Star witness now admits he was drunk - so why is Jason Moore still behind bars?

After being tracked down by an investigative journalist, the only witness for the murder of Robert Darby says he doesn't know if he identified the right person, sparking a fresh bid for justice from accused's family, writes Amy-Clare Martin

- Amy-Clare Martin

Towering at 6ft 5in with tousled dark hair, Jason Moore cuts an imposing figure. So when he was accused of murder – despite the only eyewitnesses telling police the killer was between 5ft 10in and 6ft with a shaved number two haircut – things simply did not add up.

Passer-by Abdul Ahmed had discounted Jason in an identity parade in the aftermath of the 2005 stabbing of Robert Darby outside a pub in London’s east end. No forensic evidence has ever linked him to the crime. But seven years later the same witness was asked to look again and picked him out of a police photo ID parade that only showed his head and shoulders – masking his distinctive height.

In the trial that followed, a jury found Jason guilty of murder after being told the killer was the taller of two men at the scene. Then in an astonishing admission last year, Mr Ahmed revealed to an investigative journalist that he was drunk when he witnessed the stabbing.

“It was the blink of the eye,” he said. “I was passing by. How could you remember things like that? And I was drunk!” The revelation is the basis of a fresh bid to overturn Jason’s conviction after his lawyers lodged the new evidence with the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).

Strikingly, the victim’s brother is backing Jason’s campaign for freedom, insisting the wrong man is being punished for the murder. His case has won a string of high-profile supporters, including cricket legend Sir Ian Botham, miscarriage of justice expert Lord Nicholas Manson and the Revd Dr Joanne Grenfell, Bishop of Stepney.

But after a series of damning scandals at the CCRC, including failures in the wrongful conviction of Andrew Malkinson for rape, Jason's family have their doubts over whether the ailing review body will be able do the right thing.