CCRC response to Peter Sullivan judgment – 13 May 2025
The Court of Appeal today quashed the murder conviction of Peter Sullivan, who was found guilty in 1987 of the murder of Diane Sindall and given a life sentence.
Ms Sindall was found dead on 2 August 1986 after leaving her place of work in Bebington, Merseyside.
Mr Sullivan applied to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) in March 2021 raising concerns about his interviews by the police, bitemark evidence presented in his trial, and what was said to be the murder weapon. After consulting experts, the CCRC obtained DNA information from samples taken at the time of the offence.
As a result, a DNA profile was obtained which did not match Mr Sullivan and the CCRC sent Mr Sullivan’s conviction to the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal quashed Mr Sullivan’s conviction based on the DNA evidence, but not on the other matters raised.
Mr Sullivan had applied to the CCRC in 2008 questioning DNA evidence. Experts from the Forensic Science Service (FSS) advised at the time that any further testing would be very unlikely to produce a DNA profile. Mr Sullivan’s case was not referred to the Court of Appeal.
The techniques used in the testing that led to Mr Sullivan’s case being referred were not available at the time of his first application.
Alternative techniques available at the time could have been attempted but it is impossible to say whether they would have produced the result that the modern ones have. Using those techniques at the time might have reduced the opportunities to obtain results using modern techniques.
When Mr Sullivan applied to the CCRC in 2008 he still had the option to apply directly to the Court of Appeal as he had not applied previously.
Mr Sullivan sought leave to appeal directly in 2019, without CCRC involvement, but this was rejected by the Court of Appeal in 2021.
A CCRC spokesperson said: “As the Court of Appeal heard today, the new DNA evidence that has led to Mr Sullivan’s conviction being quashed could not have been available when we first considered his case, and that the decision made then not to send this case back to the courts in 2008 was the correct one.
“However, we do regret that we were not able to identify Mr Sullivan’s conviction as a potential miscarriage of justice in our first review.
“During Mr Sullivan’s application to the CCRC in 2021, we decided to re-visit DNA testing to see if a profile could now be established. The scientific techniques that we relied on in this review were not available at the time of our first review.
“Our purpose is to find, investigate and refer potential miscarriages of justice, and it is imperative that we continue to take opportunities offered by developments in scientific techniques to do that.
“As an organisation we are committed to taking forward learning from previous reviews and we continue to develop our understanding around forensic opportunities.”
[ENDS]
Notes to Editors:
- There will be no media interviews.
- The CCRC is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for independently reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is based in Birmingham and is funded by the Ministry of Justice.
- There are currently nine Commissioners who bring to the CCRC considerable experience from a wide variety of backgrounds. Commissioners are appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in accordance with the Office for the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice.
- The CCRC usually receives around 1,500 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) each year. Since starting work in 1997, the CCRC has referred around 3% of applications to the appeal courts.
- The CCRC considers whether, as a result of new evidence or argument, there is a real possibility that the conviction would not be upheld were a reference to be made. New evidence or argument is argument or evidence which has not been raised during the trial or on appeal. Applicants should usually have appealed first. A case can be referred in the absence of new evidence or argument or an earlier appeal only if there are “exceptional circumstances”.
- If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe.
- More details about the role and work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission can be found at www.ccrc.gov.uk. The CCRC can be found on X, Facebook, Instagram (@the_ccrc) and Linkedin.