IOPC investigates retired officers over role in wrongful conviction of Andrew Malkinson

Four retired police officers are under investigation for potential gross misconduct over their involvement in the wrongful conviction of Andrew Malkinson for rape.

One of the officers is under criminal investigation for potential charges of perverting the course of justice and misconduct in a public office, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said.

Malkinson, 58, spent 17 years in prison after he was jailed for a 2003 rape in Greater Manchester that he did not commit. His conviction was quashed by the court of appeal last year.

Malkinson said: “I feel vindicated by this update but I won’t be satisfied until officers face real consequences. If Greater Manchester police get away with what they did to me, they’ll keep doing it. It’s as simple as that.”

The IOPC has been investigating complaints by Malkinson’s legal team about Greater Manchester police’s handling of the investigation that led to his conviction.

The IOPC said it was focusing on four areas:

• Whether police officers followed the appropriate processes during the identification of Malkinson as a suspect.

• Whether witnesses were offered any incentive to provide evidence.

• The alleged failure to disclose information that might have helped Malkinson’s defence at his trial.

• And the handling and disposal of items of evidence.

Catherine Bates, the IOPC regional director, said: “Mr Malkinson is a victim of one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British history. We continue to work hard to ensure his complaints are thoroughly and independently investigated.

“Following a detailed review of evidence spanning a period of more than 20 years, we have now informed four retired GMP officers that they are under investigation for potential gross misconduct.

“One of the officers has also been notified that they are under criminal investigation for potential misconduct in public office and perverting the course of justice in relation to their actions during the police investigation and subsequent trial.”

The IOPC stressed that serving notice to an officer that they are under investigation does not necessarily mean disciplinary proceedings or criminal charges will follow.

Emily Bolton, Malkinson’s lawyer at the legal charity Appeal, said: “Andy’s wrongful imprisonment was not an unavoidable accident. Police accountability isn’t optional – it’s essential. Andy, his family, and the rape victim in this case all deserve justice.”

When the investigation concludes, the IOPC will decide if any officers breached the standards of professional behaviour or if the case should be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service.

Bates added: “Our investigation team continues to work hard to conclude our investigation as soon as reasonably possible.

“We will continue to keep Mr Malkinson and GMP updated on our progress.”

Toby Wilton, the civil lawyer at Hickman and Rose who represents Malkinson over his police complaint, said: “This announcement that four officers involved will now face a misconduct investigation, and one will now face criminal investigation, is an important first step – but it is vital that all those responsible at Greater Manchester police, as well as the wider force, are held to account.”

A GMP spokesperson said: “We continue to extend our sincere apologies to Mr Malkinson for the mistakes we made.

“We offer him our commitment that we will continue to work openly and fully with the ongoing Andrew Malkinson inquiry and IOPC investigation in the hope that we will be able to provide him with the truth he deserves to hear.

“It is beyond doubt that Mr Malkinson did not commit this horrific crime.
Our ongoing investigation is committed to ensuring that the true perpetrator is put behind bars so that the victim and all involved can finally have some sense of justice after this awful ordeal.”

Malkinson’s case was twice looked at and rejected by the Criminal Cases Review Commission before it was referred back to the court of appeal on his third application.

Chris Henley KC said in his review of the commission’s handling of the case that Malkinson’s experience demonstrated “a deep-seated, system-wide, cultural reluctance, which starts right at the top in the court of appeal, to acknowledge our criminal justice system will on occasion make mistakes, that entirely innocent defendants will sometimes be convicted and have this possibility at the forefront of our collective mind when trying and reviewing cases.”

Helen Pitcher, the chair of the commission, offered an “unreserved apology” to Malkinson in the weeks before Henley’s review was about to be published.

A panel has been convened to consider Pitcher’s future in the post.