The case of Andrew Malkinson represents yet another in the long list of miscarriages of justice in the United Kingdom.  Those that study criminology and those practitioners involved in the criminal justice system have a reasonable grasp of how such cases come about.  More often than not it is a result of police malpractice, negligence, culture and error. Occasionally it is as a result of poor direction in court by the trial judge or failures by the CPS, the prosecution team or even the defence team.  The tragic case of Stefan Kiszko is a good example of multiple failures by different bodies including the defence.  Previous attempts at addressing the issues have seen the introduction of new laws such as the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996.  The former dealing in part with the treatment of suspects in custody and the latter with the disclosure of documents in criminal proceedings.  Undoubtedly there have been significant improvements in the way suspects are dealt with and the way that cases are handled. Other interventions have been the introduction of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), removing in part, charging decisions from the police and the introduction of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to review cases where an appeal has been lost but fresh evidence or information has come to light. 

And yet, despite better police training regarding interviews and the treatment of suspects, better training in investigations as a whole, new restrictive laws and procedures, the independence of the CPS, the court appeal system and oversight by a body such as the CCRC, miscarriages of justice still occur.  What sets the Malkinson case aside from the others appears to be the failure of the CCRC to take action on new information.  The suggestion being that the decision was a financial one, with little to do with justice.  If the latter is proved to be true, we will of course have to wait for the results of the inquiry, then how can anyone have any confidence in the justice system?

Over the years we have already seen swingeing cuts in budgets in the criminal justice system such that the system is overloaded.  Try to pop into the local police station to make a complaint of a crime, you won’t find a station open to the public. Should you have been unfortunate enough to have been caught for some minor misdemeanour and need to go to magistrates’ court for a hearing, you’ll be lucky if you don’t have to travel some considerable distance to get there, good luck with that if you rely on public transport. Should you be the victim of a more serious crime or indeed charged with a more serious offence, triable in crown court, then you’ll probably wait a couple of years before the trial. Unfortunate if you are the alleged offender and on remand, and if you are the victim, you could be forgiven for deciding that you’d rather put it all behind you and disengage with the system.  But even to get to that stage, there has to be sufficient evidence to secure a prosecution and it has to be in the public interest to do so. Your day in court as a victim is likely to be hang on the vagaries of the CPS decision making process.  A process that has one eye on the court backlog and another on performance targets.  Little wonder the attrition rate in sex offences is so high.  Gone are the days of letting a jury decide on occasions where the evidence hangs on little more than one person’s word against the other.

Andrew Malkinson and his legal representative have called for a judicial review, a review where witnesses can be compelled to attend to give evidence and documentary evidence can be demanded to be produced.  Instead, the government has said there will be an independent inquiry.  On a personal note, I have little faith in such inquiries.  My experience is that they are rarely independent of government direction and wishes.  Andrew Malkinson’s case is a travesty and the least that can be done is to have a proper inquiry. I suspect though that the Malkinson case might just be the tip of the iceberg. The Criminal Justice System is in crisis but budgetary restraint and political whim seem to be far more important than justice.  We can look forward to more finger pointing and yet more reorganisation and regulation.