Office passed Jeremy's case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which had just been established to review alleged miscarriages of justice. In March 2001 the CCRC referred the case to the Court of Appeal because of the discovery of DNA inside the silencer; this was found as a result of a test not available in 1986 and constituted fresh evidence. Jeremy's conviction rested in part on evidence that Sheila's blood had been found inside the silencer, suggesting that it had been on the gun when she died; but her arms were not long enough to point the gun back at herself and pull the trigger with the silencer attached. The appeal was heard from 17 October to 1 November 2002, at the Royal Courts of Justice, by Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques, who published their decision on 12 December 2002. The prosecution was represented by Victor Temple QC and Jeremy by Michael Turner QC. In a 522-paragraph judgment, the judges concluded that there was no conduct on the part of investigators that threatened the integrity of the trial, and that the more they examined the case, the more they thought the jury had been right. Grounds Jeremy initially brought sixteen issues to the attention of the court. Two (grounds 14 and 15) related to the silencer and DNA testing; the rest were about failure to disclose evidence or the fabrication of evidence. The defence withdrew ground 11 ("the proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant") before the hearing. Ground 1a – "hand swabs from Sheila Caffell" 1b – "the testing of the hand swabs from Sheila Caffell" 2 – "disturbance of the crime scene" 3 – "evidence relating to windows" 4 – "timing of phone call to Julie Mugford" 5 – "evidence relevant to the credibility of Julie Mugford" 6 – "letter from Colin Caffell" 7 – "the statement of Colin Caffell" 8 – "photograph showing carving of the words 'I hate this place'" 9 – "the Bible" 10 – "the question of inheritance" 11 – "the proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant" 12 – "the telephone in the office" 13 – "scars on the appellant's hands" 14 and 15 – "blood in the sound moderator" 15 – "DNA evidence" 16 – "police misconduct" New silencer evidence Although all the grounds (except 11) were reviewed by the court, the CCRC referred