§ MR. PICKERSGILLI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state upon what grounds he has ordered the release of Mr. Spriggs, who, at Flintshire Assizes last year, was convicted of felony, before Mr. Justice Grantham, and sentenced to five years' penal servitude. And upon what conditions has Mr. Spriggs been released?
§ MR. HOWELLI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will state the grounds upon which he has ordered the release of the 237 convict Spriggs, who was found guilty at the Ruthin Assizes of a serious assault upon a lady cyclist; and whether, although a defence of alibi had been set up at the trial, Spriggs admitted, after the trial, to the Governor of Ruthin Gaol, that he, Spriggs, had been at or near the scene of the assault on the day when it was alleged to have been committed; and whether it is usual for the Treasury to conduct the defence of a prisoner whose parents and friends are well able to provide funds for this purpose?
THE HOME SECRETARY (Lancashire, Blackpool)In consequence of certain information which reached me after the trial, I caused inquiry to be made as to the evidence of identification tendered by the prosecution, which disclosed certain facts not before the Court at the trial. The results of the inquiry were laid before the learned Judge, who concurred in the view that there was sufficient doubt in the case to justify the release of the prisoner on an order of licence. The usual conditions as to reporting to the police have been remitted, and inquiries are still being made with a view to seeing whether any further action may be necessary. Perhaps I may also answer now the question of the hon. Member for Denbigh Boroughs. With regard to the admission which the prisoner is stated to have made, I came to the conclusion, after careful inquiry as to the exact words used, that they were not intended to, and did not, in fact, amount to such an admission as is suggested, or to any admission at all. It is not the case that the Treasury conducted the prisoner's defence. There was reason to believe, however, that the means of the prisoner's friends made it difficult, if not impossible, for them to take their witnesses down to the Assizes in Wales, and advances were in consequence made to enable them to travel there. This is the usual practice in cases where there is reason to fear that the matter would not otherwise be presented to the Court with perfect fairness. Nothing more was done.