PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Why is his case similar? Both Jason and Mr Malkinson were charged based on eyewitness identification with no forensic evidence. Mr Malkinson was arrested because a police officer thought he resembled an e-fit of the rapist. Two eyewitnesses and the victim then picked him from line-ups. Jurors were not told that both eyewitnesses were serial criminals. Mr Henley wrote that the case “provides a lesson about the very strong emotional pull of identification evidence… and its fallibility even when it comes from multiple witnesses”. “The profoundly mistaken verdicts in this case underscore the danger of relying on identification evidence in the absence of any other independent supporting evidence,” he added."
--------------------------------------------------
STORY: Is Jason Moore the next Andrew Malkinson?, by Investigative Reporter Charles Thomson, published by The Newham Recorder, on July 26, 2024:
PHOTO CAPTION:
Andrew Malkinson (left) served 17 years for a rape he didn't commit. A review of his case has found serious failings by the CCRC. Supporters of East End murder convict Jason Moore (right) say he too has been let down by a miscarriage of justice (Image: Charles Thomson / Moore family)
PHOTO CAPTION:
Andrew Malkinson's 17 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit became the subject of acclaimed BBC documentary The Wrong Man. Now a review of his case has left the CCRC mired in scandal (Image: Charles Thomson);
PHOTO CAPTION:
Chris Henley KC found the DNA proving Andrew Malkinson's (pictured) innocence was available in 2009, yet the CCRC rejected his case in 2012 and 2020. He found the body's processes had gone 'badly wrong' and some staff's work was 'very poor' (Image: Charles Thomson)
Jason Moore, from Canary Wharf, is serving life in prison for the 2005 murder of Robert Darby in Gants Hill - but he insists he is innocent (Image: Moore family)
In 2005, the prosecution's star eyewitness picked out the left-hand photo, of an innocent line-up volunteer, and said he was Robert Darby's stabber. Seven years later, he picked the right-hand photo of Jason Moore and said he was the stabber (Image: Met Police)
SUB-HEADING: "Andrew Malkinson and Jason Moore were both convicted of serious violence based on eyewitness testimony, with no forensic evidence linking them to their supposed crimes. As proof of Mr Malkinson’s innocence leaves the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) mired in scandal, campaigners are asking: Is Jason Moore the next Andrew Malkinson?"
GIST: "An innocent man may have languished in prison for a decade longer than he needed to, after the body tasked with investigating miscarriages of justice bodged his case.
That was the conclusion of a damning review last week into the Criminal Cases Review Commission’s (CCRC) handling of Andrew Malkinson’s rape conviction.
The report was so damaging that justice secretary Shabana Mahmood is trying to force the CCRC chairwoman out of her job.
Meanwhile, in east London, supporters of murder convict Jason Moore say they feel vindicated by the report.
For years they have been complaining that Jason, currently serving life in prison, has also been let down by the CCRC.
They say the similarities between his case and Mr Malkinson’s are so substantial that Jason’s conviction now demands its own full re-evaluation.
-------------------------------------------------------
Who is Andrew Malkinson?
Andrew Malkinson was convicted in 2004 of a brutal rape.
He was sentenced to life with a minimum of seven years, but served 17 because he refused to participate in rehabilitation courses that required him to confess to the crime.
In 2023, his conviction was quashed after DNA samples from all over the victim’s body, including underneath her fingernails, were re-tested.
They didn’t match Mr Malkinson.
They matched another man, known to the police, who has since been arrested.
-----------------------------------------------------
What is the CCRC?
The CCRC was set up in 1997, in the wake of high-profile miscarriages of justice like the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six.
Previously, only the Home Secretary could grant a convicted person another appeal, if their first appeal had failed.
But new laws transferred that power to the CCRC, also giving it the power to actively reinvestigate cases, demanding access to police files.
----------------------------------------------------
So why is it in trouble?
A review by top barrister Chris Henley KC has found CCRC processes went “badly wrong” in Mr Malkinson’s case.
The DNA exonerating him was available by 2009, yet the CCRC rejected his case in 2012.
Staff used “casual and dismissive” language, only investigated in a “superficial” way, and some of their work was “very poor”.
Records showed “fundamental misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the new DNA findings”.
“In my mind, there had been a complete failure to get to grips with the potential significance of this new DNA result,” wrote Mr Henley. “If the test had been applied properly the 2009 application would have resulted in a referral [to the Court of Appeal].”
Mr Malkinson applied again in 2018 but the CCRC again missed the exonerating DNA.
Instead, it was left up to the charity APPEAL to finally run the tests that proved his innocence.
“From everything I have seen I have no confidence that the CCRC would have agreed to undertake this crucial initial testing work themselves,” wrote Mr Henley.
-----------------------------------------------------
And who is Jason Moore?
Jason Moore, from Canary Wharf, is serving life for a murder he insists he did not commit.
Robert Darby, 42, from the Isle of Dogs, was stabbed in the heart outside the Valentine pub, Gants Hill, in August 2005.
Seven years later, Jason was charged with the crime based on a single eyewitness identification.
He was convicted by jurors at the Old Bailey in 2013 and sentenced to a minimum of 18 years.
Newsquest has extensively investigated his case, uncovering new evidence that featured on BBC and ITV News.
The Free Jason Moore campaign has won high-profile support from MPs, justice campaigners, sports stars, authors and the Church of England.
---------------------------------------------------------
Why is his case similar?
Both Jason and Mr Malkinson were charged based on eyewitness identification with no forensic evidence.
Mr Malkinson was arrested because a police officer thought he resembled an e-fit of the rapist. Two eyewitnesses and the victim then picked him from line-ups.
Jurors were not told that both eyewitnesses were serial criminals.
Mr Henley wrote that the case “provides a lesson about the very strong emotional pull of identification evidence… and its fallibility even when it comes from multiple witnesses”.
“The profoundly mistaken verdicts in this case underscore the danger of relying on identification evidence in the absence of any other independent supporting evidence,” he added.
How strong was the Jason Moore eyewitness evidence?
There were two eyewitnesses to Robert Darby’s stabbing but only one identified Jason – and that identification was at odds with his own initial description.
Both witnesses agreed Robert’s assailant was the same height as him (5’11”) and wore a blue zip-up jacket.
Jason is 6’4” in bare feet and CCTV shows he was not wearing or carrying a blue jacket.
The witness had told police the stabber had a shaved head, yet later picked out Jason, who had a mop of thick, dark hair.
He also told police that the stabber was the passenger from a small, silver Ford Fiesta. Jason had been riding in a brand-new, top-of-the-line BMW convertible.
Weeks after the stabbing, the witness had picked a different man as the stabber, who looked nothing like Jason and had a shaved head.
By the time he finally picked Jason, seven years later, police had already shown the witness Jason’s photo. Experts say the line-up should therefore never have taken place.
-------------------------------------------------------
So what is the CCRC’s involvement?
The CCRC made a significant factual error when rejecting Jason’s case in 2021.
It wrote in its rejection letter that both eyewitnesses “agree that it was the front seat passenger” who stabbed Robert, and that it was accepted that this was Jason.
That was wrong on both counts.
Only one witness ever claimed to have seen the stabber exit a car – and that car did not resemble the one Jason is agreed by all parties to have been riding in.
The CCRC, in its rejection letter, refused a request that it re-interview the witness who identified Jason.
When Newsquest tracked him down instead, he blurted out that he was “drunk” when he witnessed Robert’s stabbing and might have identified the wrong man.
He also retreated somewhat from his claim that the stabber was a passenger in a car, saying he only saw them approach Robert “from the direction of” the car.
Our recorded interview with the witness is the subject of a fresh CCRC application, filed last year.
Two eyewitnesses agreed that the man who fought with Robert Darby wore a blue, zip-up sports jacket. CCTV evidence showed Jason leaving home neither wearing nor carrying such a jacket. He wore a grey hoodie with no zip (Image: supplied by Moore family)
Could there be exonerating DNA in Jason’s case?
We don’t know.
Days after Robert’s stabbing, police raided the home of another suspect, who did match witnesses’ descriptions of the stabber.
The man had fled the country, leaving a “blue sports top” discarded on his bedroom floor.
Police seized it but did not DNA test it.
After the eyewitness made Jason the prime suspect seven years later, limited DNA testing was finally done on the cuffs and collar, excluding Jason as the wearer.
But once Jason was excluded, it was never comprehensively tested for traces of Robert Darby’s DNA.
Jason’s lawyers have asked repeatedly for more in-depth, up-to-date testing but the CCRC refused, just as it refused to re-interview the witness.
However, in last week’s report, Mr Henley called for “an immediate commitment to review all cases which have the potential for new DNA opportunities".
“It is almost impossible to believe that this is the only case that has not been handled properly,” he said.
Jason’s pro bono law firm, Shearman Bowen, has therefore called this week for the CCRC to “reconsider its refusal to carry out further DNA testing in his case”.
What does the CCRC say?
It refused to comment on Jason’s case, but said it had begun trawling more than 5,500 rape and murder cases on its books.
“We are currently focusing on cases where the identity of the offender is in question,” it said.
“We are limiting the exercise to those cases where the conviction was before 1 January 2016,” it added, as those were before newer DNA tests were introduced.
But it said: “We anticipate that only a small proportion of those cases will be ones in which there are new forensic opportunities.""
The entire story can be read at:
https://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/24470552.ccrc-scandal-jason-moore-next-andrew-malkinson/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
- SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
