Speeches by Munt.

“Thank you.”

“Yes, I just want to pick up on what you said. I will invite you to write to the Chair. I would be quite interested in knowing how many of the cases that you have referred are matters of process as opposed to matters of fact and evidence. For example, I am aware of what I know are a historic couple of cases—McDaid and, …”

“Thank you.”

“Can you say that again? I could not hear it.”

“Thank you. Do you agree with the findings of Chris Henley’s review?”

“You do; thank you. I want to move particularly to the Andrew Malkinson case. As I think probably everybody knows now, 26 July 2023 was when the Court of Appeal quashed Andrew Malkinson’s convictions, and it was in August 2023 and then April 2024 that Helen Pitcher, as the then chair, apologised to Andrew Malkinson for …”

“Yes.”

“Do you feel that it might be appropriate to pass on that apology now?”

“Thank you. If he follows up on any of these things, he will no doubt be grateful for that, but it was certainly the case that the CCRC’s initial apology was deemed to be inadequate. Chris Henley has said that he provided his report to the CCRC in January 2024. Do you know why it wasn’t published until 18 July 2024?”

“That is still three months.”

“Who advised you of that?”

“I am sorry to interrupt, but did you not consider sending it to the IOPC and the other organisations that you mentioned in its draft form? Surely, that would have been sufficient as well and you could have done that in the January.”

“So it didn’t go to them in January.”

“Indeed, you have said. Okay, so Chris Henley’s view was that there was an early “lack of oversight and direction” in relation to Malkinson’s case. Do you feel that you were responsible for that lack of oversight and direction?”

“Doing it in good faith is not good enough, is it, when you are talking about justice?”

“I am amazed that you are saying that you have case review workers who do not understand the basics of evidence. But we are also talking about the oversight, are we not?”

“But you have said that quality is important.”

“You have said that, and everyone will understand that. Most of the work that solicitors and barristers do is unseen and the judge’s deliberations are unseen. It is the poor person who has not been served properly who needs to see this stuff sorted out, and sorted out fairly. It is not even as though this is the only ti…”

“Fine.”

“Yes, I do, I do, I do. I wondered why the CCRC’s response to the Henley report and the annual report of 2023-24 says that Henley’s findings are “necessarily limited to the Andrew Malkinson case”, because to me the evidence suggests otherwise.”