Appeal Court clears Andrew Malkinson of rape after two decade journey to prove innocence

[Chippy_Tea]

Imagine the horror of spending 17 years in prison for rape when you know you are innocent, i know lie detector evidence is not admissible but why not why cant lie detectors be used at the guilty persons request to show they are not lying?

The now 57-year-old served 10 extra years, beyond his original minimum term of seven years, because he would not admit to the crime while in prison.

While police use polygraph tests to assist in investigations and monitor offenders, the results are not admissible as evidence in British courts. Employers have the right to use the tests if they have reasonable grounds to suspect gross misconduct, but the tests must not be mandatory

The Appeal Court has quashed the rape conviction of a man who spent 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.

Andrew Malkinson was previously found guilty of attacking a woman in Salford in 2003, even though - three appeal judges were told - there was "no forensic matter" linking him to the crime.

Judges ruled that verdict was unsafe after hearing new DNA evidence, taken from the victim's fingernails, skin and clothing, did not match Mr Malkinson.

Lord Justice Holroyde, delivering the ruling, said: "We have no doubt that the new evidence shows these convictions to be unsafe.

"We quash... and Mr Malkinson you leave this court a free man."

Mr Malkinson's lawyer, Edward Henry KC, had told the hearing: "This is an historic case but also an historic injustice.

"DNA testing, which Mr Malkinson had called for since his arrest, now supports his long standing protestations of innocence.

"It was not, and could not have been, [him.]"

The judges reserved a ruling on further grounds for appeal raised by Mr Malkinson's legal team.

The prosecution at the time, they said, was based on identification evidence which Mr Henry described as having "deplorable disclosure failures which mostly lay at the door of the Greater Manchester Police."

Mr Henry raised the issue of a photo showing the victim with a broken fingernail, after she scratched her attacker deeply on the cheek. He told the court it was not disclosed during the trial.

Mr Malkinson had no cheek injury, the lawyer said, when he was arrested the day after the woman had been assaulted.

Judges also heard that a key witness was "actively abusing drugs" and picked out Mr Malkinson from an electronic ID parade while the witness was being investigated for unrelated offences.

The defence in the trial, Mr Henry said, were unaware of that. He added that the previous convictions of two witnesses were also not disclosed, meaning the jury could not question whether they were "honest."

"There was," he told judges, "ample material the defence could have used to undermine [their] credibility and reliability."

The now 57-year-old served 10 extra years, beyond his original minimum term of seven years, because he would not admit to the crime while in prison.

After his eventual release, Mr Malkinson told ITV News that his time behind bars was "torture."

"It felt great to be out of the confines, not to be physically held, because I longed to be free for so long.

"I’ve got a black hole - just behind me - filled with nothing, joylessness, misery, horror, pain, psychological torture."

He later added in a statement: "I've suffered incalculably for the last 20 years as a result of my wrongful conviction, and I continue to suffer each day.

"I have always known I am innocent. The police must be made accountable - no one should have to suffer what I've been through."

https://www.itv.com/news/granada/20...e-after-two-decade-journey-to-prove-innocence

 

[Leon103]

To easy to overcome a lie detector.

Loads of questions for the police and cps and the examination of dna evidence and disclosures at court/to defence.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

To easy to overcome a lie detector

I dont mean to rely on that only but if the guy was willing to do 10 more years on top of the 7 he got for the offence because he was innocent surely a voluntary test to see if reopening the case would be worthwhile.

 

[Leon103]

I dont mean to rely on that only but if the guy was willing to do 10 more years on top of the 7 he got for the offence because he was innocent surely a voluntary test to see if reopening the case would be worthwhile.

Waste of money. Loads of people don't admit their offence and serve out their sentence in prison. Thr only unique thing with this case is that there was physical evidence to show he didn't do it. Evidence that was never sought at earlier trials and re-trials.

Does the dna they found have a hit?

After all those years a lie detector test would be useless, more than enough time for him to convince himself he wasn't guilty, that's all it takes to ruin a test.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

After all those years a lie detector test would be useless, more than enough time for him to convince himself he wasn't guilty, that's all it takes to ruin a test.

I wasn't aware they were that easy to trick.

 

[Brew_DD2]

I wasn't aware they were that easy to trick.

You can contract your anal sphincter to evade and give a false reading.

 

[Cwrw666]

There's something very wrong with a penal system that gives a longer sentence to a wrongly convicted innocent person than someone who is actually guilty

 

[starseeker]

The GMP should be made to pay very, very heavily for this shameful case, withholding evidence which would have proved his innocence . The officers involved should be charged with perverting the course of justice and face jail terms, but of course they won't, very likely they will just retire on their fat pension and face no charges.

 

[Leon103]

I wasn't aware they were that easy to trick.

I spoke with a probation officer once about this very subject. The questions have to be carefully worded and often questions are shown beforehand. I guess it is easy to train your bodies reactions, especially if you have believed something to be true for so long

 

[Leon103]

The GMP should be made to pay very, very heavily for this shameful case, withholding evidence which would have proved his innocence . The officers involved should be charged with perverting the course of justice and face jail terms, but of course they won't, very likely they will just retire on their fat pension and face no charges.

Is there evidence that they withheld anything? Strange that nobody requested the dna sample sooner. Where were the cps? What about his defence team in the trial ans subsequent retrials? They are all to blame. I guess there is a lot more to it than the above and no doubt it will all come out in some sort of drama in 10 years time.

 

[Chippy_Tea]