The government has initiated an independent inquiry to scrutinise the events and management surrounding the Andrew Malkinson case. Malkinson was wrongfully imprisoned for 17 years for a rape he didn’t commit and was only recently cleared of the charges. This inquiry aims to delve into the involvement of the Greater Manchester police (GMP), the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), and the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) in his conviction and the subsequent efforts to reverse it.
Despite the absence of DNA evidence linking him to the crime, Malkinson was found guilty of rape in Greater Manchester in 2004. After nearly two decades of asserting his innocence, the appeal court finally quashed his conviction last month when new DNA tests implicated another individual in the crime.
Previously, the CCRC had declared a review of its handling of Malkinson’s case after twice refusing to mandate additional forensic tests or recommend the case for appeal. This was further compounded by revelations from The Guardian that DNA from another man was identified on the victim’s clothes in 2007. Despite this, Malkinson continued to serve his sentence for an additional 13 years.
This inquiry will run concurrently with a Law Commission review that will examine the broader appeals process, including the operations of the CCRC.
Justice Secretary, Alex Chalk, commented on the grave miscarriage of justice Malkinson endured. He emphasised the importance of the justice system’s primary function: to rightfully convict the guilty and exonerate the innocent. Malkinson’s case starkly highlighted the system’s failure in this regard.
Malkinson expressed his hopes for the inquiry, seeking comprehensive answers and accountability from all parties involved in the miscarriage of justice he experienced. He emphasised the need for a scientific approach to uncover the truth behind the prolonged denial of justice.
Kate Maynard, Malkinson’s solicitor, voiced concerns about the inquiry’s non-statutory nature, which means witnesses cannot be legally compelled to testify or disclose documents. The Ministry of Justice, however, believes that a non-statutory inquiry is the most suitable approach, drawing parallels with other individual cases.
Following his exoneration, Malkinson has been an advocate for significant reforms in the justice system that led to his wrongful conviction. He emphasised the inherent issues with the police’s impartiality and the CCRC’s inefficacy.
The review will be spearheaded by a prominent legal figure, with the CCRC, CPS, and GMP all committing to full cooperation. Emily Bolton, founder of Appeal and Malkinson’s solicitor, highlighted the need for a thorough investigation into the systemic failures that allowed such a grave injustice to persist for two decades.
GMP’s Chief Constable, Stephen Watson, expressed his regret over Malkinson’s ordeal and welcomed the inquiry’s comprehensive scrutiny. The CCRC chair, Helen Pitcher, emphasised the importance of a collective review to understand the miscarriage of justice and implement necessary recommendations.
Max Hill KC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, affirmed their commitment to the inquiry and the pursuit of justice for Malkinson.