I ASKED IRELAND TO SHOW ME THE LAW

Yesterday, I promised another update and said I would show you the legal and constitutional addendum I submitted to the Irish Department of Justice.

Here it is.

But legal language can make something very simple sound complicated, so I want to explain exactly what this means.

Michael Flynn, Thomas Higgins and Patrick Higgins (Long) were convicted under British rule in 1882 and executed in January 1883.

The Crown silenced them.

But the records did not disappear with them.

Evidence survived. Historical records survived. Parliamentary records survived. Contemporary reporting survived.

Those records raise serious questions about the evidence, witnesses, jury selection, language and interpretation, alibi evidence, and the circumstances surrounding these prosecutions.

More than 140 years later, I brought that evidence back to Ireland and asked the Irish Government for an independent examination.

They refused.

The Department relied on a Government policy adopted in March 2026 concerning convictions imposed before the foundation of the State.

But the foundation of the Irish State did not simply wipe away the legal and administrative world that existed before 1922. The new State inherited and continued significant parts of the existing legal system as authority transferred from British administration to Irish government.

That makes the question even harder to ignore:

How can 1922 now be treated as an absolute dividing line that prevents even an independent historical examination of surviving evidence?

So now, 143 years after these men were silenced, their surviving evidence is being silenced too.

The Crown silenced the men in 1883. The Irish Government is silencing their evidence in 2026 under a policy created just months ago.

That is what I am challenging.

A PARDON AND AN EXAMINATION ARE NOT THE SAME THING
I did not ask the Government to blindly declare these men innocent.

I did not demand an automatic pardon.

I asked them to examine the evidence.

If the Government maintains that a Presidential Pardon cannot be considered because these convictions occurred before 1922, then answer the question at the heart of my challenge:

What law prevents an independent historical examination of the evidence?

Refusing a pardon is one thing.

Refusing to even examine the evidence is another.

Ireland has examined nineteenth-century convictions before.

Sylvester Poff and James Barrett were convicted in 1882 and executed in January 1883. Their cases received an independent expert examination, their convictions were found unsafe, and Presidential Pardons followed in 2024.

Their evidence was heard.

Why won't Ireland hear this evidence?

WHAT I ASKED THE DEPARTMENT
I have included an image from the legal and constitutional addendum I submitted to the Department with this update. Because the full legal document can be difficult to read on a phone, here is what I am asking in plain English:

1. What law actually prevents Ireland from independently examining evidence from a pre-1922 conviction?

2. Where does the Constitution say that an independent historical examination cannot take place simply because the conviction predates the State?

3. If the Government believes a Presidential Pardon is unavailable, why should that prevent an independent examination of the evidence? They are two different things.

4. Why was independent examination possible for other nineteenth-century convictions, including Poff and Barrett, while this evidence is now being refused examination under a policy created in 2026?

5. Does the Government still have the authority to commission an independent historical examination even if it maintains that a Presidential Pardon cannot ultimately be recommended?

That is what I want answered.

This really is that simple:

I brought surviving evidence to the Irish Government and asked them to examine it. They refused.

NOW I AM ASKING YOU TO SPEAK
If you believe surviving historical evidence deserves to be heard, respectfully contact the Irish Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration:

info@justice.ie

Please include this case reference in your email:
DJE-MO-09081-2026

Tell the Department that you support The Pre-1922 Justice Project's call for an independent examination of the surviving evidence concerning the 1882 Lough Mask convictions of Michael Flynn, Thomas Higgins and Patrick Higgins (Long).

Ask them:

Why is a Government policy created in 2026 being used to silence surviving evidence from 1882 instead of allowing that evidence to be independently examined?

Please be respectful.

But please don't be silent.

The Crown silenced the men in 1883.

The Irish Government is silencing their evidence in 2026.

A policy can close a file.

It cannot erase the evidence.

And apparently, after 143 years, they have an Irish-American banshee in Pennsylvania crying for these families.

They are going to hear me.

And I hope they hear all of you too.

Please sign. Please share. Please speak.

DON'T SILENCE THE EVIDENCE.

Erin Flynn
Founder, The Pre-1922 Justice Project