Innocent man kept in prison for 17 years finally under review

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has initiated an inquiry into its handling of Andrew Malkinson's case, prompted by revelations that it was aware of potentially exoneration-worthy DNA evidence a staggering 16 years prior to the quashing of his rape conviction.

 

Malkinson, aged 57, who endured 17 years of wrongful imprisonment, saw his conviction for the rape of a 33-year-old woman in Salford in 2003 overturned just last month following the emergence of DNA evidence linking another individual to the crime.

 

On Tuesday, it came to light that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had knowledge of forensic test results from 2007, which identified a male DNA profile on the victim's vest top that did not match Malkinson's. Astonishingly, an internal record of Malkinson's initial application to the CCRC in 2009 indicated that the commission considered the expense of further testing and argued against the likelihood of overturning the conviction.

 

In response to these revelations, two former senior government law officers, a former Lord Chief Justice, and the head of the Justice Select Committee have collectively called for an urgent public inquiry to unravel the circumstances surrounding this case.

 

Yesterday, the CCRC, which twice rejected Malkinson's appeals of innocence, announced its intent to conduct a comprehensive review. This decision came after a meeting between Helen Pitcher, the CCRC's chairman, and Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary, on Wednesday.

 

A spokesperson for the CCRC stated, "A review into the decisions taken in Mr. Malkinson's case couldn't be started until we had the judgment from the Court of Appeal, but we have long recognized that it would be important to have one. We will be as open as we can be within our statutory constraints with the findings of the completed review and the lessons to be learned."

 

The CPS emphasized, "It is clear Mr. Malkinson was wrongly convicted of this crime and we share the deep regret that this happened. Evidence of a new DNA profile was not ignored. It was disclosed to the defense team. In addition, searches of the DNA databases were conducted. At that time there were no matches and therefore no further investigation could be carried out."

 

The Johnson Partnership

(formerly GV Hale)