The case of Danny Major, a former police officer who has been fighting for nearly two decades to clear his name of assault and perverting the course of justice charges, is now under review by the Criminal Justice Audit Committee.
Major’s ordeal began 2001 when he was accused of assaulting a teenager he arrested while on patrol, causing actual bodily harm (ABH) to the suspect. In 2003, he was charged and convicted of ABH and perverting the course of justice, leading to his standing down from duty with the West Yorkshire Police force. He has always maintained his innocence.
After being granted an appeal in 2008, his conviction was upheld. Since then, Major has been on a tireless quest for justice. Now, almost two decades later, his case is finally being reviewed by the Criminal Justice Audit Committee (CJAC).
The CJAC’s purpose is to review and scrutinize cases where there may have been a miscarriage of justice at both trial and appellate levels. This committee provides an essential independent voice in the continued search for transparency and accountability within the criminal justice system.
Supporters of Major claim that evidence was withheld or fabricated during his trial – this includes allegations that key witness statements were not disclosed properly and that DNA evidence found on the scene did not belong to either Major or the victim. Crucially, testimony from other police officers seem inconsistent and unreliable.
Danny’s mother Bernadette Major spoke about her son’s experience during an interview with A Just Cause: “It’s unbelievable how our lives have changed… We’ve spent so much time going through paperwork, transcriptions – whatever it takes to get my son out and quashed.”
Jeremy Snowdon QC, who represented Danny Major during his appeal in 2008, highlighted numerous concerns about Police Professional Standards Department’s inquiry that led to Major’s conviction.
The possibility of reopening this case could not only bring closure and vindication for Danny Major but could also encourage further examination of similar cases where evidence has been either tainted or ignored completely.
As our society continues to seek fairer systems of law enforcement and criminal justice administration, cases like that of Danny Major can serve as vital steps towards restoring public trust in these vital institutions.
The CJAC’s review process provides hope for those affected by potential miscarriages of justice that truth will prevail. There is no set timetable for this process; it relies on the thoroughness of its investigation to determine its conclusion.
For now, Danny Major and his family will continue their fight for justice. Their tireless pursuit serves as a testament to resilience in the face of adversity while pushing back against possible injustice within such a crucial part of our societal fabric. The ongoing review process demonstrates progress in ensuring greater transparency in our criminal justice system for both present and future generations.