A man wrongly jailed for 17 years for a rape he did not commit has received an apology from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).
Andrew Malkinson was jailed in 2003 but eventually released in December 2020.
His charges were quashed last year after new DNA evidence potentially linked another man to the crime.
The CCRC has now offered Mr Malkinson an unreserved apology after the completion of a report from an independent review by Chris Henley KC into the handling of the case.
CCRC chairman Helen Pitcher OBE said: “Mr Henley’s report makes sobering reading, and it is clear from his findings that the commission failed Andrew Malkinson. For this, I am deeply sorry. I have written to Mr Malkinson to offer him my sincere regret and an unreserved apology on behalf of the commission.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
“For me, offering a genuine apology required a clear understanding of the circumstances in which the commission failed Mr Malkinson. We now have that.
“Nobody can ever begin to imagine the devastating impact that Mr Malkinson’s wrongful conviction has had on his life, and I can only apologise for the additional harm caused to him by our handling of his case.”
Mr Malkinson had protested his innocence for years.
He had applied for his case to be reviewed by the CCRC in 2009, but at the conclusion of its review in 2012 the commission refused to order further forensic testing or refer the case for appeal, amid concerns over costs.
A second application was rejected in 2020.
Read more:
Investigation launched into Andrew Malkinson case
Police and CPS ‘knew another man’s DNA was on victim’s clothes’
Critical DNA evidence had been available since 2007, but no match was found on the police database at the time.
Since Mr Malkinson had his conviction quashed, dozens of rape and murder convictions from before 2016 are set to undergo fresh DNA testing to identify potential miscarriages of justice.
The CCRC said it has re-examined nearly 5,500 cases that it previously rejected in the light of improvement in DNA analysis techniques.
Its initial trawl last summer found around a quarter of the cases are those where the identity of the offender is challenged.
Focusing on those, it says there are potentially several dozen cases where DNA samples could be retested using the DNA 17 technique, first introduced in 2014.
