Greater Manchester Police and the CPS have said that they will no longer be contesting the appeal of Andrew Malkinson
In 2004, Mr Malkinson was convicted by a 10-2 majority jury verdict of the July 2003 rape of a 33-year-old woman in Greater Manchester despite the absence of any forensic evidence linking him to the attack and notable discrepancies with the descriptions provided by eyewitnesses.
He who spent a decade longer in prison than he might have done had he admitted his guilt.
His conviction was referred in January this year for a fresh appeal hearing after DNA was linked to an alternative suspect.
I’ve suffered incalculably for the last 20 years as a result of my wrongful conviction, and I continue to suffer each day,’ commented Andrew Malkinson.
‘I have always known I am innocent. Finally, the prosecution has acknowledged my conviction should not stand. Of course, it is still the Court of Appeal’s decision to grant me justice. I sincerely hope they will give serious consideration to the disclosure failures which denied me a fair trial. The police must be made accountable – no one should have to suffer what I’ve been through.’
Emily Bolton, Andrew’s solicitor at the legal charity APPEAL, called the decision ‘a major milestone in Andy’s quest for justice.’ ‘The CPS – which nearly two decades ago prosecuted Andy – has accepted that his conviction should be overturned. However, it is for the Court of Appeal to decide whether to rule Andy’s conviction unsafe and, if so, on what basis. Andy’s 17 years of wrongful imprisonment were avoidable. We will be arguing that Andy’s conviction is unsafe not only in view of new DNA evidence, but because there were significant disclosure failures at his trial. It is important to dissect what went wrong in Andy’s case in order to protect victims of crime and prevent wrongful convictions in future.’
