asked the Minister for Justice if he will state what was the finding of the jury and what sentence was imposed on Archibald Doyle in connection with the robbery at Donnycarney; how much of the said sentence did Archibald Doyle serve; what sentences were imposed on any other person or persons in connection with this robbery and what portion of same was served; and if any portion of these sentences was remitted; under what conditions, if any, was this done.
Ceisteanna.—Questions. Oral Answers. - Sentences In Dublin Robbery.
At the City of Dublin Circuit Court on the 5th February, 1930, Archibald Doyle pleaded guilty to the charge of possession of a revolver or pistol with intent to endanger life or cause serious injury to property, and was also found guilty by the jury on the charge of robbery under arms, to which he had pleaded "Not Guilty." He was sentenced for each offence to ten years' penal servitude, to run concurrently. This sentence was subsequently reduced to one of five years' penal servitude, the remission being one of those granted on the occasion of the Eucharistic Congress held in Dublin in 1932.
Having regard to this remission and to the ordinary remission earned for industry and good conduct under the prison rules, Doyle was eligible for release on the 21st October in the present year. He was actually released, however, on 12th April last, having then served a period of three years, 82 days. The release took place in deference to strong representations made to me by a deputation of members of this House. I am not aware that any other person was convicted in connection with the robbery in which Doyle was implicated and, accordingly, the portion of the question dealing with the sentences inflicted on such other persons does not appear to arise.
Would the Minister not think it proper to communicate to the House the nature of the representations made to him by the deputation to which he refers in his answer?
The deputation included a member of the Deputy's Front Bench and the nature of the representations made to me was that this man had been provided with a position at that time and that if the sentence went through the whole period, the position would not be available. That was the ground on which it was granted.
Did the Minister act exclusively on representations made from this side of the House?
No, I said the deputation included both sides of the House.
We know what is meant by the "inclusion."