header-logo header-logo

Justice system must learn from Malkinson

25 July 2024
Issue: 8081 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail
The criminal justice system must have a ‘culture’ where ‘it is acknowledged that mistakes can be made’, Chris Henley KC has said, in his independent review of the Andrew Malkinson case
Malkinson was wrongly convicted of rape in 2004 and served 17 years for a crime that he did not commit. His conviction was quashed last summer, after the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) rejected the first two of Malkinson’s three applications despite the emergence of new DNA evidence.

The Henley review’s nine recommendations, published last week, include annual training for all CCRC staff on interpretation of DNA evidence, and that any decision not to obtain a police file be accompanied by a ‘full written justification’.

Henley said the case exemplifies the ‘fundamental importance of full and transparent pre-trial disclosure of all relevant material to the defence’ and ‘provides a lesson about the very strong emotional pull of identification evidence, not only on a jury but also on legal professionals and judges, and its fallibility, even when it comes from multiple witnesses, which is so difficult to assess. The profoundly mistaken verdicts in this case underscore the danger of relying on identification evidence in the absence of any other independent supporting evidence’. 

CCRC chair Helen Pitcher expressed ‘sincere regret and an unreserved apology’. The Lord Chancellor, Shabana Mahmood, has begun the process to remove Pitcher from her post. 

Jon Robins, lecturer in criminology at Brighton University and NLJ columnist, said: ‘If the CCRC has done one job well, then it has been providing cover for other parts of a failing criminal appeals system. A main theme of the report is the “deep-seated, system-wide, cultural reluctance” starting “right at the top in the Court of Appeal” to acknowledge our justice system will on occasion make mistakes. 

‘The rot set in before Helen Pitcher joined, but she needs to go because there’s nothing in the CCRC’s communications with the outside world that they recognise there is a problem.’ 

Robins added that recent analysis shows just 16 convictions have been overturned as a result of the CCRC’s investigative work over the last eight years.

Issue: 8081 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll