A TEST case which convicted killer Glyn Razzell hopes will allow him to challenge his life sentence has been heard at the Supreme Court. Solicitors acting for a convicted murderer from Woolpit, Suffolk, are appealing for access to DNA samples in order to carry out testing with methods not available at the time of his trial.

The challenge is being followed closely by Razzell, who is serving a life sentence for murdering his wife Linda, who vanished in 2002. Her body has never been found despite Wiltshire Police carrying out an exhaustive search of more than 200 sites. Razzell claims he is innocent and the victim of a wide-ranging conspiracy.

He is seeking access to case files which were held by the Forensic Science Service but have since passed to Wiltshire Police.

The former banker believes the documents may prove he did not murder Linda, who disappeared after setting off for work at Swindon College. The test case could have implications for Razzell and other convicted criminals across the country. Kevin Nunn, who is serving a minimum of 22 years for the murder of his former partner, Dawn Walker, is challenging Suffolk Police’s similar refusal to release DNA evidence. His supporters say technology has advanced since he was sentenced and post-conviction disclosure has overturned miscarriages of justice in several high-profile cases.

Nunn’s lawyer James Saunders said: “There have been major advances in DNA profiling since 2006 which hold out the real prospect of a breakthrough coming out of a cold case review.

“If Mr Nunn does not have the right to have the case reviewed, we face the worrying possibility of an innocent man rotting in jail when the evidence that might exonerate him is locked in a store at the police station,” he added.

“Equally worrying is that if Mr Nunn is innocent, the real killer is still out there, free to attack someone else.”

But opponents say a ruling in favour of Nunn may allow convicted criminals to clog up courts with endless appeals and lead to a lack of finality in the justice system.

Nunn’s case against Suffolk Constabulary took place in front of five judges on Thursday.

A spokesman for the Supreme Court said a decision would be released in around three months’ time.

Razzell, 53, has written to the Adver from prison to protest his innocence.

Among the evidence he wants to re-examine are traces of Linda’s blood found in a friend’s Renault Laguna, which detectives believe was used to move her body. Razzell, found guilty of his wife’s murder at Bristol Crown Court in November 2003, also protested his innocence last year on a website set up by his supporters. He wrote: “This year marks the 10th anniversary of my conviction for a murder I did not commit.

“Despite several requests, the police continue to refuse (my legal team) access to the Forensic Science Service documents which might contain the evidence to clear me. “We await the outcome of a test case in the Supreme Court.”

Police maintain that blood not picked up in several tests on the car – part of Razzell’s conspiracy claim – was eventually found after a chemical called luminol was used to detect it. They also point out that he has launched two unsuccessful appeals and have appealed to him to reveal the whereabouts of his wife’s body to give closure to their four children.