An accountant serving life for murdering his mother's best friend is one of several cases which could be taken to the court of appeal after a leading Home Office pathologist was condemned for bungling postmortem examinations in an official inquiry into his work.
Experts say the implications of the judgment against the pathologist, Michael Heath, who has carried out thousands of postmortem examinations in criminal cases, could be widespread. Lawyers are reviewing cases to examine whether convictions based primarily on evidence from Dr Heath are unsafe. One of those convicted is considering taking legal action against him.

In addition, the Criminal Cases Review Commission is expected to consider a number of cases in the light of the doubts cast over Dr Heath's work by a disciplinary panel which found last week that he had fallen short of the standards required by his profession in two murder cases.
Dr Heath was adamant in both cases that a murder had taken place, but other pathologists fundamentally disagreed with his conclusions.

One man had his conviction quashed on appeal and another was acquitted as a result of the serious doubts raised over Dr Heath's postmortem conclusions. He faces the prospect of being struck off the register next month when the Home Office advisory board considers what sanctions should be taken against him.

Among the cases causing concern as a result of the disciplinary judgment is that of Simon Hall, 27, who was convicted in 2003 of killing Joan Albert, 79. The CCRC is examining his case. Mr Hall, an accountant from Capel St Mary, near Ipswich, has maintained his innocence ever since he was convicted in 2003 of stabbing Mrs Albert to death at her home in Capel St Mary.

Mrs Albert was found dead by a neighbour in the hallway of her home on December 16 2001. She had suffered stab wounds inflicted by a knife taken from the house. Mr Hall's alibi was that he went clubbing until the early hours

Campbell Malone, his solicitor, said: "There are criticisms of steps that Dr Heath didn't take which may have excluded Simon. In addition, there was a failure to establish a time of death, which affects his alibi."

Other cases in which Dr Heath has been severely criticised include that of Victor Boreman. His murder conviction was quashed this year after appeal court judges ruled the evidence given by Dr Heath was "discredited" and may have misled the jury. The judges said the findings of several other pathologists seriously undermined Dr Heath's evidence.

Mr Boreman and his co-defendants, Malcolm Byrne, 34, and Michael Byrne, 41, spent 10 years in prison for the murder of a man in south-east London in 1996.

"I am exploring the options for taking a civil case against Dr Heath," Mr Boreman said. "I spent 10 years, two months and two weeks in prison and I feel there should now be a wider investigation. Dr Heath wasn't doing this alone. He is being used as a scapegoat for the system."

Other cases which are likely to be reviewed are that of Stuart Lubbock, the man found dead in Michael Barrymore's swimming pool, and Michael Stone, who was convicted of the murder of Lin and Megan Russell in Kent in 1996.

Derek Pounder, of the department of forensic medicine at Aberdeen University, said the problems exposed were symptomatic of a deeper problem. "More than 50% of forensic pathologists work single-handedly, rather than out of an institute or university as they once did," Professor Pounder said. "What that means is there is no day-to-day discussion between colleagues about the cases they are involved in. Therefore any aberrant opinion becomes uncontrolled within the system over a number of years."