Andrew Malkinson will need to 'prove innocence in wrongful conviction' once more to get compensation

A man who was wrongfully convicted of rape and jailed for 17 years will have to prove his innocence once more in order to get compensation - his lawyer has said.

Andrew Malkinson, 57, was wrongly found guilty of raping a woman in Salford, Greater Manchester in 2003, and was jailed for life with a minimum term of seven years.

But, because he maintained his innocence, an extra 10 years were added onto his sentence.

His conviction was finally quashed by senior judges at the Court of Appeal on 26 July after DNA evidence that linked another man to the crime was brought to light.

It later emerged Mr Malkinson, from Grimsby, would be made to pay for his board and lodging for the 17 years he spent in jail, deducted from any compensation he may get.

It sparked outrage across the country, and ministers were quick to issue fresh guidance making it clear that those who are wrongly convicted will no longer have living costs covering their time in prison docked from compensation payments.

But, despite welcoming the move, Mr Malkinson's lawyer says he now faces another battle to claim the compensation he is owed.

Emily Bolton, from legal charity Appeal, said: "At the moment he is still required, even with this reform, to go through a process that requires him to prove his innocence beyond reasonable doubt - why?

"He has already proved his conviction is unsafe at the Court of Appeal, we consider this to be a totally unreasonable burden to place on wrongfully convicted people.

"It's incredibly difficult to prove that your conviction is unsafe to the Court of Appeal, it's a really, really high standard, this is not a technicality and he shouldn't have to do more.

"He's been through so much, how many more battles should this man have to fight?"

An independent board was set to determines whether living costs would be taken off any compensation that Mr Malkinson receives.

But, following the high-profile case, the Justice Secretary Alex Chalk ordered an urgent review of compensation laws for innocent people.

Downing Street indicated that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak believed the deductions were unfair amid demands to drop the charges.

Mr Chalk has now updated the guidance dating back to 2006 to remove them from future payments made under the miscarriage of justice compensation scheme.

Speaking about Mr Malkinson's reaction to the reform, Ms Bolton added: "Andy is really pleased that the government is listening, but he thinks that there is more that can be done.

"For him, what it means to Andy, is that now the people who he considers his kidnappers, he no longer has to pay their expenses so that's a step in the right direction.

"But Andy wants to see so much more happen, particularly around this compensation issue."

Mr Malkinson is also calling for wider changes, raising concerns about the police’s handling of evidence and the ability of juries to convict on a 10-2 majority.

"Andy wants to see a change in the way that miscarriages of justice are investigated and rectified in this country," Ms Bolton said.

"He's actually got a petition out asking for the body that is supposed to investigate miscarriages of justice to take a long hard look at how it failed him in this case, not once, but twice, and to issue an apology to him.

"But that's not all that Andy wants to see change. There are so many things that contributed to his wrongful conviction. The DNA in this case shows that Andy is innocent."

• Andrew Malkinson's lawyer Emily Bolton from legal charity Appeal.

She added: "Andy is an extraordinary man to have survived 20 years of a wrongful conviction, 17 and half of those in prison, maintaining his innocence, serving 10 more years than he needed to serve in order to hold to the truth.

"Andy's not going to give up, he wants the system reformed so this doesn't happen to other people."

Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To know...