Man who spent 17 years in jail after being wrongly convicted of rape ‘could have been freed almost a DECADE earlier’
AN innocent man who spent 17 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit could have been freed almost a DECADE earlier, a damning report has found.
Andrew Malkinson, 57, was locked up after being convicted of raping a woman in Greater Manchester in 2003.
He spent years protesting his innocence and was finally cleared last year when his conviction was quashed.
A scathing report has now found Malkinson could have been exonerated almost a decade earlier.
Malkinson and legal charity Appeal applied for his case to be reviewed by the Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2009.
But the CCRC sat on crucial DNA evidence which had been available since 2007.
The commission concluded its review in 2012, refusing to order more forensic testing or refer the case for appeal because of costs.
A second appeal was rejected by the commission in 2020 before Malkinson was cleared last year.
Malkinson said: “The CCRC obstructed my fight for justice and cost me an extra decade wrongly imprisoned.”
He called for a complete overhaul of the body and for its chairwoman Helen Pitcher to be sacked.
Last year cops arrested a new suspect on suspicion of the July 2003 rape following the discovery of the new DNA evidence in the case.
The 48-year-old man from Exeter has been released under investigation.
Greater Manchester Police said a file has been passed to the Crown Prosecution Service for consideration.
Chris Henley KC’s review laid bare a string of “serious” failings and missed chances to correct the miscarriage of justice as early as 2009.
He revealed the body had even considered rejecting requests for a referral to the Court of Appeal for a third time.
Presenting the review today, Henley said: “The CCRC failed Mr Malkinson.
“It required Appeal to obtain the new DNA evidence that ultimately resulted in the further work that led to the referral by the CCRC.
“It would not have happened otherwise. The opportunity to have this case referred in 2009 was missed.
“A further opportunity to look again at the DNA evidence when the second application was received in 2018 was not taken.”
“I have seen nothing to persuade me that the CCRC would have independently considered that retesting was justified or had any prospect of producing anything new which might call into question the safety of the conviction.”
‘UTTERLY DAMNING’
Malkinson’s legal team previously discovered striking similarities between his ordeal and the earlier CCRC case of Victor Nealon.
Nealon’s 1997 conviction was overturned by the Court of Appeal in December 2013 after new DNA evidence was unearthed.
Nealon’s case “undoubtedly bore similarities to Mr Malkinson’s case”, Henley said.
He added: “In my view Mr Malkinson’s conviction would have been quashed almost 10 years earlier than it was, if the Nealon judgment had been properly understood and followed.”
Malkinson said: “This report lays bare how the CCRC obstructed my fight for justice and cost me an extra decade wrongly imprisoned.
“In 2022 the CCRC was considering rejecting my case for a third time, despite the compelling DNA evidence presented by my legal team.
“That finding shows that the body is biased through and through. It needs to be torn down and completely rebuilt.
“If Helen Pitcher and her leadership team won’t resign after a scathing report like this, they should be sacked.”
‘BROKEN’ SYSTEM
Appeal’s James Burley said the CCRC was a “broken safety net” – branding the report “utterly damning”.
Burley said: “The new Justice Secretary should bring in a fresh leadership team at the CCRC that is serious about rooting out wrongful convictions.”
Ms Pitcher offered Mr Malkinson an “unreserved apology” in April when she received the findings of the review.
In response to the report, the CCRC said it accepted the recommendations and work to address them was already underway.
A separate inquiry ordered by the previous Government into Mr Malkinson’s case is ongoing.
Timeline of the case
2003
A 33-year-old woman is raped and left for dead on a motorway embankment as she walks home in Salford.
The woman recalls inflicting a “deep scratch” on her attacker’s face.
Cops visit Andrew Malkinson the next day, noticing that he has no scratch.
But Malkinson is arrested two weeks later – and is picked out of a video line-up.
2004
Malkinson is convicted of rape and sentenced to life in prison, despite no DNA evidence being presented at his trial.
2006
Malkinson’s first appeal is refused.
2007
A male DNA profile in a “crime specific” spot on the victim’s vest top is uncovered in a nationwide review of forensic probes.
The DNA profile does not match the victim’s then boyfriend – or Malkinson.
Cops and the CPS are alerted to the find. A search is done for a match on a local police database but no match is found.
2008
A report into the new DNA discovery is written by the Forensic Science Service.
2009
Malkinson applies to the Criminal Cases Review Commission to look at his case.
A CCRC worker says: “I read the papers today. I am slightly bemused by the submissions.
“Just because it appears there is someone else’s DNA on the complainant’s vest, not the boyfriend’s or the applicant’s, cannot surely produce a successful referral in view of all the other strong ID evidence.”
GMP cops and CPS staff meet forensic experts at the FSS to discuss the DNA find.
They acknowledge that the DNA is “crime specific” but do not commission any further work.
A forensic scientist recommends a special test to get a clearer result but the CPS advises against it.
The CPS’s Manchester lead says “he did not see that there was a need to do any further work on the file”.
He added: “If it became apparent that there was to be a further appeal based upon the forensic scientist’s additional work, then the position would change.
“The question of additional work in relation to bolstering the case as it stands could be undertaken.”
2011
A forensic scientist tells the CCRC: “We are not going to get a profile from the material available which is capable of being searched and as a result someone identified.
“On the face of things this tends to support the position that the commission has done everything reasonable.
“There is no convincing reason to take forensic investigation any further.”
But searchable DNA had been found and searched four years earlier in 2007.
A CCRC note reads: “The location of the DNA on the vest top does not make it any more likely to have been left by the attacker as opposed to a different individual.”
The CPS had flagged the importance of the location to the CCRC two years earlier.
2012
The CCRC refuses Malkinson’s 2009 application without looking at the full police file or commissioning any further DNA testing.
2016
Journalist Bob Woffinden publishes a book on “casualties of justice” with a chapter on Malkinson.
2018
A fresh application is made to the CCRC highlighting flaws in the witness evidence.
But the CCRC does not commission any forensic testing or searches of the police database.
2020
The CCRC refuses another application by Malkinson.
His lawyers at Appeal carry out their own DNA tests, which link the crime to a different unknown man.
Appeal also win a legal battle for a police file – discovering that key witnesses had previous criminal convictions.
Malkinson is released from prison on good behaviour but still has the rape conviction on his criminal record.
2021
Malkinson’s lawyers make a fresh application to the CCRC on the basis of its new discoveries.
2022
Cops arrest a different man in connection with the rape and release him under investigation.
2023
The CCRC refers Malkinson to the appeal court. His conviction is overturned after a 19-year fight for justice.
2024
The CCRC offers Malkinson an ‘unreserved’ apology.
A scathing report finds Malkinson could have been exonerated almost a decade earlier – cataloguing a string of failures by the CCRC.