Widow Exhumes Husband After Burial Next to Man Who Ruined His Life

A widow in Kent has had her husband’s remains moved after learning he was buried next to a man whose crimes had harmed her family. The High Court granted a rare dispensation to exhume David Woods and relocate his body, a decision his family described as a necessary step to protect his memory.

David Woods, 81, an Arsenal fan and father of two, died in the early weeks of 2024 and was buried in the grounds of the medieval St Nicholas’ church in Ash. Within weeks, the grave adjacent to his was allotted to Daniel Thomas, a 47-year-old local criminal whose victims included Woods’ relatives. When Christine Woods, the widow, and her two daughters learned of the arrangement, they said the proximity to Thomas’s grave was unbearable and pursued a court remedy.

Last month a High Court judge heard that the close proximity of the graves caused the Woods family serious distress. The judge ruled that exceptional circumstances existed and granted permission to exhume Woods and move him to a different plot within the same cemetery, removing him as far as possible from the adjacent grave. The reburial was carried out last week.

Details about Thomas’s past remain disputed, but court records show he was a career criminal who targeted vulnerable people. In 2015 he was convicted by Canterbury Crown Court of fraud after he demanded payment for work on a pensioner’s home that had not been performed. Judge James O’Mahony described Thomas’ attempts to excuse himself as ‘the most dishonest evidence I have ever heard in this court in more years than I care to remember.’ A friend who spoke to the Daily Mail said Thomas later put on weight and died in his sleep, with the cause of death thought to be organ failure, possibly from a heart attack. The case notes also describe allegations that he exploited one of Woods’ daughters and involved a substantial sum of money.

To address the Woods family’s distress, the court ordered the exhumation and placed the remains a short distance away from the original grave, within the limits of the historic cemetery awkwardly configured with centuries of gravestones. The old plot was turf over, while Woods’s grave was reburied a few yards away. A small plaque was placed near Thomas’s grave and a stone love heart was laid atop it, while Woods’ new grave site received fresh soil and a new bouquet of roses. The cemetery’s limited space meant the new site was the maximum distance permissible; there are still two potential plots between the two resting places. The Woods family did not comment when approached.

Officials noted that the trustees of The Canonry Benefice, which administers St Nicholas and six other churches in the area, had no knowledge of any connection between Woods and Thomas before the adjacent plots were allocated. The judge emphasized that the church’s usual policy is that last resting places should be as straightforward as possible unless exceptional circumstances warrant otherwise.

Christine Woods had hoped that, when her time comes, she would be laid to rest next to her husband in the same trench, but the proximity to Thomas forced her to pursue a different arrangement for the future. The High Court’s decision, while unusual, reflects the seriousness with which the Woods family has grappled with the indignity of being buried near someone who harmed them.