The lawyer for Charles and Diana Ingram hopes “scientific advances” will help them win an appeal against their cheating convictions.
Rhona Friedman said the idea that Charles Ingram was helped to the jackpot by coughs from his wife and accomplice Tecwen Whittock, whom he had never met, was “ludicrous nonsense”.
All three were convicted for cheating in 2003, and got suspended jail terms.
The Ingrams plan to lodge an appeal.
Ms Friedman believes new technology will identify other coughs made in the recording of the show, which never aired.
She said: “The coughs are like pistol shots on the souped-up version of the audio. “Once you dissect it logically it doesn’t make sense.”
She said: “I think there is a way of overturning this conviction, but it will be tricky.”
David Liddiment, boss of ITV at the time of the scandal, said he might have been wrong about former Army major Charles Ingram’s guilt.
In a review of Quiz, Liddiment said: “I wouldn’t say my doubts about Ingram’s probity were completely assuaged, but I’m ready to accept the possibility there may be another reason for his strange behaviour.”
Ms Friedman does not believe Celador boss Paul Smith will accept the Ingrams’ innocence.
She said: “He can’t. Celador effectively ended up creating all the prosecution’s audiovisual exhibits, which is one of my big concerns about the case.”
But she said Chris Tarrant might have a change of heart.
“Even though his evidence was, ‘I didn’t hear anything’, he’s adamant they must be guilty. If we’re successful it’s going to look embarrassing for him,” she said.
She insisted the Ingrams had planned to appeal long before Quiz came out.
She said: “When you’re a byword for cheating when you know you didn’t do anything wrong, you’d want to change that wouldn’t you?”
