Wrongly jailed man hits out at ‘insulting' compensation increase
The Ministry of Justice has announced that the compensation cap will rise by 30% for those who were convicted of a crime they did not commit.
Those wrongfully imprisoned for more than 10 years will receive £1.3 million instead of £1 million, while those with sentences of less than 10 years will receive £650,000 rather than £500,000.
It is the first increase to the payment since the scheme's introduction in 2008.
But Andrew Malkinson, who has been campaigning with the law charity Appeal to get the compensation scheme overhauled, described the change as 'insulting'.
He was wrongly convicted and jailed in 2004 for the rape of a 33-year-old woman in Salford, Greater Manchester, spending 17 years in prison.
Mr Malkinson – who was released in 2020 after DNA evidence proved he was not the attacker – said: 'This change is an improvement but a below-inflation increase is insulting.
'The state stole years of my life and robbed me of my physical and mental health, yet it still wants to arbitrarily limit the compensation I receive to try to put myself back together.
'I'll keep fighting to abolish this cruel and arbitrary cap, along with the brutal rules currently denying compensation to the vast majority of wrongfully convicted people.'
The compensation scheme is intended to help individuals restart and rebuild their lives.
It is one route through which an individual can receive compensation for a wrongful conviction, with other options including suing public bodies.
Those claiming after miscarriages of justice within the armed forces will also see the same rise in the cap.
Toby Wilton, solicitor at Hickman & Rose who represent Mr Malkinson in his claims for compensation, said: 'While this proposal is welcome, it does not go nearly far enough. The current maximum cap on compensation of £1 million was introduced in 2008.
'Before that, compensation was not capped at all and applicants received compensation broadly in line with what they would receive in a court of law.
'The government should return to this system, removing the arbitrary cap which unfairly penalises those who, like Andrew Malkinson, have suffered the longest lasting and most serious miscarriages of justice.
'A 30% increase in the cap, whilst welcome, does not come close to addressing this unfairness.
'Increased by RPI inflation, the measure the courts use to uprate compensation amounts, £1 million in 2008 would be closer to £2 million today. Increased by CPI, it would be £1.65 million, more than double this proposed increase.
'The Government and Parliament should think again.'
Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood believes the additional support will help victims of miscarriages of justice.
She said: 'Fairness is the ideal that underpins our justice system. Where it has failed to meet that ideal, victims of devastating miscarriages of justice must be able to rebuild their lives.
'This uplift will ensure victims are compensated for the crimes they did not commit and the years they cannot get back.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
11 hours ago
- BBC News
Four more traders appeal rate-rigging convictions after Supreme Court ruling
Four traders are appealing to have their rate-rigging convictions overturned after the Supreme Court quashed two rate-rigging cases on Merchant, Jonathan Mathew, Philippe Moryoussef, and Christian Bittar are seeking acquittal following the victory of traders Tom Hayes and Carlo of the traders were convicted of manipulating the interest rates used for loans between banks, know as Libor in the UK, an issue at the heart of the 2008 financial crisis."Following the Supreme Court's landmark decision yesterday to quash the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, all four of our clients now intend to appeal against their convictions," said law firm Hickman & Rose. "In those circumstances, they don't intend to comment further at this time," the firm four convictions came after an investigation from the Serious Fraud Office into whether traders had been manipulating Libor for became the focus of allegations of wrongdoing following the financial crisis in 2008 and has now been discontinued, while its European equivalent Euribor is being the Supreme Court has now ruled in favour of Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo, the four traders' appeal is likely to be a more straightforward process than for Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo who argued their case for Serious Fraud Office declined to comment on the appeal from the four traders on it said on Wednesday in response to the ruling on Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo's case that it had "considered this judgement and the full circumstances carefully and determined it would not be in the public interest for us to seek a retrial".The Libor scandal came to light in 2012, when it was discovered that banks were artificially inflating rates to profit from trading and were also lowering them to mask the troubles they faced following the outbreak of the global financial in 2023, the BBC uncovered evidence of a much larger, state-led "rigging" of interest rates, under pressure from central banks and governments across the world during the financial Hayes and Mr Palombo argued they were wrongly prosecuted for what were normal commercial practices in order to appease public anger towards the banks over the financial crisis.
Times
12 hours ago
- Times
Cabinet secretary driven to distraction by rumours of Chevening maze
Sir Chris Wormald was 'once late to a conference call because he was stuck in the maze' ALAMY Public figures can often cope with criticism about procedure and technicalities, but are more vulnerable when it comes to utter ridicule, the sort of stuff higher up what we might call the 'Iannucci Index'. So the cabinet secretary Sir Chris Wormald might have been relatively relaxed about Tim Shipman's revelations in The Spectator, such as his tactic of bamboozling politicians with 'QI points' (distracting pieces of trivia), and his wish to install Jeremy Pocklington at the Ministry of Justice because it would suit the civil servant's career rather than the needs of the nation. But surely Wormald will be cringing at Shipman's follow up on X, namely that he was 'once late to a conference call because he was stuck in the maze at Chevening'. These are the things that can take you to the hedge of oblivion.
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
Comply with child age checks or face consequences, Ofcom tells tech firms
Tech firms have been warned to act now or face the consequences, as new online safety protections for children come into force. From Friday, so-called 'risky' sites and apps will be expected to use what the regulator has described as 'highly effective' age checks to identify which users are children and subsequently prevent them from accessing pornography, as well as other harmful content including self-harm, suicide, eating disorders and extreme violence. But some online safety campaigners said while the new measures should have been a 'watershed moment for young people', regulator Ofcom has instead 'let down' parents, accusing it of choosing to 'prioritise the business needs of big tech over children's safety'. The Molly Rose Foundation, founded by bereaved father Ian Russell after his 14-year-old daughter Molly took her own life having viewed harmful content on social media, said the changes lack ambition and accountability and warned that big tech will have taken note. In the face of campaigners' criticism, Ofcom chief executive Dame Melanie Dawes has previously defended the reforms, insisting that tech firms are not being given much power over the new measures, which are coming into effect as part of the Online Safety Act. The changes include age checks on pornography websites, as well as others such as dating app Grindr, which Ofcom said will ensure it is more difficult for children in the UK to access online porn than in many other countries. The regulator said sites such as X, formerly Twitter, and others including Bluesky and Reddit have also committed to age assurances. Ofcom said its safety codes also demand that algorithms 'must be tamed and configured for children so that the most harmful material is blocked'. It said it has launched a monitoring and impact programme focused on some of the platforms where children spend most time including social media sites Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, gaming site Roblox and video clip website YouTube. The sites are among those which have been asked to submit, by August 7, a review of their efforts to assess risks to children and, by September 30, scrutiny of the practical actions they are taking to keep children safe. Actions which could be taken against firms which fail to comply with the new codes include fines of up to £18 million or 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is greater, and court orders potentially blocking access in the UK. Dame Melanie said: 'Prioritising clicks and engagement over children's online safety will no longer be tolerated in the UK. 'Our message to tech firms is clear – comply with age checks and other protection measures set out in our codes, or face the consequences of enforcement action from Ofcom.' But Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said: 'This should be a watershed moment for young people but instead we've been let down by a regulator that has chosen to prioritise the business needs of big tech over children's safety.' He said the 'lack of ambition and accountability will have been heard loud and clear in Silicon Valley'. He added: 'We now need a clear reset and leadership from the Prime Minister. That means nothing less than a new Online Safety Act that fixes this broken regime and firmly puts the balance back in favour of children.'
