sure many people are aware of the risks which are associated with mobile phone use at the wheel but I suggest communicating this message in a way which does not turn a young woman who died tragically before her time into some form of martyr to sell your publication. Nor shoudl you have turned Mr. Coombe into some sort of villain or killer without any consideration for his feelings or his grief.

I am writing in utter disgust towards the nature of this disgraceful and utterly distasteful artical. This poor young women who lost her life through no fault of her own, has been hung out to dry by one reporter who saw a good way to boost her career. I am perfectly sure that it was hard enough for Marni Triggs' family to come to terms with her death and also to manage the task of sitting through the inquest. Journalist Simmonds had the trust to sit in on Marni Triggs inquest, but she has abused this trust to its fullest extent.

No doubt there are many problems associated with mobile phones and driving but for someone who has been proven innocent of the false crime this artical has prevailed.

not only does this paper see fit to print lies when the journalist was there to hear the facts but it also belives itself to be so superior that it can delete comments of the truth, that prehaps hinder the validity of there artical and also there paper. i hope it got you alot of money because that is the only reason you printed it. maybe it is about time you listened to what your readers are saying and understand how cruel and insensitive your artical was.

finally i would like to over my deepest condolences to family and friends for your loss and for this papers use of Marni Triggs as there muse for writing.

i am disgusted by the artical and think eveyrone desrves there say so if this paper should delete peoples comments then truly the writing is as bad as the people behind solely and truly.

miss g sullivan

A MESSAGE FROM BONNY COOMBE, ROWAN'S SISTER

The fact that the Oxford Mail are claiming that the verdict was omitted from Simmonds' vicious article by mistake just makes it even more obvious that they are a pack of incompetent idiots who are masquerading as "JOURNALISTS". It is disgusting that the 'editor' felt it appropriate to delete important, informative, FACTUAL, and emotional messages from people who knew and loved Marni, whilst they chose to leave up here repulsive comments containing judgements about Marni and her family based on Simmonds'...err..."ARTICLE". I fully appreciate that these statements have since been retracted. It is the effect of this sort of attitude that is going to now cause even more trauma for the Triggs family and all those who loved Marni. However I find some comfort in the knowledge that, once better informed, these people have been kind enough to rethink the situation and many of them are offering alot of support.

The Triggs are a vibrant, strong, compassionate and caring family. As Nancy Triggs has said, they truly have picked on the wrong family. I know that the Triggs will do all in their power to get this appalling situation sorted. I will be backing them all the way and I hope that anyone who has been affected by this will join us. It is a terrible ordeal to have to deal with, especially on top of the enormous grief all of us who knew Marni are already feeling at the tragic loss of such an amazing young woman who gave so much, and who continues to give us all strength and courage.

What happened to freedom of speech? Deleting messages from the page, that were supportive for the Triggs family is digusting, I too will be backing the them all the way!
Marni was an amazing person with a strong sense of justice, just like the rest of her family.
'Production mistakes' isn't a good enough excuse!
The Oxford mail have acted very insentivly and have simply used this tradegy for there own gain and should be ashamed!
Were the feelings of her family and friends thought about at all?
I thought local papers were supposed to support it's community?Isn't it strange that Mr Bretts first comments havn't been deleted!
Marni is greatly missed by all who knew her. Marni, her family and Rowan are all in my thoughts.
All my love and support Harriet ****

Gemma and Greggy Rock!
So does Bonny.
Harriet, Nancy, Oscar; I had a dream ... In my dream, young people get millitant and disallow the construction of life according to media design.
Struggle on! It's worth it.
C. xx

This should now be referred to the Press Complaints Commission since the paper's "apology" has simply reinforced the association of Marni's face and therefore character with the "Texting ... clue" compounding our association of Marni's death with texting.
Argue that the juxtaposition of the image comprises an inaccurate and misleading representation. The connotations of the article are more powerfully communicated than its "denotation": that means, if you look up each word in a dictionary you will find the definitions do not implicate Marni but the connotations (the powerful message embedded in the words and picture read together) have a different and more readily decoded and understood meaning by association.

THE CODE OF PRACTICE (and you must quote this as below) broken is that which concerns accuracy:

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy, mis-leading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published.
iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

email
complaints@pcc.org.uk

I argue thus:

Dear Press Complaints Office.
I stand by my assertion that printing a photograph of a lovely girl, Marni Triggs, alongside a headline, "Texting ... clue" implies, unequivocally, that the article associates Marni's death with texting. When we read we do more than decode letters to form words and deduce meaning. Reading includes the drawing of meaning from images and the connotations of images and words together carry as much weight as, if not more weight than, the decoding of the denotations of words.
Thus, by association The Oxford Mail imply Marni Triggs was texting and so died.
I attach again a link to the website that you might decide for yourselves.

http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/display.var.1213823.0.0.php

Sincerely.
Cherry Coombe

Having read the "article" and comments that followed I feel strongly enough to put forward my views. The article in itself is bad enough, but it gets worse!!...I feel it is absolutely disgusting that anyone could even contemplate removing the comments made by the Trigg's family and Cherry Coombe. In particular, the messages written by Oscar Triggs were beautiful, heartfelt and a lovely tribute to Marni. To delete them is totally wrong.
My thoughts are with the Trigg's family and with the Coombe's.
I wish you all the luck in whatever action you choose to take, and offer my total support. Becca

I think you should ask that this story be removed and replaced with a more balanced one, or perhaps the headline could be changed. That would be a good way to make things right. The paper has been and gone but this article is still here. What's the point in them printing an apology if they're just going to leave this up in its original form??

First I would like to thank everyone for the supportive comments & for taking the time to read Marni's real story.
Last night I saw the actual newspaper, I had thought what was on here bad enough, the actual newspaper was so much worse. As Cherry said there were plenty of other headlines about Marni's tragic death that would have sold just as many papers. The Oxford mail decided to chose the "Trial & Conviction by Oxford Mail" method. They knew very little about Marni's journey that day.
The apology they printed in mondays Oxford Mail did little or nothing to repair the damage. The letter I received from O`Neill (the editor)I suspect did nothing more than just scrape him to the right side of the law.
We realise that we are not the only family to have suffered the callous & irresponsible reporting of the Oxford Mail. It seems they have a reputation for preying on vunerable families. It takes a huge amount of energy to do battle with them especially at such a difficult time.As Nancy said, Marni had a strong sense of justice, so for Marni's memory & on behalf of other families that have had similar treatment we will take this as far as we can.
So please, if you or anyone you know have had this sort of treatment by the Oxford Mail& would like to have your say ,get in touch. If we can stop just one more family from suffering the distress the Oxford Mail have caused us it will be worth the effort.
Again thankyou for your support.
Liz

Perhaps our comments on the reporting of Marni's inquest by the Oxford Mail were listened too. The reports in both the Oxford Times & The Bicester advertiser are both much more accurate & balanced accounts. I suggest in future the Oxford Mail should adopt a similar responsible attitude.
Liz