Man on Trial for Rape That Led to Andrew Malkinson Wrongful Jailing

Published: March 5, 2026
The English Chronicle Desk
The English Chronicle Online

A man has gone on trial in Manchester this week accused of committing a violent rape and assault in 2003 — the same crime that saw Andrew Malkinson wrongly convicted and imprisoned for more than 17 years before his conviction was quashed. The case has drawn intense attention in the UK as it revisits one of the most notorious miscarriages of justice in recent memory.

At Manchester Crown Court, Paul Quinn, 51, has pleaded not guilty to charges including rape, strangulation and inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent in connection with the attack on a woman in Little Hulton, Salford. Prosecutors told jurors that fresh DNA evidence, unavailable at the time of the original prosecution, now links Quinn to the crime and undermines the mistaken identification that led to Malkinson’s conviction.

The victim, then in her thirties, was walking close to the M61 motorway in July 2003 when she was stalked, dragged into bushes, brutally beaten, strangled until unconscious and raped — suffering a fractured cheekbone and serious injuries. Prosecutors told the jury that new forensic analysis has shown DNA matching Quinn’s profile on the victim’s clothing and body.

During the original investigation, police focused quickly on Malkinson, who was living nearby. He was arrested, identified in a police lineup and ultimately convicted in 2004 despite no DNA evidence linking him to the attack and significant discrepancies between his appearance and the victim’s description. His conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal in 2023 after decades of campaigning and advances in forensic science.

Prosecutor John Price KC described Malkinson as “the victim of a most terrible miscarriage of justice, one of the worst there has been,” emphasising that jurors will hear evidence of mistakes made during the original investigation, including reliance on flawed identifications by witnesses.

Quinn, who was first arrested in 2022 after renewed forensic inquiry traced DNA to him, denies all charges. He has acknowledged that DNA might reflect consensual sexual activity, but prosecutors argue that the totality of the evidence — including the strength of the modern DNA match — points decisively to him as the attacker.

The trial also includes testimony and exhibits comparing historical images of Malkinson and Quinn around the time of the offence as well as e-fit and witness descriptions from 2003. Jurors have been told that the crime would likely have been committed by someone familiar with the area, a point prosecutors suggest aligns more with Quinn’s background.

Andrew Malkinson, now 60, has been at the centre of public debate over police procedures, identification reliability, forensic disclosure and appeals processes. His wrongful conviction — upheld for many years despite subsequent DNA evidence that did not match him — spurred calls for reform in how criminal investigations handle forensic information and communicate exculpatory evidence to defence teams.

The trial continues as the court hears detailed forensic evidence and arguments from both sides on how the events unfolded more than two decades ago. Observers say the case could have lasting implications for the UK criminal justice system, particularly on standards for identification, evidence disclosure and handling of wrongful convictions.

Read More At>>