The Court of Appeal dismissed Stephen Somers’s appeal against a five-year prison sentence for possessing explosives, finding the sentence reasonable and appropriate.
Somers pleaded guilty in the Circuit Criminal Court in Dublin on 1 July 2013 to possessing explosives contrary to section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act 1883, as amended. The offence occurred on 16 May 2012. He was sentenced on 3 March 2014, with credit for time already spent in custody.
The appeal judgment said gardaí stopped a Ford Mondeo they had been observing in the Allenton area of Tallaght at about 9.30pm on the offence date. As the car was being pulled over, an officer saw a passenger door open and a cylindrical object dropped beneath the vehicle. The passenger, Somers, was also seen discarding gloves as he got out.
A ballistics expert identified the object as a viable pipe bomb: a steel pipe with PVC end caps, a green firework fuse and grey powder, fitted with improvised explosives. The judgment said gardaí accepted that Somers was collecting it for another person and had been pressured to transport it because of a drugs debt and a threat to his girlfriend. He expressed remorse and shame when interviewed.
At the time of the offence, Somers was 21, had one child and had a drug addiction problem. His appeal argued that the sentencing judge overstated the offence’s gravity, gave too little weight to his guilty plea and rehabilitation prospects, and placed undue emphasis on aggravating factors. The appeal’s main focus was rehabilitation, including a positive probation report. The judgment also recorded that the report assessed him as being at very high risk of reoffending.
The Court of Appeal noted his 66 previous convictions, including convictions for entering buildings with intent, burglary and theft. It said the pipe bomb was capable of killing or maiming people, and that the sentencing judge had considered alternatives to immediate custody and the mitigating factors before imposing five years.
The court concluded that the sentence adequately accounted for both the offence and the offender. It dismissed the appeal, leaving the sentence in place.