Paul Quinn jailed for 2003 Salford rape after Andrew Malkinson case

Paul Quinn was jailed for 24 years after the rape that sent Andrew Malkinson to prison for 17 years, closing one chapter of a case that exposed a catastrophic failure in investigation, prosecution and forensic follow-up. At Manchester Crown Court, Quinn, now 52, received an extended sentence of 21 years in custody and three years on licence, with parole eligibility after 14 years.

The attack took place in the early hours of 19 July 2003 in Little Hulton, Salford, when a 33-year-old woman was assaulted as she walked home. The court heard that she was beaten, bitten, strangled unconscious and raped, and suffered a fractured cheekbone. Quinn was convicted in April after a six-week retrial of rape, strangulation and grievous bodily harm, with jurors hearing that his DNA was later found on the victim’s vest and that he had searched online about how long police keep samples.

That conviction cast fresh light on one of the most damaging miscarriages of justice in modern criminal cases. Andrew Malkinson was wrongly convicted in 2004, released in 2020 and had his conviction quashed by the Court of Appeal in 2023 after DNA evidence showed he could not have been the attacker. He spent 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit, while the real offender remained free.

Mr Justice Bright told the court that the victim was a “hero” and praised her for giving evidence at two trials. He described that evidence as “excruciating” and “remarkable”, a reminder of the burden placed on a woman who had already endured a violent sexual assault and then had to relive it years later in court. The judge also said Quinn knew throughout that another man had been arrested, convicted and imprisoned for his crime, and that he “sat back and enjoyed [his] liberty at the expense of an innocent man.”

Malkinson said he was “insulted” that Quinn received a softer sentence than the innocent man who was jailed for the crime, and described the case as involving “two decades of vilification.” The sentence has now brought the offender to account, but it also sharpens the unresolved question at the heart of the case: how a rape investigation, a prosecution and the handling of forensic evidence allowed the wrong man to lose 17 years while the true attacker remained at liberty.