In Millburn, New Jersey, a quiet evening on Windermere Terrace was interrupted by the sound of a woman screaming into her phone, begging someone to “come get me out of here.” What followed was a bizarre police encounter involving a destroyed Honda Accord, a missing bumper, and a driver who insisted she was never actually driving. On February 15, 2025, Officers from the Millburn Police Department responded to a call about a suspicious person and discovered a scene of vehicular chaos.
The incident, captured on police bodycam, highlights the dangers of impaired driving and the complex legal situations officers face when a suspect denies operating a vehicle despite overwhelming evidence. With a smoking radiator and a tire shredded down to the rim, the suspect, identified as 43-year-old Cristina M. Then, struggled to stand, argued with officers about “imaginary lines,” and admitted to drinking alcohol before attempting to retract her statement. This footage has drawn attention not just for the suspect’s confusing behavior, but for the textbook police work used to establish probable cause when a driver refuses to cooperate.\
Table of Contents
Watch the Full Bodycam Footage
Full Chronological Narrative (Full Details)
The Arrival and Initial Discovery
It was approximately 7:40 PM on a rainy Saturday evening when Officer Michael O’Neill of the Millburn Police Department arrived at West Road, just off Hobart Gap. A concerned resident had called 911 after seeing a woman with long hair carrying a bag and screaming on the phone near the edge of their property.
Upon arrival, Officer O’Neill found the suspect, Cristina Then, standing near a gray 2012 Honda Accord. The vehicle was in terrible condition. Smoke was billowing from the radiator, and the front passenger tire was completely shredded, indicating the car had been driven on the rim for some distance.
Officer O’Neill approached the woman to check on her welfare. The interaction began with immediate confusion.
“I as you. Okay,” the woman said, her speech difficult to follow. “You okay? An accident slid,” she continued.
Officer O’Neill tried to orient her. “It’s going to be West Road just off of Hobart Gap. Did you slide?”
The woman seemed unaware of the severity of the damage to her vehicle. She mentioned that a friend had “just fixed it,” and tried to downplay the situation, saying, “It’s not a big deal. Just an accident.”
The Investigation Begins
Officer O’Neill noticed the smell of radiator fluid and observed the heavy front-end damage. He asked for her driver’s license, registration, and insurance. The suspect claimed she had the documents on her phone but did not produce them immediately.
Realizing the car was inoperable and the weather was cold, the officer suggested she sit in his patrol car to stay warm. “So the radiator is busted… He can’t drive it. But you can sit in the car and stay warm, okay?” Officer O’Neill offered.
As they moved toward the police cruiser, the suspect’s physical condition became more apparent. She was stumbling and swaying. Officer O’Neill asked, “You sure you didn’t hit your head or something?” to which she replied she was fine.
Admission of Alcohol
Once near the patrol vehicle, the questioning turned to the cause of her impairment. Officer O’Neill asked directly, “Miss, have you been drinking?”
“No,” she replied.
“Are you sure about that?”
“Positive.”
However, her story quickly changed. While Officer O’Neill and Officer Shanahan (who had arrived as backup) observed her, the suspect struggled to follow basic instructions. When asked again about drinking, she first said, “I don’t have anything to drink tonight,” but immediately followed up with, “I did. Okay.”
Later, she became more specific, admitting to Officer O’Neill, “she drank a Fireball.” Despite this admission, she clung to a confusing defense: she claimed she was not driving the car. “I was not driving while I was using the vehicle, I stopped, I called for help… I did not crash the car,” she insisted, adding the bizarre claim that “The car was a lemon.”
The Field Sobriety Tests
Officer Crawn arrived on the scene to conduct Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs). This is where the situation escalated from confusion to confrontation.
Officer Crawn attempted to instruct the suspect on the “Walk and Turn” test. He asked if she had any medical conditions preventing her from balancing. She said “Yes,” but then seemed to agree to the test.
The officer instructed her to place her left foot on an imaginary line and her right foot in front of it. The suspect began arguing about the conditions of the road and the instructions.
“Speak English,” she told the officer, despite the fact that he was speaking clear English. When told to stand in the starting position, she complained, “I mean this is a thoroughly like this. This is not even levels.”
Officer Crawn demonstrated the test, taking three heel-to-toe steps. “It’s going to look like this. Ready? 1, 2, 3,” he showed her. Instead of watching, she turned away and argued, “Not driving. Turn around at all. I was never drive.”
The officer warned her, “Listen, you’re not paying attention… I’m about to arrest you for driving while intoxicated.”
The Arrest
The suspect continued to be uncooperative, refusing to get into the starting position or follow instructions. She eventually told the officer, “You make me crash your car. Sir. I do not trust you to do that.”
Realizing she would not complete the tests, Officer Crawn made the decision. “I terminated the testing because you’re not cooperating. And the condition of the roadway,” he explained to her later.
Officers placed her under arrest. She was handcuffed and told she was being arrested for DWI. She immediately protested, “I was not driving while intoxicated… How? Made me cars destroyed. I was not driving a truck.”
Searching for Evidence
After the arrest, officers faced a new problem: the car was locked, and they couldn’t find the keys. The suspect had been clutching her bag, but the keys weren’t immediately visible. “She has keys on her. She must,” one officer noted.
Eventually, they managed to locate the keys in her belongings to facilitate the tow. Meanwhile, officers scoured the surrounding area looking for the accident scene. They found a piece of the tire directly behind the Honda but could not locate the bumper or the specific tree or pole she had hit. “We can’t figure out where the hell she [crashed]… She’s stumbling all over the [place]… Just didn’t want to do the walking,” an officer summarized to his colleagues.
The vehicle was towed by C&L Towing, and the suspect was transported to headquarters for processing.
The Arrest and Charges
Charges Filed Against Cristina M. Then
Based on the police report and the events captured on video, the primary charge filed against the suspect is Driving While Intoxicated (DWI).
See Cristina M. Then’s Full Public Record & History
Here is a breakdown of the charges and what they mean under US law:
- Driving While Intoxicated (DWI)
| Charge Name | Simple Legal Meaning | Penalties (New Jersey) | Why Officers Applied This Charge |
| Driving While Intoxicated (NJ Statute 39:4-50) | Operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol or drugs to the point where you cannot drive safely. | 1st Offense: Loss of license (3-12 months), fines ($250-$500), potential jail time (up to 30 days), and mandatory Intoxicated Driver Resource Center classes. | The suspect admitted to drinking (“Fireball”), showed physical signs of impairment (stumbling, swaying), had a wrecked car, and failed/refused sobriety tests. |
Why This Case is Serious
This case is particularly shocking because of the condition of the vehicle. Driving on a “shredded” tire with a smoking radiator indicates a complete lack of awareness or judgment, which is a hallmark of severe intoxication. Furthermore, the suspect was found in a residential neighborhood. If she had not stopped when the car failed, she could have easily struck a pedestrian, another car, or a home.
What Happened Before Police Arrived
Before Officer O’Neill arrived on the scene, the situation had already drawn the attention of the neighborhood. The official police report provides the backstory that the bodycam does not show.
The 911 Call
The incident was reported by a local resident named Yuanjia Yin, who lives at 3 Windermere Terrace. This witness called the police not because of a car crash, but because of a “suspicious person.”
Yin told dispatchers that he saw a female with long hair carrying a bag. She was standing on the edge of his property and was screaming into her phone. The witness specifically heard her yell, “Come get me out of here!”
The Movement
After making the disturbance at the resident’s property, the suspect began walking down West Road. This is where Officer O’Neill eventually intercepted her. This witness account is crucial because it places the suspect with the vehicle and establishes her erratic behavior before police even began their investigation.
Expert Opinion & Legal Analysis
Did you know? You can check arrest records for anyone in your neighborhood instantly. [Search Public Records Here]
Expert Legal Analysis
As a legal analyst, I have reviewed the footage and the police report to evaluate the actions of the Millburn Police Department and the legal standing of the suspect, Cristina Then.
1. Was the Stop and Detention Legal?
Yes. Under the Fourth Amendment, police need “reasonable suspicion” that a crime has occurred or is occurring to detain someone. In this case, Officer O’Neill had a 911 call about a suspicious person and arrived to find a woman matching the description standing next to a smoking, wrecked car. This creates a clear “community caretaking” justification to approach her, which rapidly evolved into reasonable suspicion of DWI once he smelled radiator fluid and observed her stumbling.
2. The “I Wasn’t Driving” Defense
The suspect repeatedly claimed, “I was not driving.” Legally, this is known as the “Operation” element of a DWI charge. You might think police need to see you driving to arrest you, but that is false.
In New Jersey (and most states), courts recognize “Constructive Operation.” This means the prosecution can prove you were driving based on circumstantial evidence.
- The Evidence: The engine was warm/smoking (indicating recent use).
- The Keys: She had the keys in her possession (in her bag).
- The Isolation: She was the only person with the vehicle.
- The Admission: She initially said she was “using the vehicle.”
This evidence is overwhelmingly strong. Her claim that a “friend fixed it” or she was just “waiting for help” will likely fail in court against the physical evidence of a fresh accident.
3. Refusal of Field Sobriety Tests
The suspect refused to listen to instructions and argued with Officer Crawn. Legally, this is often treated as a “refusal.” Field Sobriety Tests (like the Walk and Turn) are voluntary in the sense that police cannot physically force you to walk a line. However, your refusal (or inability to follow instructions due to intoxication) is admissible evidence of guilt in court.
Officer Crawn followed standard procedure. He explained the test, demonstrated it, and gave her multiple chances. Her inability to focus, her arguments about the road surface, and her turning away from the officer are all indicators of impairment that the prosecution will use.
4. Did the Officers Follow Protocol?
The officers appeared to follow proper protocol.
- Safety First: They moved her out of the cold and away from the road.
- Miranda Rights: Viewers often ask, “Why didn’t they read her rights immediately?” Police are only required to read Miranda Rights after a suspect is in custody (arrested) and before interrogation. The questions asked on the side of the road (“Have you been drinking?”) are part of the initial investigation and generally do not require Miranda warnings under the Berkemer v. McCarty Supreme Court ruling.
- The Search: Officers searched her bag for keys. This is generally permissible as a “search incident to arrest” or an inventory search because the vehicle was being towed and they needed to secure it.
Conclusion: The officers built a solid case. They have the 911 call, the witness, the physical damage, the admission of drinking alcohol, and the bodycam footage of her erratic behavior.
The Aftermath / Current Status
Current Status
Following the roadside encounter, Cristina Then was placed in the back of a patrol car and transported to the Springfield Police Headquarters.
- Chemical Testing: At the station, she underwent an Alcotest (breathalyzer) administered by Officer Crawn. The specific results of this test were not released in the initial public report, but these results are usually the “nail in the coffin” for DWI cases.
- Booking: She was transported back to Millburn Police Headquarters for processing.
- Release: Unlike more violent crimes, DWI suspects in New Jersey are often released to a responsible adult under “John’s Law.” Cristina Then was released to the custody of a friend who signed a Potential Liability Form, taking responsibility for her.
- Vehicle: The 2012 Honda Accord was impounded by C&L Towing.
Case Status: The case is currently closed by arrest. Cristina Then will face a court date in municipal court to answer for the DWI charge. If convicted, she faces license suspension, fines, and potential surcharges.
Download Full Police Report PDF
Disclaimer
All suspects mentioned, including Cristina M. Then, are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This article is based on official police records (Case I-2025-004029) and public bodycam footage provided by the Millburn Police Department. This content is for news reporting and educational purposes only.
I grew up in this town as a matter of fact pretty close to Hobart gap rd. (My dad was a cop for 37 yrs in MLB) the officers followed protocols, were respectful and professional given the weather and her intox. Was a tough call.
Thank you