By Gabriel Princewill-
The revelation that police and prosecutors were aware of the presence of another man’s DNA on the victim’s clothes in the Andrew Malkinson(pictured) case as early as 2007 has sent shock waves through the criminal justice system, and demands an inquiry
Heads should naturally roll after the serious and embarrassing failing of the justice system in keeping an innocent man behind bar for 16 years.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The injustice of the Malkinson case underscores the importance of reviewing other cases for potential instances of withheld evidence or wrongful convictions.
There are an estimated 346 cases of miscarriage of justice cases registered in the UK. The justice system is expected to proactively identify cases where crucial information may have been ignored, and rectify any injustices that may have occurred.
The integrity of the British justice system took a big knock after it was revealed that Malkinson had spent 16 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
What was worse was the fact unidentified DNA was found on the clothing of the victim, yet, CPS representatives took a conscious decision to act against his interest at the time.
A log of a meeting between the Forensic Science Service, the CPS and Greater Manchester police in December 2009 reveals a disturbing level of laxity in addressing the situation..
Its then head of complex casework in Manchester said: “If it is assumed that the saliva came from the offender, then it does not derive from Malkinson. This is surprising because the area of the clothing that the saliva was recovered from was crime specific.”
However, the caseworker added that he did not see any need to do any further work on the file unless the case was brought to appeal, and then his focus would be on “bolstering” the case against Malkinson.
A Crown Prosecution Service spokesperson said: “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 found on the victim’s clothing in 2007 was not ignored. It was disclosed to the defence team representing Mr Malkinson for their consideration.
“In addition, searches of the DNA databases were conducted to identify any other possible suspects. At that time there were no matches and therefore no further investigation could be carried out.”
Conviction Grounds
Andrew Malkinson was convicted of two counts of rape and one count of attempting to choke, suffocate or strangle with intent to commit rape in 2004, and sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term. He was convicted on identification evidence of the victim and two passers-by, but there was no DNA evidence linking him to the crime.
In 2007, further tests were carried out due to enhanced DNA techniques and DNA of an unknown male was found on the vest top worn by the victim. That should have been enough o cast serious doubt to the legitimacy of his arrest, but it did not.
Two searches subsequently carried out by the Forensic Science Service (FSS) in 2007 and 2009, yielded no suspect, and for some reason, all the professional bodies handling the case decided not to make any public announcement that an unidentified person’s DNA had been found on the clothing of the victim.
Malkinson’s lawyer was notified of the DNA finding at the time.
Prior to 2007, there had already been an appeal against conviction, the only avenue to a further appeal being for the defence to refer the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which was done in 2009 on the basis of the unidentified DNA.
However, the CCRC reviewed the new DNA in 2009 and shamefully declined to refer the case to the Court of Appeal. A high level of accountability in this case lies with the CCRC.
A new suspect, whose DNA was put on the system in 2012, was identified in 2022. The CPS obtained more DNA forensic testing which further implicated the new suspect. As a result, the CPS did not oppose the quashing of Mr Malkinson’s convictions on the basis of the new DNA evidence.
Andrew Malkinson’s right to a fair trial was fundamentally compromised by failing to act on crucial evidence that could have exonerated him, despite the fact his attacker emphasized that she had scratched her attacker in the face during the attack.
The case illustrates the dire consequences of wrongful incarceration. Spending 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit has not only robbed Malkinson of his freedom but also irrevocably altered his life.
The revelation that his innocence was known to authorities further exacerbates the tragedy of his wrongful imprisonment.
Potential For Erosion of Public Trust
The failure of the justice system to act swiftly and effectively on the knowledge of another man’s DNA on the victim’s clothes erodes public trust in law enforcement and prosecution. When those responsible for upholding justice fail to do so, it undermines citizens’ confidence in the fairness and impartiality of the system. This erosion of trust can have lasting repercussions on the relationship between the public and the authorities.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar