Are you OK with cookies?

We use small files called ‘cookies’ on Some are essential to make the site work, some help us to understand how we can improve your experience, and some are set by third parties. You can choose to turn off the non-essential cookies. Which cookies are you happy for us to use?

Skip to content

CCRC response to Andrew Malkinson judgment

The Court of Appeal has today published its judgment into the overturned conviction of Andrew Malkinson, who was incorrectly convicted of rape in 2004.

The CCRC referred Mr Malkinson’s case in January 2023. He had applied to the CCRC twice previously, but the first application was made at a time before current DNA techniques were available and the second concentrated on issues concerning the identification procedure.

The Court of Appeal’s judgment found strongly in favour of the grounds of DNA evidence that matched an alternative suspect, which came through the CCRC’s forensic testing.

They also found that evidence not disclosed by police was also a ground for allowing the appeal.

Helen Pitcher OBE, chairman of the CCRC, said:

“It is plainly wrong that a man spent 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.

“In each review, we focused on the submissions made to us. But knowing what we know now we would have sought the undisclosed police evidence to refer this case.

“We are pleased that the CCRC’s work to match an alternative suspect on the DNA database has been so strongly referenced in the judgment.”

In the last three years, more than 100 miscarriages of justice have been overturned following CCRC referrals. The organisation has referred 822 cases – an average of one every 11.5 days over the last 26 years. Around 30% of CCRC references are declined by the Court of Appeal.