R v Cory Godfrey Bowen - Sentence Judgment

¶ 251013 R v Cory Godfrey Bowen: Ind. 100 of 2023, Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 1 of 5 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS 1 CRIMINAL DIVISION 2 3 Neutral Citation Number: [2025] CIGC (Crim) 49 4 INDICTMENT NO: 100 of 2023 5 6 7 8 R 9 10 V. 11 12 CORY GODFREY BOWEN 13 14 15 Appearances: Ms. Shauna-Kaye James, Crown Counsel, Office of the Director of Public 16 Prosecutions for the Prosecution 17 18 Ms. Amelia Fosuhene, Brady Attorneys-at-Law for the Defence 19 20 21 Before: The Hon. Justice Cheryll Richards KC 22 23 Submissions Heard: 13th October 2025 24 25 Ruling: 13th October 2025 26 27 28 29 30 Criminal Law – Sentencing - Threat to Kill contrary to section 88 C (1) (a) of the Penal Code 31 (2022) Revision. Principles on Sentencing. 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 251013 R v Cory Godfrey Bowen: Ind. 100 of 2023, Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 2 of 5 SENTENCE JUDGMENT 1 2

¶ [1] The defendant is before the Court for sentencing following his conviction after trial for 3 the single offence of Threat to Kill contrary to section 88 C (1) (a) of the Penal Code 4 (2022) Revision. He was acquitted of all other charges. 5 6

¶ [2] The particulars of the offence of Threat to Kill are that he on the 10th day of July 2022 7 at the Cayman Islands Detention Centre within the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands 8 threatened to kill PC Williams intending that she would fear that the threats would be 9 carried out. 10 11

¶ [3] The facts may be briefly stated. While being booked in at the Centre following his arrest 12 for an unrelated matter, the defendant said to PC Williams, “I am going to kill every 13 one of you. I am going to find out where each of you live and wait outside or knock on 14 your doors or windows and when you answer I am going to blow you away.” 15 16

¶ [4] The defendant has an antecedent history of fourteen previous convictions dating back 17 to 2003. In the main these are for drug offences, possession and consumption. There is 18 one previous conviction for an offence of violence. On the 5th May 2016, the defendant 19 was sentenced to 5 years and 3 months imprisonment for the offence of Wounding with 20 Intent. 21 22

¶ [5] The Department of Community Rehabilitation (“DCR”) has provided a Social Inquiry 23 Report dated 30th September 2025, (“the SIR”). The Court has read this report in its 24 entirety and takes into account everything said therein in favour of the defendant. The 25 defendant is thirty-nine years old and the father of six children between the ages of 26 eight and thirteen years old. 27 28

¶ [6] Following his release from prison he has had difficulty securing employment and has 29 been residing with his mother who provides financial support for him. He has had long 30 standing problems with alcohol consumption and drugs. While in custody he was 31 251013 R v Cory Godfrey Bowen: Ind. 100 of 2023, Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 3 of 5 actively engaged in the available intervention programmes. He explained to the 1 Probation Officer as he did at trial that when the instant offence was committed, he was 2 very drunk. 3 4

¶ [7] The Probation Officer’s assessment is that his actions on the commission of the offence 5 show that he has an attitude which is supportive of acting in an abusive and threatening 6 manner towards those in a position of authority. The Officer states that he also 7 presented as lacking in consequential thinking and in considering the impact of his 8 actions both on himself and others. He was assessed as being at high risk of re- 9 offending. He has a record of breaches of orders both in the community and in custody 10 and as having issues with anger management. He is said to have expressed a degree of 11 remorse for his actions but demonstrated limited victim awareness and empathy. 12 13 THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES 14 15

¶ [8] The prosecution submits that under the relevant Cayman Islands Sentencing 16 Guidelines the culpability is at the medium level. This is because the offence was 17 limited in scope and duration but was nevertheless a threat which included significant 18 violence. 19 20

¶ [9] The harm is said to be at Category 3 because there was little distress caused to the 21 victim. An offence of Category 3B has a starting point of 9 months custody with a range 22 of sentence of community order to one year custody. 23 24 THE SUBMISSIONS 25 26

¶ [10] Defence Counsel submitted that there is no disagreement with the proposed 27 categorisation of the offence. Counsel submitted in mitigation that the defendant 28 explained to the police on arrest for the offence that he was intoxicated and did not 29 remember what happened at the time and he apologised. Counsel submitted that the 30 251013 R v Cory Godfrey Bowen: Ind. 100 of 2023, Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 4 of 5 defendant has shown clear remorse from shortly after the incident through to date and 1 he remains sorry for what he has done. Counsel said that the previous offending was 2 some ten years ago, that he has grown since 2016 and this conduct is now totally out 3 of character for him. He realises that he needs to have some assistance to address the 4 alcohol issues that he has. Counsel said that while he does not benefit from the discount 5 which would be given on a plea, he has been awaiting resolution for some time with 6 more serious charges hanging over his head. This has had a sobering and salutary effect 7 on him. 8 9

¶ [11] With respect to any possible breaches of a community order, Counsel said that the 10 defendant is willing to comply with any orders made by the Court and he knows the 11 consequences of any breach. 12 13 THE SENTENCE 14 15

¶ [12] Having considered all the submissions including that the categorisation is accepted, 16 from a starting point of 9 months imprisonment, there is one aggravating factor, namely 17 the occupation of the victim, a public officer engaged in duties at the time of the 18 offending. This serves to increase the sentence by 1 month to 10 months imprisonment. 19 20

¶ [13] In mitigation the Court takes into account all the circumstances outlined in the SIR and 21 by Counsel for the defence. These include that the defendant is genuinely remorseful, 22 from shortly after the commission of the offence and there has been some delay. All 23 the circumstances serve to reduce the sentence by 3 months from 10 months to 7 months 24 imprisonment. 25 26

¶ [14] Given the personal circumstances of the defendant and the nature of the offending, the 27 Court considers it appropriate that the sentence be suspended for a period of two years. 28 29

¶ [15] A supervision order under s.21 of the Alternative Sentencing Act 2008 is also made. 30 During the period of suspension, the defendant is to be supervised by the DCR. He is 31 251013 R v Cory Godfrey Bowen: Ind. 100 of 2023, Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 5 of 5 to comply with the instructions of his assigned Probation Officer and to attend anger 1 management and alcohol counselling as directed. 2 3 Dated this the 13th day of October 2025 4 5 The Hon. Justice Cheryll Richards KC 6 Judge of the Grand Court 7