An Ipswich man who served 11 years for a murder he never committed has said he always knew this day would come.

On Wednesday, three judges at the Court of Appeal quashed the conviction against Mr Campbell for murder by shooting and conspiracy to rob a shopkeeper in London in 1991.

Mr Campbell eventually confessed, only after being held by police for two days and being interviewed in 14 separate police interrogations – many times without a lawyer being present – believing that, if he admitted the crime, he would be allowed to go home.

Mr Campbell suffered severe brain damage as a baby, and as such, has severe learning difficulties. 

This means that he is easily persuadable, and has a tendency to agree to suggestions put to him.

He has lived in Ipswich since finishing an 11-year sentence at Hollesley Bay Prison near Woodbridge in 2002.

At the end of April, his case was adjourned by the Court of Appeal after a two-day hearing, which included evidence provided by a forensic psychologist who said that the techniques of questioning used by police “carried a very high risk” and were “dangerous”. 

Mr Campbell has been fighting for years to clear his name.

Hours after the news came in, he and his supporters gathered at the Hive in Norwich Road in the centre of Ipswich.

“It’s nearly 34 years overdue, but I always knew it was going to happen one day. If not today, it would have happened another day,” he said.

“The system let me down badly. It shouldn’t have taken 34 years to sort it out. I shouldn’t have gone to prison – the system put me there.

“It’s definitely shaken my faith in the system.”

He said he does not know what the future holds, but he hopes to have some of the experiences his wrongful conviction took from him, now that he is able to live his life as a free man.

Mr Campbell, now in his 50s, said: “I can start my life an innocent man.”

He thanked his legal team of Michael Birnbaum, Rose Slowe and Glyn Maddocks, his supporters and his foster mum Jean.

In their ruling, Lord Justice Holroyde, sitting with Mr Justice Bourne and Mrs Justice Stacey, said they had “concluded that the convictions are unsafe”.

He said: “We accept that, considered in the light of the fresh evidence, the rulings might be different.

“A jury knowing of the fresh evidence would be considering the reliability of those confessions in a materially different context.

“In those circumstances, we cannot say that the fresh evidence could not reasonably have affected the decision of the jury to convict."