R v Randon Davis and Lincoln Sibron Jr - Sentence Judgment

¶ 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 1 of 26 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS 1 CRIMINAL DIVISION 2 Neutral Citation Number: [2025] CIGC (Crim) 4 3 INDICTMENT NO: 13 and 14 of 2024 4 5 6 R 7 8 V. 9 10 RANDON ODELL DAVIS 11 AND 12 LINCOLN DONOVAN SIBRON JR 13 14 15 16 Appearances: Mr. Kenneth Ferguson, Crown Counsel 1, Office of the Director of Public 17 Prosecutions for the Prosecution 18 19 Ms. Amelia Fosuhene of Brady Law for the Defendant Randon Odell Davis 20 Ms. Stacy-Ann Kelly for the Defendant Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr 21 22 23 24 Before: The Hon. Justice Cheryll Richards KC 25 26 Submissions Heard: 9th December 2024 27 28 Sentence Judgment: 10th January 2025 29 30 31 32 Criminal Law – Sentencing, Robbery contrary to s.242 of the Penal Code (2022 Revision), Possession of 33 an Imitation Firearm with Intent to Commit an Offence contrary to s.18 (6) of the Firearms Act (2008 34 Revision), Application of the Cayman Islands Sentencing Guidelines. 35 36 37 38 39 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 2 of 26 SENTENCE JUDGMENT 1 2

¶ [1] The defendants are before the Court for sentencing following guilty pleas to the three 3 counts on the Indictment. 4 5

¶ [2] Count One charges them jointly with the offence of Robbery contrary to s.242 (1) of the 6 Penal Code (2022 Revision). The particulars are that they on the 8th day of February 7 2024 at Vidette’s Grocery, No. 14 Reverend Blackman Road, West Bay, Grand Cayman, 8 Cayman Islands, stole approximately CI$1,500.00 and two packs of Rothman cigarettes 9 belonging to Vidette’s Grocery, and immediately before or at the time of doing so and in 10 order to do so, used force against Glenroy Antonio Bodden. 11 12

¶ [3] Count Two charges them jointly with the offence of Robbery contrary to s.242 (1) of the 13 Penal Code (2022 Revision). The particulars are that they on the 8th day of February 14 2024 at JN Money Transfer within Vidette’s Grocery, No. 14 Reverend Blackman Road, 15 West Bay, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, stole approximately CI$23,436.00 and US 16 $1,215.00 belonging to JN Money Transfer Cayman, and immediately before or at the 17 time of doing so and in order to do so, used force against Janicka Ebanks. 18 19

¶ [4] The maximum penalty for the offence of Robbery is life imprisonment. 20 21

¶ [5] Count Three charges them jointly with the offence of Possession of an Imitation Firearm 22 with intent to Commit an Offence, contrary to section 18 (6) of the Firearms Act (2008) 23 Revision). The particulars are that they on the 8th day of February 2024 at Vidette’s 24 Grocery, No. 14 Reverend Blackman Road, West Bay, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, 25 had in their possession an imitation firearm with intent to commit an offence, namely 26 robbery. 27 28

¶ [6] The maximum penalty for this offence is 20 years imprisonment and a fine. 29 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 3 of 26

¶ [7] The defendants first appeared in the Summary Court on the 12th February 2024. The 1 charges were transmitted to the Grand Court for first mention on the 16th February 2024. 2 Between the 16th February and the 10th May 2024 the defendant Davis changed attorneys. 3 Two tentative trial dates were identified, the Court having been advised that not guilty 4 pleas were likely. The last trial date identified was 23rd September 2024 with a case 5 management hearing on the 27th June 2024. Defence Counsel nevertheless asked for 6 arraignment to be deferred pending reviews and conferences. On the case management 7 date, defence Counsel indicated that there were to be guilty pleas and asked for the case 8 to be mentioned. The defendants entered pleas on the 28th June 2024. 9 10 THE FACTS 11 12

¶ [8] The prosecution has provided a summary of the facts which is not disputed. 13 14

¶ [9] Both robberies occurred at the same location, Videttes Grocery Store in West Bay. This 15 has a JN Money Transfer facility to the back of the Store. The facility is equipped with 16 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Cameras which recorded the robbery. 17 18

¶ [10] On Thursday 8th February 2024, at about 7:25pm, Ms. Janicka Ebanks, the teller at JN 19 Money Transfer, dealt with her last customer. At about 7:28pm, she telephoned for the 20 Brinks armoured truck to collect the cash intake for the day. She had just completed the 21 deposit slip for the Cayman Islands currency amounting to CI$23,436.00 and placed the 22 money in a package. She placed the package on top of a metal safe under the counter. 23 She had US$1,215.00 in her hand and was in the process of completing the deposit slip 24 for that sum when the incident began. 25 26

¶ [11] At about 7:32pm, both defendants drove to the Store in a white Honda Fit motor car 27 bearing registration number 219 384. It was registered to a Rent-a-Car business. They 28 alighted from the car and entered the Store. Both were masked but wore different and 29 distinctive clothing. 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 4 of 26 1

¶ [12] The defendant Davis who was wearing an orange construction shirt went to the back of 2 the Store where the JN Money Transfer business was. He approached Ms. Ebanks who 3 was behind the counter which was separated by Plexi glass from the customer area. He 4 pointed the index and middle finger of his right hand at her and demanded money. 5 6

¶ [13] While this was happening, the defendant Sibron wearing a black hooded jacket went to 7 the grocery section of the Store. He pulled what appeared to be a firearm from the left 8 pocket of the jacket, pointed it towards the Store Clerk, Glenroy Bodden and said “give 9 me all the cash out of the pan.”. 10 11

¶ [14] Mr. Bodden handed over cash of CI$1,500.00 and upon request a plastic bag. The 12 defendant Sibron placed the money into the plastic bag and then asked that the safe be 13 opened. Mr. Bodden responded that he did not have a safe and that he had handed over 14 everything he had. The defendant ordered Mr. Bodden from around the counter and 15 escorted him at gun point to the back of the Store to the JN Money transfer business. The 16 defendant Sibron pointed the firearm at Ms. Ebanks. 17 18

¶ [15] Ms. Ebanks handed over cash CI$23,436.00 and US$1,215.00 and a plastic bag to the 19 defendant Davis. Davis then took the firearm from Sibron with his right hand and walked 20 two steps towards Miss Ebanks. From the CCTV footage he appeared to say something 21 to her and she appeared to respond to him. 22 23

¶ [16] The defendant Sibron demanded and received two packs of Rothmans cigarettes from 24 Mr. Bodden before both men ran from the Store. 25 26

¶ [17] The tellers contacted the police immediately and they attended the scene. The police 27 received information from two householders who lived on Vulgunners Drive in West Bay 28 which is near to the Store. As a result of this information and the assistance of the police 29 helicopter, the rental car was found abandoned in the vicinity of 68 Vulgunners Drive. 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 5 of 26 CCTV footage subsequently obtained from Government cameras showed the car being 1 driven from the scene to that area. 2 3

¶ [18] At about 8:20pm, another householder from the area provided information about a man 4 acting suspiciously at the rear of premises on the said Drive. The defendant Sibron was 5 found hiding in a shed at the rear of those premises. Police officers detained and 6 cautioned him. When asked why he was hiding in the shed, he told the officers that he 7 had seen a man running so he ran. When the officers asked him to describe this man who 8 he said he had seen running and where the man was running from, the defendant replied 9 “no comment”. The police then arrested him on suspicion of committing robbery and 10 took him into custody. A search of his person and of the shed did not reveal any firearm. 11 12

¶ [19] The householder subsequently produced CCTV footage which showed both defendants 13 running through the rear of the said property. 14 15

¶ [20] Another householder at a different area of the same drive, telephoned 911 16 communications and provided information which led the police to the area directly 17 behind 28 Vulgunners Drive. This is a water treatment facility. The two properties are 18 separated by an eight feet chain link fence. 19 20

¶ [21] Upon arrival, the officers climbed the fence and approached the water tank. When they 21 did so, the defendant, Davis emerged from the bushes around the tank and ran. He was 22 not wearing shoes and had no clothing on his upper body. The officers pursued him whilst 23 shouting commands for him to stop but he ignored them and attempted to scale the chain 24 link fence. DS Barnett grabbed his feet, but he kicked the officer in his chest before 25 scaling the fence and running away. The police chased him on foot into various properties 26 whilst receiving assistance from the police helicopter until he was eventually held on 27 premises at No. 32 Bahama Close and handcuffed. 28 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 6 of 26

¶ [22] DS Barnett observed that the defendant had a huge bulge at his waistline. When searched 1 the defendant had CI$14,871.00 and US$1,159.00 in various bank notes all secured with 2 staples and beige rubber bands, in his underpants. The notes were arranged in the same 3 manner as they were arranged by the JN Money Transfer Teller Janicka Ebanks shortly 4 before the robberies occurred. 5 6

¶ [23] The rental car was searched and processed by the police on the 9th February 2023. An 7 advertising sticker for the rental Company which had been on the outside rear of the 8 vehicle at the time of the rental on the 31st January 2024 was found on the inside left front 9 passenger door. 10 11

¶ [24] A number of items were found inside the car. These included an unsealed pack of 12 Rothman Switch cigarettes, a rubber band, two CI$25.00 bills and the torn portion of a 13 deposit slip later identified by Janicka Ebanks as part of the deposit slip for the Cayman 14 Islands currency she had completed just minutes before the robbery. These were found 15 on the floor of the front passenger side of the car. A pair of Timberland work boots, a 16 plastic water bottle, and a multicoloured backpack were found in the rear seat of the car. 17 18

¶ [25] The defendant Sibron’s fingerprints were subsequently recovered from the rear-view 19 mirror and from one side of the pack of Rothman Switch cigarettes. The defendant 20 Davis’s fingerprints were lifted from the anterior of the passenger side door and the A- 21 pillar of the driver’s door. 22 23

¶ [26] Swabs from the inside surface of the pair of Timberland work boots, the inside of the 24 plastic water bottle and the back straps and zipper pull of the backpack, when tested had 25 the DNA profile of the defendant Sibron. 26 27 28 29 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 7 of 26

¶ [27] The defendant Davis was interviewed under caution in the presence of duty Counsel on 1 the 9th February 2024. He produced a prepared statement in which he said that he was 2 not shown any evidence linking the money found on him to the robbery and that he did 3 not accept that the money found on him was so linked. 4 5

¶ [28] The defendant’s Davis cell phone when examined showed that on the 28th January 2024 6 he had made arrangements to rent the car and had been in contact with Sibron for his 7 driver’s license to supply to the car rental business. The two men communicated about 8 the arrangements for the rental. Davis then advised the business on the 31st January 2024 9 that the car would in fact be rented by Sibron who he said was his cousin. 10 11

¶ [29] Davis’s phone also contained other messages between himself and Sibron. One was a 12 voice note in which Sibron asked Davis for $25.00 to buy food. There was a video of 13 Davis holding what appeared to be a firearm which is of similar appearance to the one 14 used in the robberies. On the 23rd January 2024 there was a WhatsApp conversation 15 between Davis and an unknown person in which Davis asked for ammunition to be 16 sourced for him. 17 18

¶ [30] From the CCTV recording in the Store, the robberies lasted about one minute and a half. 19 The firearm has not been recovered to date. 20 21 VICTIM IMPACT REPORTS 22 23

¶ [31] In October 2024, the Department of Community Rehabilitation (“DCR”) contacted the 24 manager of JN Money Transfer, Mr. Glenroy Henry for the purpose of preparing a Victim 25 Impact Report (“VIR”). Mr. Henry initially indicated his willingness to participate in the 26 process but thereafter efforts to re-contact him were not been successful. The position is 27 similar for the victim Glenroy Bodden. There are thus no VIRs in respect of the two 28 victims. 29 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 8 of 26 ANTECEDENT HISTORY- RANDON ODELL DAVIS 1 2

¶ [32] The defendant Davis has one previous criminal conviction for wounding. He was 3 sentenced on the 1st June 2018 by the Grand Court to 9 months imprisonment suspended 4 for one year. 5 6 SOCIAL INQUIRY REPORT - RANDON ODELL DAVIS 7 8

¶ [33] The DCR has provided a Social Inquiry Report (“SIR”) in respect of the defendant Davis 9 dated 7th November 2024. The Court has read this SIR in its entirety and takes into 10 account everything said therein in favour of the defendant. 11 12

¶ [34] The defendant is 26 years old. He is a Jamaican National who grew up in Jamaica and 13 migrated to the Cayman Islands in 2013 to live with his father who is resident and 14 working here. The defendant has one child who is aged 5 years old. 15 16

¶ [35] The defendant reported a positive upbringing with his mother as his main caregiver in an 17 extended maternal family environment. His father did not reside with them but provided 18 financial support. However, community contacts describe the defendant as troubled by 19 the fact that his father was not more present in his life and as being resentful because of 20 these circumstances. 21 22

¶ [36] The defendant attended school until the age of seventeen years but did not sit 23 examinations due to financial difficulties. He was not employed until he was in the 24 Cayman Islands when he began working for his father on a limited part-time basis. 25 Thereafter, from 2019 he worked for two years as a lifeguard. Since then, he has been 26 unemployed. He received some support from his father but has struggled financially. 27 28 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 9 of 26

¶ [37] The defendant described his motivation for the offence as being under financial pressure 1 and his desire to provide for his daughter. The defendant has a long history of ganja use 2 and had been using ganja on the day of the offence. 3 4

¶ [38] The defendant was assessed as being at high risk of re-offending with four of the eight 5 criminogenic factors in the High and Very High categories. He is said to demonstrate 6 very little victim empathy and to have failed to recognise the possible impact of his 7 actions on the victims. Since being on remand, he has undertaken rehabilitative courses. 8 9 ANTECEDENT HISTORY- LINCOLN DONOVAN SIBRON JR. 10 11

¶ [39] The defendant Sibron has no criminal convictions recorded against him 12 13 SOCIAL INQUIRY REPORT - LINCOLN DONOVAN SIBRON JR. 14 15

¶ [40] The DCR has provided a SIR in respect of the defendant Sibron dated 28th October 2024. 16 The Court has read this SIR in its entirety and takes into account everything said therein 17 in favour of the defendant. 18 19

¶ [41] The defendant Sibron is 22 years old. He has no dependents. He is a Jamaican national 20 who migrated to the Cayman Islands in 2021 for work opportunities. He was educated to 21 high school level after which he was employed in the farming industry. 22 23

¶ [42] His brother and cousin were killed in gun violence in his home community. He was close 24 to both and continues to feel grief at their deaths. 25 26

¶ [43] While in the Cayman Islands he was employed in the janitorial field but struggled 27 financially with his expenses being more than his earnings. 28 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 10 of 26

¶ [44] The Court was advised upon inquiry during the sentence hearing that one expense of 1 $900.00 which was almost one half of his monthly income was that of paying the rent for 2 his girlfriend. 3 4

¶ [45] The defendant has a long history of ganja use and had been using ganja on the day of the 5 offence. 6 7

¶ [46] The defendant was assessed as being at high risk of re-offending with three of the eight 8 criminogenic factors in the High and Very High categories. He is said to demonstrate 9 very little victim empathy and to have failed to recognise the possible impact of his 10 actions on the victims. Since being on remand, he has undertaken two rehabilitative 11 courses. 12 13 THE CAYMAN ISLANDS SENTENCING GUIDELINES 14 15

¶ [47] All Counsel referred the Court to the Cayman Islands Sentencing Guidelines 2015 for 16 the offence of Robbery. The Guidelines provide for Culpability and Harm factors as 17 follows:- 18 19 “Culpability Particularly demonstrated by one or more of the following: 20 A – High culpability 21 • Production and use of a weapon to inflict violence 22 • Production of a bladed article or firearm or imitation firearm to threaten violence 23 • Use of very significant force in the commission of the offence 24 25 B – Medium culpability 26 • Production and use of a weapon to threaten violence 27 • Threat of violence by a bladed article or firearm or imitation firearm (but which 28 is not produced) 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 11 of 26 • Other cases where characteristics for categories A or C are not present 1 2 C – Lesser culpability 3 • Played limited role in offence acting under the direction of others 4 • Involved through coercion, intimidation or exploitation 5 • Threat or use of minimal force 6 • Very little or no planning 7 8 Harm 9 The level of harm is determined by weighing up all the factors of the case to 10 determine the harm that has been caused or was intended to be caused to the victim. 11 The victim relates both to the commercial organisation that has been robbed and 12 any individual(s) who has suffered the use or threat of force during the commission 13 of the offence. 14 15 Category 1 16 • Serious physical and/or psychological harm caused to the victim 17 • Serious detrimental effect on business 18 • Very high value goods or sums 19 20 Category 2 21 • Some physical and/or psychological harm caused to the victim above the level 22 of harm inherent in this offence 23 • Some detrimental effect on business 24 • High or medium value goods or sums 25 26 Category 3 27 Factors in categories 1 and 2 not present” 28 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 12 of 26

¶ [48] The prosecution submits that Culpability in this case is at the level of Category A on the 1 basis of the production of a firearm or imitation firearm to threaten violence, although no 2 violence was actually meted out to both victims. 3 4

¶ [49] Counsel submits that while there are no Victim Impact Statements from either victim and 5 no evidence of psychological harm caused above the level of harm inherent in the 6 offences, a substantial amount of cash was stolen from JN Money Transfer and overall, 7 when both robberies are considered as a whole. 8 9

¶ [50] The offending is therefore said to fall into Category A 2. Category A 2 offences have a 10 starting point of 9 years custody with a sentencing range of 7 to 14 years custody. 11 12

¶ [51] Both defence Counsel disagree with the prosecution and submit that the culpability is at 13 the Medium or Lesser level and the harm is at the level of Category 2. 14 15

¶ [52] Counsel for the defendant Davis submitted that culpability is a high B Medium 16 Culpability and that the Harm is Category 2. Counsel said that there would have to be 17 more harm than that which is inherent in the offence and this cannot be notional or 18 presumed psychological harm. There is no VIR. Counsel submitted that the value of the 19 goods taken is of medium value, making this an offence of Culpability B and Category 2 20 Harm with a starting point of 5 years custody. The range of sentence is 4 to 8 years 21 custody. 22 23

¶ [53] Counsel for the defendant Sibron submitted that his culpability, while significant, falls 24 within the medium category. It is said that there is group activity but no evidence to 25 suggest that he played a leading or dominant role. The use of the imitation firearm 26 instilled fear in the victims but no physical harm or injury was caused. 27 28 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 13 of 26

¶ [54] As to Harm, Counsel submitted that while the victims experienced fear during the 1 robbery, no physical harm occurred, and the financial loss was not catastrophic. There is 2 no evidence to suggest that the emotional and financial impact may have been enduring 3 or significant. The amount stolen falls within the middle range of financial harm under 4 the Guidelines. The Harm is therefore said to be at the level of Category 2. 5 6

¶ [55] Counsel urged that the appropriate starting point should nevertheless be that for an 7 offence of Medium culpability with Category 3 harm, one of 3 years' custody, with a 8 range of sentence from 18 months to 5 years. 9 10 AGGRAVATING FACTORS 11 12

¶ [56] The prosecution submits that there are six aggravating features, namely: - 13 14 i) The robbery involved a significant amount of planning: - 15 16 a) The defendants made prior arrangements to rent the getaway 17 vehicle. 18 b) They removed the advertising sticker from the rear of the Honda 19 Fit car and placed it on the inside panel of the left rear passenger 20 door in an attempt to hide the ownership of the vehicle. 21 c) The timing of the robberies. They were timed for just prior to 22 the arrival of the Brinks armoured truck in order to steal the days 23 intake from JN Money Transfer before it could be transported. 24 d) A financial institution was targeted as the defendants were of the 25 view that any cash stolen would have been insured. (Statement 26 of Davis in SIR1). 27 28 1 Page 8 of the SIR 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 14 of 26 ii) Attempts were made to disguise/conceal the identities of both defendants - 1 the use of face masks, hoodie and balaclava to conceal their identities. 2 3 iii) The firearm or imitation firearm seen in the CCTV footage which was used 4 to commit the robberies has never been recovered and neither defendant has 5 given any account as to its whereabouts. 6 7 iv) The clothes worn by both defendants were disposed of between the time of 8 the robberies and their later capture that night. 9 10 v) Some of the stolen cash was never recovered. The defendant Randon Davis 11 in his SIR (pg. 8), simply said that they had discarded some of the cash 12 bundles. 13 14 vi) Both defendants played leading roles in what was obviously a joint 15 enterprise. Defendant Sibron robbed Glenroy Bodden first with the firearm 16 and then corralled him into the area of the JN Money Transfer cubicle where 17 he handed the said weapon to his co-accused Davis who used the weapon 18 to rob Janicka Ebanks before they both made their escape from the premises. 19 20

¶ [57] Counsel for the defendant Sibron accepts that use of a firearm to instill fear and 21 commission of the offence as part of a group are aggravating factors. 22 23 SUBMISSIONS IN MITIGATION 24 25

¶ [58] Counsel for the defendant Davis submitted that the defendant has expressed significant 26 remorse. Counsel said that in his statements to the Probation Officer he tried to mask the 27 hurt and trauma which attended his childhood. When he came to the Cayman Islands, he 28 found it very difficult. He is a stepchild and there was an entire family which had grown 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 15 of 26 up without him and with whom he was not close. Having lost his job which he had for 1 two years, he was no longer able to maintain himself. He tried to paint a façade that he 2 was able to cope when he was not. He did not seek help from his father or stepmother 3 and was trying to tell people that everything was under control when it was not. Counsel 4 said that the defendant needs an intervention to take account of assistance that will be 5 offered to him but one that does not stop him from seeing light at the end of the tunnel. 6 He has tried whilst in custody to do certain courses at the Prison but again needs help and 7 motivation. He intends to do additional courses which will equip him to become a 8 productive member of society. 9 10

¶ [59] Counsel said that the defendant did not deliberately kick the police officer to the chest. It 11 was accidental. Counsel said that the defendant is only 26 years old. He accepts that there 12 will be a custodial sentence. He has a young child. He knows that through his own fault 13 he will not be there every day for his child as he tried to be. He also knows that he will 14 have to make amends for that because he is repeating a pattern where his own father was 15 not present while he was growing up. Counsel said that this is a real wake up call for the 16 defendant. This is a real reckoning where he understands the gravity of life for the victims 17 and for the life of his child. Counsel said that the defendant has asked her to apologise 18 on his behalf to the Court and to the victims. He throws himself on the mercy of the Court 19 and asks that any sentence be kept as low as is possible. 20 21

¶ [60] Counsel for the defendant Sibron submitted in mitigation that the defendant pleaded 22 guilty within four months of being charged. This saved Court resources and spared the 23 victim’s further distress. This said Counsel demonstrates his accountability and remorse. 24 Counsel submits that Mr. Sibron’s background and expressed remorse indicate that he 25 has the potential to reform with the appropriate rehabilitative support. 26 27 28 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 16 of 26

¶ [61] Counsel submitted that the defendant had a challenging upbringing in Jamaica which 1 provides the context for his decision-making at the time of the offence. Counsel said that 2 his participation in the offence was motivated by acute financial hardship and desperation 3 rather than deliberate malice or greed, a mitigating factor which is recognised under the 4 guidelines. Counsel said that the SIR shows the level of his expenses and records that his 5 sister would send funds from Jamaica to help him. He has faced trauma at the death of 6 his brother. Counsel urged the Court to temper justice with mercy and to consider a 7 sentence towards the lower end of the scale in the region of 40 months imprisonment. 8 9

¶ [62] Counsel submitted that the following are mitigating factors: - 10 • Early guilty plea, although not at the first opportunity. 11 • Motivated by financial desperation rather than greed. 12 • No actual harm was caused to victims. 13 • Remorse and readiness to reform. 14 • Challenging upbringing and socio-economic hardships. 15 16 THE SENTENCE 17 18

¶ [63] Although charged separately, the sentence for the two robberies will be considered 19 together. They were part and parcel of a single enterprise. 20 21

¶ [64] This enterprise was a pre-planned robbery of the Store which was effected at gun point. 22 The nature of the offending is of the most serious kind such that the custody threshold is 23 firmly passed. 24 25

¶ [65] The Court has considered the submissions of all Counsel as to the offence category. In 26 the Court’s view this is plainly an offence of High Culpability A because an imitation 27 firearm was produced to threaten violence. The firearm was pointed at each victim and 28 in the case of Mr. Bodden, he was taken at gunpoint from one section of the store to the 29 next, where the firearm was then transferred from one defendant to the other and pointed 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 17 of 26 at the second victim. This was a threat of violence, namely the violence of being shot by 1 a weapon which appeared to be a firearm if the victims did not do as they were told. 2 3

¶ [66] The Court accepts the submissions of all Counsel that the Harm is at the level of Category 4 2 because of the high or medium value of goods stolen. This was evidently a small 5 commercial enterprise and not on the same level as a bank or larger business. 6 7

¶ [67] The starting point is thus 9 years custody. 8 9

¶ [68] The Court considers that there are four significant aggravating factors in this case. There 10 was a high degree of planning2. The rental car was sourced from some days before the 11 robberies. The rental car sticker was removed from outside and placed on the inside of 12 the vehicle. The robberies were timed to occur precisely in the matter of minutes between 13 the closure of the JN Money Transfer business and the arrival of the armoured vehicle. 14 This must have taken prior observation and much planning. 15 16

¶ [69] While the submissions of the defence have focused on the inability to determine which 17 defendant played a leading role, what is plain is that this was group activity which itself 18 may constitute an aggravating factor3. 19 20

¶ [70] In committing the offences, the defendants concealed their identities by wearing face 21 masks, balaclavas and hoodies4. 22 23

¶ [71] In the aftermath of the incident, both men discarded the clothing worn at the time of the 24 robbery. The firearm was either concealed or disposed of such that it has never been 25 recovered. 26 27 2 Cayman Islands Sentencing Guidelines - Potential Aggravating Factors paragraph 8 3 Cayman Islands Sentencing Guidelines - Potential Aggravating Factors paragraph 8 4 Cayman Islands Sentencing Guidelines for Robbery 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 18 of 26

¶ [72] The first and fourth aggravating factors serve to increase the sentence by 6 months in 1 each case and the second and third by 4 months in each case. 2 3

¶ [73] The sentence is thus increased from 9 years custody to 10 years and 8 months or 128 4 months. 5 6

¶ [74] The defendant Davis has a previous conviction for wounding for which he was sentenced 7 in 2018. It is not an offence of similarity, and the circumstances of this offending are not 8 known. Although it may be classified as a crime of violence this is not treated as an 9 aggravating factor in his case. 10 11

¶ [75] In mitigation the Court takes into account in respect of both defendants everything said 12 and written in their favour. While noting that there are points of dissimilarity between 13 them, ultimately the balance of factors in each case leads to the following conclusions. 14 15

¶ [76] In respect of the defendant Davis, account is taken of his remorse, the apology extended 16 through his Counsel, the trauma of his childhood and all his personal circumstances. 17 These include his difficult financial circumstances, the fact that he is the father of a young 18 child who will be without his presence and support if he is incarcerated. He has 19 undertaken rehabilitative courses while at the Prison and intends to undertake additional 20 courses. All the mitigating factors serve to reduce the proposed sentence by 12 months 21 to one of 116 months. 22 23

¶ [77] In respect of the defendant Sibron, account is taken of the fact that he has no previous 24 convictions and is a person of good character. He is relatively young. He is remorseful. 25 His personal circumstances include a challenging upbringing, trauma at the death of his 26 brother, financial hardship and desperation. He has undertaken rehabilitative courses 27 while at the Prison. All the mitigating factors serve to reduce the proposed sentence by 28 12 months to one of 116 months. 29 30 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 19 of 26 CREDIT FOR GUILTY PLEAS 1 2

¶ [78] The next issue is the level of credit which is to be afforded for their guilty pleas. The 3 Guidelines provide that “the reduction principle is employed because a guilty plea avoids 4 the need for a trial, saves considerable costs and resources, and in the case of an early 5 plea, saves victims and witnesses from the ordeal of giving evidence. It also acts as an 6 encouragement to others to plead guilty where appropriate.” The recommended highest 7 level of reduction of one third is where a guilty plea was entered at the first reasonable 8 opportunity. 9 10

¶ [79] The prosecution submits that the pleas in this case were not entered at the first reasonable 11 opportunity. Counsel says that the pleas were entered after full disclosure had been made 12 by the prosecution and after a trial date had been set. Counsel asked the Court to consider 13 no more than a 25% reduction. 14 15

¶ [80] Counsel for the defendant Davis said that initially the defendant denied the offence, then 16 legal aid was transferred to her. She said that it took a while to obtain the proper papers 17 and then to meet with the defendant. Having spoken to him, he accepted his part in the 18 offending. Counsel asks the Court to note that even though there was an initial denial, 19 as soon as she had the papers the defendant made his plea. Counsel said that except for 20 disclosure, she cannot say the reason that a certain stance was taken by previous Counsel. 21 22

¶ [81] Counsel on behalf of the defendant Sibron urged the Court to apply the standard reduction 23 for an early guilty plea. Counsel said that there was some delay as it related to disclosure, 24 and the defendant Davis wanted to change Counsel. Because both defendants were jointly 25 charged, it was important that they tendered pleas together. Once legal aid and everything 26 was in place they went to meet with the defendants. The defendants were forthright and 27 accepted responsibility. Counsel said that she had to consult with Co-Counsel who was 28 coming on board. 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 20 of 26

¶ [82] The factual circumstances relative to the pleas in this case are set out in the tables below:- 1 2 R V LINCOLN DONOVAN SIBRON - INDICTMENT 14/2024 3 4 Date Defence Counsel Court 1 12th February 2024 S. A. Kelly Summary Court Case Transmitted to the Grand Court 2 16th February 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Arraignment adjourned, no Indictment 3 21st February 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Defence say legal aid not yet in place. 4 1st March 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Arraignment adjourned to join with other defendant. 5 6th March 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Arraignment adjourned awaiting co- defendant Davis. Tentative trial date of 2nd July 2024 is identified. 6 26th March 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Bail Application is made and is refused. 7 12th April 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Defence ask for time to review further disclosure. 8 10th May 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Defence ask for time. 9 24th May 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Defence Counsel says still not ready for arraignment. Trial date identified of 23rd September 2024 for 3 weeks and case management hearing date set of 27th June 2024 10 27th June 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Defence indicate guilty plea likely and ask for mention date. 11 28th June 2024 S.A. Kelly Grand Court Guilty pleas entered. 5 6 R V RANDON ODELL DAVIS - INDICTMENT 13/2024 7 8 Date Defence Counsel Court 1 12th February 2024 J. Hughes Summary Court Case Transmitted to the Grand Court 2 16th February 2024 J. Hughes Grand Court Arraignment adjourned, no Indictment 3 21st February 2024 J. Hughes Grand Court Bail Application is made and is refused. 4 6th March 2024 J. Hughes Grand Court Arraignment adjourned at defence request to await receipt of three pieces of evidence. Court advised not guilty 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 21 of 26 plea is likely, tentative trial date of 2nd July 2024 for two weeks is identified. 5 12th April 2024 J. Hughes Grand Court Defence Counsel given leave to come off record. Defendant seeking to be represented by Ms. Fosuhene. 6 10th May 2024 A Fosuhene Grand Court Defence ask for time. 7 24th May 2024 A Fosuhene Grand Court Defence Counsel says not ready for arraignment. Tentative trial date identified of 23rd September 2024 for 3 weeks and case management hearing date set of 27th June 2024. 8 27th June 2024 A Fosuhene Grand Court Defence indicate guilty plea likely and ask for mention date. 9 28th June 2024 A Fosuhene Grand Court Guilty pleas entered. 1

¶ [83] There is guidance on determining what is the first reasonable opportunity. This will vary 2 from case to case but where the Court is satisfied that the defendant and any legal advisor 3 would have had sufficient information about the allegations, it would usually be the first 4 time that the defendant appears before the Court and has the opportunity to plead guilty. 5 The Guidelines state: - 6 7 “10.6 Determining the ‘First Reasonable Opportunity’ 8 The critical time for determining the reduction for a guilty plea is the first 9 reasonable opportunity for the defendant to have indicated a willingness to plead 10 guilty. This opportunity will vary with a wide range of factors and the Court will 11 need to make a judgment on the particular facts of the case before it. 12 13 The key principle is that the purpose of giving a reduction is to recognise the 14 benefits that come from a guilty plea not only for those directly involved in the case 15 in question but also in enabling Courts more quickly to deal with other outstanding 16 cases. 17 18 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 22 of 26 The Court should adopt a consistent approach where a determination has to be 1 made as to the ‘first reasonable opportunity’ to plead guilty. Guidance may be 2 derived from the following: 3 4 (a) the first reasonable opportunity may be the first time that a defendant appears 5 before the court and has the opportunity to plead guilty; 6 (b) but the court may consider that it would be reasonable to have expected an 7 indication of willingness even earlier, perhaps whilst under interview; 8 Note: For a) and b) to apply, the Court will need to be satisfied that the defendant 9 (and any legal adviser) would have had sufficient information about the allegations 10 (c) where an offence is triable only on indictment, it may well be that the first 11 reasonable opportunity would have been during the police station stage; where that 12 is not the case, the first reasonable opportunity is likely to be at the first hearing in 13 the Grand Court; 14 …” 15 16

¶ [84] In this case, there was no indication of willingness to plea to the police at interview stage. 17 The defendant Davis was interviewed. Mr. Sibron refused to be interviewed by the Police 18 because his choice of duty Counsel was not available. 19 20

¶ [85] There was no early acceptance of responsibility before any Court. Months passed 21 following the first appearance in the Grand Court. There were bail applications where the 22 prosecution evidence was detailed. Defence Counsel were each given multiple 23 adjournments. 24 25 26 27 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 23 of 26

¶ [86] In the Courts view, the defendants and Counsel had sufficient information about the 1 allegations from an early stage. By no means can it be said that their pleas came at the 2 first reasonable opportunity. 3 4

¶ [87] The reduction which is applied in each case is 25%. 5 6

¶ [88] The proposed sentence on Counts One and Two is therefore 87 months imprisonment. 7 8 POSSESSION OF AN IMITATION FIREARM 9 10

¶ [89] For Count Three, Possession of Imitation Firearm, the Court is mindful of the case of R 11 v. Avis5. The English Court of Appeal stated therein that the appropriate level of sentence 12 for a firearm offence will depend on all the facts and circumstances relevant to the offence 13 and the offender. It will usually be appropriate for the sentencing court to ask itself a 14 series of questions:- 15 16 i. What sort of weapon is involved? 17 “Genuine firearms are more dangerous than imitation firearms. Loaded 18 firearms are more dangerous than unloaded firearms. Unloaded firearms 19 for which ammunition is available are more dangerous than firearms for 20 which no ammunition is available. Possession of a firearm which has no 21 lawful use such as a sawn off shot gun will be viewed even more seriously 22 than possession of a firearm which is capable of lawful use.” 23 ii. What if any use has been made of the firearm? 24 iii. With what intention, if any, did the defendant possess or use the firearm? 25 iv. What is the defendant’s record? 26 5 1998 1 Cr. App. R. 420 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 24 of 26 The seriousness of any firearms offence is inevitably increased if the 1 offender has an established record of committing firearm offences or crimes 2 of violence. 3 4

¶ [90] In this case this was an imitation firearm which was used to effect robberies. The 5 defendants possessed the firearm with the intention to use it to threaten the victims in the 6 course of robberies. 7 8

¶ [91] In each case considering that the possession is treated as an aggravating factor in the 9 robberies which increased the level of culpability and is not a standalone offence, a 10 sentence of 30 months imprisonment is imposed on each but is to run concurrently to the 11 sentences for the offences of Robbery. 12 13

¶ [92] The sentence of 30 months is arrived at in the following way. From a starting point of 48 14 months, reduced by 8 months by reason of mitigating factors to 40 months and thereafter 15 a 25% reduction for guilty plea. 16 17

¶ [93] All the offences arise out of a related incident or facts and are a series of offences 18 committed against the same victims. As recommended by the Cayman Islands 19 Sentencing Guidelines, it is appropriate that the sentences run concurrently. 20 21

¶ [94] The proposed sentences have been reviewed and are considered proportionate to the 22 offending. The personal circumstances of the defendants have been considered but 23 balanced against the serious nature of the offending are not such as to justify sentences 24 in the community. 25 26 27 28 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 25 of 26

¶ [95] The sentence in each case is therefore one of immediate custody with time served to be 1 taken into account: - 2 3 Count One - 87 months imprisonment 4 Count Two - 87 months imprisonment 5 Count Three - 30 months imprisonment 6 7

¶ [96] All sentences are to run concurrently with time served to be taken into account. 8 9 ANCILLARY ORDERS 10 11

¶ [97] There is no challenge to the request of the prosecution that the monies seized from the 12 defendant Davis be forfeited and returned to JN Money Transfer and Glenroy Bodden. 13 14

¶ [98] The Court therefore makes a compensation order pursuant to s. 33 of the Penal Code that 15 the funds presently held by the Police CI$14,871.00 and US$1,159.00 be paid over to JN 16 Money Transfer. 17 18

¶ [99] There is no evidence that the defendants have the means to make any further 19 compensation payments. The prosecution has advised that a financial inquiry has 20 revealed that they have no savings. They have no means to pay. Consequently, no further 21 compensation order is made. 22 23 NOTE 24 25

¶ [100] The Court closes by noting the very quick and timely response of the police to the reports 26 of the robbery. In tandem with this is what can only be described as the sterling assistance 27 provided by several citizens of the district of West Bay. These citizens courageously 28 provided information to the Police on the suspicious movements of the vehicle and of the 29 250110 R v Randon Odell Davis and Lincoln Donovan Sibron Jr: Ind. 13 and 14 of 2024. Coram Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 26 of 26 two men seen running in, around or through their properties. They did so in a timely 1 manner. 2 3 This is what undoubtedly led to the recovery of the getaway vehicle and the arrest of the 4 defendants within hours of the robbery. The Court commends the police responders 5 involved and all these citizens who played an important part in the aftermath of this 6 serious crime. 7 8 Dated this the 10th January 2025 9 10 The Hon. Justice Cheryll Richards KC 11 Judge of the Grand Court 12