Andrew Malkinson: Miscarriages of justice body to review its role in case of man wrongly jailed for rape
‘We recognise that Andrew Malkinson has had a very long journey to clear his name,’ says body that rejected two appeals
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The body that investigates miscarriages of justice will review its handling of the case of a man wrongly jailed for rape after his appeals to it were twice rejected before his conviction was overturned in court.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission pledged to be open about the findings of a review of the case of Andrew Malkinson, saying it was plainly wrong that he spent 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
Last month Mr Malkinson’s conviction for the 2003 attack in Greater Manchester was quashed after DNA potentially linking another man to the crime was identified.
The commission twice turned down his applications for his case to be re-examined, but eventually the Court of Appeal overturned his conviction and he was released from prison in December 2020.
Case files obtained by Mr Malkinson as he battled to be freed show that police and prosecutors knew forensic testing in 2007 had identified a searchable male DNA profile on the rape victim’s top that did not match his own. No match was found on the police database at the time and no further action was taken.
There is no record that they told the CCRC, the body responsible for investigating possible miscarriages of justice, although the Crown Prosecution Service said Mr Malkinson’s lawyers were told.
Mr Malkinson, now 57, applied to the CCRC for a review of his case that year, but when the review concluded in 2012 the commission refused to order further forensic testing or refer the case for appeal.
CCRC documents relating to the case between 2009 and 2012 suggest there were concerns about costs.
Last year a new suspect was identified whose DNA had been on the national database since 2012.
The commission has now announced that a leading barrister, with extensive experience prosecuting and defending, will lead a review of its role in the case.
It will focus on the commission’s decisions over Mr Malkinson’s two applications to the body.
Commission chairman Helen Pitcher met the Lord Chancellor and justice secretary, Alex Chalk, on Wednesday to discuss the case.
A spokesman said: “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 recognised 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.”
He said this was a complex case, adding: “We recognise that Mr Malkinson has had a very long journey to clear his name and it is plainly wrong that he spent 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
“We have already been in touch with Greater Manchester Police and with the Crown Prosecution Service to offer our assistance in any of their inquiries.”