A British man spent 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit. Report shows authorities knew he was innocent after five years.

Authorities knew a British man had been wrongly convicted of rape five years after he was sentenced to life in prison, but failed to release the evidence, according to a new report.

Andrew Malkinson served 17 years in prison for a 2003 rape he did not commit. It was only five years after his conviction that he learned the authorities knew he was innocent, the BBC reported. He should have been released from prison and rehabilitated at that time, according to a report by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).

The report found that the CCRC failed to investigate evidence of Malkinson’s innocence until 2022. Malkinson is now calling for comprehensive reforms to the commission and the resignation or dismissal of its chair, Helen Pitcher.

Malkinson said the report “exposes how the CCRC obstructed my fight for justice and cost me another decade of wrongful imprisonment.”

“If Helen Pitcher and her leadership team do not resign following such a damning report, they should be sacked,” he added, according to Sky News.

Pitcher apologized to Malkinson and said it was “clear that the commission had let him down.”

“No one can imagine the devastating impact this wrongful conviction has had on Mr Malkinson’s life and I deeply regret any additional harm caused by our handling of the case,” she added. “On behalf of the Commission, I express my deepest regret.”

In its response to the report, the CCRC said it would “learn from the mistakes made”. It added that it would “implement the reform recommendations made by Chris Henley, the lawyer appointed by the government to review Malkinson’s case. Work has already begun to implement these”.

In 2003, Malkinson was accused of raping a woman in Greater Manchester, the BBC reported. He was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment despite there being no DNA evidence linking him to the crime. His conviction was based on disputed eyewitness accounts from people who placed him near the crime scene, even though he did not match the rapist’s description or have a deep scratch on his face that the victim allegedly inflicted on her attacker during the rape.

Three years after his imprisonment, forensic scientists were able to find DNA in the victim’s clothing that pointed to another, then unknown man. In 2009, Greater Manchester Police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the CCRC knew of this evidence but rejected Malkinson’s applications to overturn his conviction. In 2013, the CCRC again failed to review Malkinson’s record, despite the Court of Appeal acquitting another man of rape in almost identical circumstances. The CCRC again rejected Malkinson’s attempt at acquittal in 2019. It also considered rejecting his third application in 2022.

The damning report found that the CCRC only referred the case back to the magistrates after a legal aid agency helped Malkinson win an application to have new DNA testing carried out.

Henley, the lawyer responsible for the report, said he did not believe the CCRC would ever have done the work to exonerate Malkinson on its own.

“It has taken 20 years to correct this appalling miscarriage of justice,” Henley said, according to the BBC. “This case demonstrates a deep-rooted, system-wide cultural reluctance, starting at the very top of the Court of Appeal, to acknowledge that our criminal justice system occasionally makes mistakes. The fact that Mr Malkinson has had to wait 20 years to be exonerated is neither an achievement nor proof that things are working properly.”