Police and the CPS allegedly knew in 2007 that one other man's DNA was on the garments of the girl Andrew Malkinson was wrongly imprisoned for raping, but left him behind bars for an additional 13 years.
Mr Malkinson, who spent 17 years in jail for a rape he didn't commit, had his conviction quashed last month after DNA linking one other man to the crime was produced.
Case information obtained by the 57-year-old as he battled to be freed present that officers and prosecutors knew forensic testing in 2007 had recognized a searchable male DNA profile on the rape sufferer's high that didn't match his, in keeping with The Guardian.
They selected to take no additional motion and there's no file that they instructed the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), the physique answerable for investigating potential miscarriages of justice, in keeping with the report.
The CPS claims Mr Malkinson's attorneys have been instructed of the brand new DNA proof.
The CCRC refused to order additional forensic testing or refer the case for attraction in 2012.
Allegedly, the case information counsel the CCRC was fearful about prices.
Mr Malkinson was discovered responsible of raping a lady in Greater Manchester in 2003 and the subsequent yr was jailed for all times with a minimal time period of seven years, however he served an extra 10 for sustaining his innocence.
Notes of a gathering between the Forensic Science Service, the CPS and Greater Manchester Police (GMP) in December 2009 suggests the CPS understood the potential significance of the 2007 DNA discover, in keeping with the report.
CPS steerage states it "must write to the CCRC at the earliest opportunity about any case in which there is doubt about the safety of the conviction".
An inner log of Mr Malkinson's first software to the CCRC in 2009 - to attraction towards his conviction - reportedly reveals CCRC highlighted the price of additional testing and stated it could be unlikely to result in his conviction being quashed.
Mr Malkinson stated: "If the CCRC had investigated properly, it would have spared me years in prison for a crime I did not commit.
"I really feel an apology is the least I'm owed, however it looks as if the very physique set as much as tackle the system's fallibility is labouring underneath the delusion that it's itself infallible. How many extra folks has it failed?"
Read extra:Andrew Malkinson 'won't have to repay prison living costs'Rape conviction of man who spent 17 years in prison overturned
A CPS spokesperson instructed The Guardian: "It is clear Mr Malkinson was wrongly convicted of this crime and we share the deep regret that this happened.
"Evidence of a brand new DNA profile discovered on the sufferer's clothes in 2007 was not ignored. It was disclosed to the defence staff representing Mr Malkinson for his or her consideration.
"In addition, searches of the DNA databases were conducted to identify any other possible suspects. At that time there were no matches and therefore no further investigation could be carried out."
The CCRC instructed the newspaper: "As we have said before, it is plainly wrong that a man spent 17 years in prison for a crime he did not commit."
GMP have but to remark.
Please share by clicking this button!
Visit our site and see all other available articles!