Katie Williams
Live reporter

Paul Quinn has been sentenced to 24 years for rape, strangulation and grievous bodily harm after he attacked a young mother as she walked home in Salford, Greater Manchester, in 2003.

The crime led to innocent Andrew Malkinson being wrongly imprisoned for 17 years, in what has been characterised as one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British history. Here's what you need to know:

The sentence: The earliest Quinn will be released is after serving 14 years of his 24-year sentence. You can find a full breakdown on the charges here, and our legal correspondent unpacks what it all means.

The judge said Quinn's lifestyle appears to have changed "significantly" after around 2017, but added that he saw "no sign whatsoever" that Quinn repented the crime.

Victim impact: In a statement read out by a barrister, the woman said she lives in "constant fear", adding that one night in 2003 changed her life. Judge Mr Justice Bright has called her a "hero".

Malkinson says in a statement following the sentencing, that Quinn "let me rot whilst he enjoyed his freedom". He adds that he is "insulted" by the sentence and hopes he does not get parole.

How we got here: Malkinson was convicted in 2004 after being misidentified in a police identity parade. He served 17 years before being released in 2020 and exonerated in 2023.

DNA evidence: Advances in DNA evidence helped overturn Malkinson's conviction and identify Quinn as the real perpetrator. The handling of the case has been criticised and is being investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

• We're now closing our live coverage, but you can read more in our news story

More from Andrew Malkinson's statement now, which has been released through Appeal, a charity that campaigns against wrongful convictions.

He says: “I got sentenced to life imprisonment and served more than 17 years inside. Throughout that time I didn’t know if I would ever be released.

“Paul Quinn, who has a track record of violence and sexual offences, and who let me rot whilst he enjoyed his freedom, could now be out after just 14 years, and will certainly be out after 21 years.

“I hope that this man does not get parole and that he serves longer than me. Anything less is not justice.

“I am also appalled for the victim, who has suffered so gravely and whose real attacker has today gotten off lightly.

"My thoughts are with her and her loved ones – who I hope today nevertheless brings some peace.”

Andrew Malkinson has just released a statement following Quinn's sentencing.

“I am insulted that this violent, depraved individual – who was content to let me suffer two decades of vilification and more than 17 years wrongly imprisoned for his crime – has received a softer sentence than was imposed on me, an innocent man," he says.

We will bring you more on this shortly.

Solicitor Toby Wilton, representing Andrew Malkinson, who was wrongly convicted over the crime and spent 17 years in jail, has made the following statement:

"While Andy is relieved this chapter of his ordeal is now closed, it is not the end of this matter as far as he is concerned.

"Andy is still fighting to persuade the Government to overhaul the scheme by which the victims of miscarriages of justice receive nowhere near the compensation they deserve.

"Currently, the costs incurred in trying to achieve a fair and suitable compensation are deducted from the final amount some victims receive.

"This effectively means that victims of the most serious miscarriages of justice, such as Andy, are expected to pay for the privilege of securing justice.

"This is clearly not right, and unfairly affects only those, like Andy, who have suffered the most."

Following Quinn's sentencing, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) is appealing to anyone who may also be a potential victim to come forward.

GMP says the outcome of this case has been possible "due to the extraordinary courage and resilience shown by the victim, who has continued to engage with the criminal justice process through two trials".

The force adds that it has apologised to "the two victims impacted by this ordeal: the survivor of this heinous attack, and Mr Andrew Malkinson".

Detective Chief Superintendent Rebecca McKendrick, senior investigating officer on the case, said: “To commit such a violent attack raises concerns that there may be other victims out there.

“If you believe you have been a victim or have information you have not yet shared with us, please know we want to hear from you. We promise you that we will support you and we will listen to you.”

Anyone with information related to the case can call GMP on 101, via its website www.gmp.police.uk, external, quoting Operation Canopy, or anonymously call the independent charity Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent, at Manchester Crown Court

The judge is now back in court to explain his sentence.

Quinn has had to come up to the dock to hear it again.

This is the first time I have seen someone sentenced twice.

Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent, at Manchester Crown Court

Paul Quinn has been given a fixed 24 year sentence - and I’m unpacking what this means - because it’s not quite simple.

The prison element of that is a maximum of 21 years. He would normally be eligible for release on a strict licence at the two-thirds point - which is 14 years.

But the judge has made a special legal finding that Quinn is dangerous - so when he reaches 14 years he will have to ask the Parole Board to review whether he is rehabilitated. It will judge whether he is safe to be released.

At 21 years, however, he will be automatically released because that is the end of the fixed prison sentence.

While he will then be in the community, he will not be free. He will be subject to a licence - conditions on his movement and life - for another three years.

And if he breaks any of those, he would be returned to prison for the remainder of that added-on period.

We can now bring you more from Mr Justice Bright as he gave Paul Quinn a 24 year sentence.

On the two rape counts (counts three and four), Bright says Quinn will get the same sentence for each, with a custodial element of 21 years.

"I recognise that this is above the normal guideline range... but I consider this unavoidable" given the "extreme and unusual circumstances" of the case, he says.

Added to this is an extension period of three years on account of Quinn's dangerousness, Bright says.

The sentence on count one (attempting to choke, suffocate or strangle) is 12 years, he says.

The sentence on count two (grievous bodily harm with intent) is seven years. Bright says the sentence on each count is concurrent with the sentences on the other counts.

This gives a total sentence of 24 years, he says.

Bright says the earliest Quinn will be released from custody is 14 years, when he is able to apply for parole.

He says time served on remand - 633 days - will count towards this.

Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent, at Manchester Crown Court

Quinn looks down and blows out his cheeks as he is escorted to the cells.

Paul Quinn has been sentenced to 24 years for rape and other offences.

Quinn, 52, was found guilty in April of rape, strangulation and grievous bodily harm for his attack on a woman in Salford, Greater Manchester, in 2003.

It comes more than two decades after Andrew Malkinson was wrongly convicted over the crime and spent 17 years in jail.

Mr Justice Bright is listing more factors that he is considering in his sentencing - in particular, the woman's "vulnerability" as she was alone at the time and attacked "in the dead of night".

There was "careful selection" of the location Quinn attacked, the judge says, as well as his decision to take her mobile phone "to prevent her from calling the police or getting help".

Quinn left the woman unconscious, seriously injured in an isolated spot.

Mr Justice Bright says: "You effectively left her for dead".

He adds that Quinn "disposed of evidence", and had been intoxicated that night, "drinking heavily" and likely consuming cannabis, speed or ecstasy.

Mr Justice Bright says that he will increase the sentences on the rape counts to reflect that there were two rape offences.

Bright now turns to the "dire effects" on Malkinson.

Summarising the position of the two sides, he says the prosecution says he should increase the sentence to reflect this harm, but the defence says this would be unfair.

Bright says he finds himself "unable to ignore the extraordinary circumstances" involved from Quinn's perspective. Quinn knew that this conviction was "wrongful" and also that it was "extremely useful" to him, Bright says.

It "certainly should have preyed on your conscience" but you were "only too willing to sit back and take advantage of his misfortune", he adds.

Bright says that while Quinn never did anything to actively implicate Malkinson, the innocent man would never have been questioned in the first place if it weren't for Quinn's offending.

Bright says it would be wrong to compare the "indirect evil" Quinn did to Malkinson to that inflicted upon the "heroic woman", but adds that he does consider both acts to be "evil".

The judge turns to the two rape offences.

Mr Justice Bright says the incident has "unquestionably resulted in severe psychological harm".

He tells the court that "it was certainly unusually violent, even by the standards of stranger rapes."

Turning to Quinn's culpability, the judge says the fact that Quinn turned away from his home, and pursued somebody for almost a mile, indicates a "commitment to the idea, once it formed, and persistence".

"Raping someone who has first been strangled into unconsciousness in the extreme way that you did, with the specific intention of then committing rape, is a very distinct manifestation of culpability...," he says.

Mr Justice Bright says the "gravity" of the harm and Quinn's culpability are "a long way above the norm for an offence of this kind. I therefore would consider a sentence significantly above the starting point."

He adds that "taken in isolation" - by "considering matters without regard to aggravating features" such as Quinn's "extreme intoxication" - the judge's sentence would've been 12 years.

He then moves to count two.

"The fact remains that these injuries were intentionally inflicted on a woman who lay on the ground unconscious and completely defenceless."

He says: "They were inflicted on someone who was utterly vulnerable."

Mr Justice Bright says that, if "considered in isolation and without regard to aggravating features", the sentence would have been seven years.

Image source, POOL

Bright says that the "best and most convenient course" is to pass concurrent sentences on counts one and two.

But he says it "would not be right" for the other offences to "be glossed over too quickly" and they should be considered in their own right as "each of them is extremely serious".

On count one, he says while "it is not clear" how long the unconsciousness lasted it "must have been several minutes".

Bright says that although the pain involved "must have been extreme", she still remained unconscious.

For this reason, he calls it a "very unusual and serious case".

The woman is "very lucky she did not die" or incur "significant brain damage", he says.

Bright says he doesn't think Quinn had intention to kill, but he was "unquestionably reckless" and paid "no heed" to the "very obvious risk that what you did might cause death".

Mr Justice Bright says he has "no doubt that the prosecutors were right" in saying Paul Quinn understood the knock-on effect on Andrew Malkinson.

Neither this or what he had done to the woman seemed to have troubled Quinn, Bright says.

Andrew Malkinson's attempts to get his conviction overturned didn't gain much publicity until his release, the judge says.

A journalist who championed his cause published her first article on the subject in 2020, he explains, which was followed by "increasing media coverage" - with Malkinson's successful appeal in 2023.

The judge says it's "notable" that in 2019, Quinn visited an old news story about Malkinson's conviction. "You were interested in his story when few other people were," Mr Justice Bright says.

On the same day, he searched for "wrongly convicted cases UK". "Very few people then thought that Mr Malkinson had been wrongly convicted," the judge says.

He says the prosecution has relied on those mentioned internet searches - who say it "demonstrated that you were aware, all along, that Mr Malkinson had been convicted of the offences committed".

"And you were also aware, all along, that he had been wrongly convicted. Because those offences, were in fact committed by you," he continues.

Bright says that while she was unconscious, Quinn hit her, leaving lasting injuries that required surgery.

Bright says that "every time she looks in a mirror" she is reminded of the attack.

Quinn twice raped the woman while she was unconscious, and her phone was taken "presumably to stop her from using it".

Image source, POOL

Mr Justice Bright says that as the victim reached the bridge, Paul Quinn "pounced".

He had been following her for at least 0.9 miles at this point, he says, which took 16 minutes when a policeman walked the same route.

Bright says Quinn waited until the "perfect moment" when nobody else was about, and when the victim arrived at the "perfect point" in the road.

"You raced at her from behind and bundled her off the road", down a steep embankment to a point which was out of sight, he says.

Bright says Quinn then threatened her again and took her phone when she tried to use it to get help, before strangling her.

"She thought she was going to die" and "passed out", Bright says.