A CONVICTED rapist jailed for life 10 years ago was cleared and freed
yesterday after the Court of Appeal declared his case ''a miscarriage of
justice''.
Scotsman John McGranaghan, 48, found guilty at the Old Bailey in 1981
of ''horrific and nauseating'' rapes and indecent assaults on three
women, smiled and waved from the dock after his convictions were ruled
''wholly unsafe and unsatisfactory''.
The property dealer, of Tooting, London, had lost his original appeal
in 1982, but the case was reopened after the organisation Justice
investigated it and the Home Office received fresh scientific evidence.
It was that evidence, from forensic scientist Mr Roger Cook, that
positively eliminated Mr McGranaghan as the attacker of the final victim
in a case that had been conducted on the basis that the same man was
responsible for all the offences.
Lord Justice Glidewell, quashing all the convictions and setting aside
the life sentence, criticised the prosecution team for not appreciating
the importance of scientific evidence available in 1981, and also the
defence for advising Mr McGranaghan not to provide blood and saliva
samples.
Mr McGranaghan -- who had been told by Judge Charles Lawson in the Old
Bailey case that he should not be released until he reached old age --
emerged from the High Court cells to be greeted with cheers and hugs
from waiting relatives.
He said: ''I can't believe it. I'm just glad to be free and to know
that this miscarriage of justice is finally over.
''I've been through years of hell in prison. I've been treated by
every-one as a sex offender when all along I have known I was innocent.
Sex offenders are treated worse than anyone else in prison. I've had to
fight all the way.''
Mr McGranaghan added: ''Now I just want to pick up the pieces of my
life and try to start again. It's impossible to say what my plans for
the future are.
''I'm not bitter really. Well, I'm bitter against the system which
convicted me for crimes I never committed. But I can't be bitter against
the victims of the rapes for which I was convicted.
''I have suffered and so have they. Their suffering still goes on.
They'll suffer forever because of what happened to them. And the person
who raped them is still free. He's never been caught. He's still out
there somewhere.''
Justice director Leah Levine, who was in court to hear yesterday's
ruling, said afterwards: ''It's been a very long haul to get this
result.''
Lord Justice Glidewell, sitting in London with Mr Justice Hodgson and
Mr Justice Buckley, had described the attacks on a married couple and
two women living alone, as nauseating and horrific.
They happened between 1978 and 198O in the Wimbledon and Ewell,
Surrey, areas.
Mr McGranaghan, on his lawyers' advice, had not provided blood and
saliva samples, the appeal Judge said, and the Crown relied on the
victims' descriptions of the rapist and the similarities in each case of
the way the attacks were carried out.
However, the fresh evidence from Mr Cook, a Metropolitan Police
forensic scientist, indicated that seminal staining on a cotton
bedspread taken from the final victim's home, could not be linked to Mr
McGranaghan.
The staining came from an ''A'' secreter, while the accused's blood
group was ''O''.
Lord Justice Glidewell said the victim Mrs F, a divorcee at the time
of the trial, had relived her ordeal for the Appeal Court and said she
had been completely unaware of the staining. She also admitted that she
had had a brief affair at the time of her marriage break-up some time
before she had been attacked.
However, the staining was recent and was close to the area of the bed
where the ''hideous episode'' had been enacted, the appeal Judge said It
was wholly consistent that it had come from her assailant.
''If so, this appellant was not that assailant,'' the Judge said.
Turning to the other attacks, the Judge said that had these matters
been tried separately, Mr McGranaghan could have been convicted.
However, the case was conducted on the basis that the attacks were so
similar that it was highly likely the same man was responsible.
None of these convictions now could be regarded as safe or
satisfactory.
Lord Justice Glidewell said the Crown team at the trial, led by Miss
Ann Curnow QC, had failed to appreciate that Mr Cook's report could have
led them to a reappraisal of the case that the same man had carried out
all the attacks.
The defence, had it seen the report, would have appreciated its
importance. The defence team had been aware that Mr McGranaghan had been
a blood donor and that his card indicated his ''O'' blood group.
The appeal Judge said: ''This (the case) can only be regarded as a
miscarriage of justice.''
Broadcaster Ludovic Kennedy, who backed the campaign for Mr
McGranaghan organised by Justice, said his release was ''wonderful
news''.
He said the case further highlighted the need for a totally
independent forensic science service with equal access for the defence.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article