Hellman J
<doc> 1 IN THE GRAND
2 CRIMINAL SIDE
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS
INDICTMENT NO.
THE QUEEN
v.
ADRIAN ADELA GEA
MADEINYS EBANKS-POL
0109 + 0110/2016
16 17 Appearances:
18
19
20
21
23
24 Before:
25 Judge Alone Trial
26
27 Verdict Judgment
28 Sentence Hearing
29
30
31
32
Mr. Scott Wainwright for the
Mr. Nicholas Dixey of New
Defendant Gea
Ms. Keva Reid of MKR for
Ebanks-Pol
Justice Stephen Hellman (A:
26th February 2018 – 7th Mar.
23rd March 2018
22nd June 2018
the Crown
in & Co. for the
the Defendant
ctg.)
rch 2018
33 Crimina-
34 foliation
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Sentence Judgment, R v.
SentenCe JUDGMENT
ea (Cayman Is lands Sentencing Guidelines 2015) –
Mitigating factors.
SENTENCE JUDGMENT
ea (Cayman Is lands Sentencing Guidelines 2015) –
Mitigating factors.
Date: 22.06.
Page 1 of 5 </doc>
<doc> 1 1. You have both been convicted, following a trial, of commercial
guilt actually responsible. I don't know the full extent of your
risks, Ebanks-Pol, the robbery was, no doubt, partly to get
her, who had recently dismissed you. Whatever your motive
ely serious. It had far reaching consequences for your victims
now Mitzii Callan, and the store assistant, Jodi-Ann Ebanks
sentencing you, I have to go through a formal process, with
robbery. You were
motivation. In your
back at your former
ation, the offence is
rims – the jewellery
s— the
which is set out in the
8 Cayman
9 what
10 were
11 firearm
12 maybe
13 judgment
14 3. I then
15 catego-
16 robbery
17 psycho-
in Islands Sentencing Guidelines 2015 ("the Guidelines").
As your culpability for the offence, or in other words, how
you were both highly culpable. The offence involved
or imitation firearm to threaten violence. Mr. Gea, your co-
you didn't use a firearm or imitation firearm, but I found as
nt that you did.
have to consider the level of harm which you caused. I
say 2 offence under the Guidelines. It was not the most
possible, but it was harmful. It was harmful in the logical harm above the level of harm inherent in the offence.
First, I must decide
serious your actions
by production of a
counsel suggests that
a fact in my verdict
find that this was a
harm to commercial
you caused some
de to Ms. Callan and
18 Ms. E
19 goodness
20 4. In find
21 Impact
22 Ms. E
23 wrote
24 them to
Sentence Judgment R v.
thanks-Dixon. It was also harmful in that it involved his
namely, the jewellery that you stole.
being that your actions caused psychological harm, I take ad-
Report. In considering the Report, I focus on what was said
banks-Dixon rather than the conclusions drawn by the pro-
the Report. The Report mentions how your actions had a life-
ith.
impact on Ms. Ebanks-Pol (Madeirys). Heilman J. (Atag), Date: 22.06.1978
count of the Victim
d by Ms. Callan and
obation officer who
re-changing effect on
18
Page 2 of 3 </doc>
<doc> 1 5. Ms. C.
2 no long
3 able to
4 was st
5
6
7
Ebanks-Pol, she was
s, she no longer felt
e of the robbery and
ed the Report:
to the house for me.
only think it's them
8 6. Ms. E.
9 up?
10 for the
11 up age
12 wanted
13 hands
14 little le
15 them
16 remer
17 7. The re-
banks-Dixon said in evidence at trial that she heard a man. When she looked up he had pulled down his tam to make it
mouth and eyes. He was holding a small gun which he p-
inst her back. He asked whether she had children, and
ted to see them again she should do as he said. The man tied
feet and mouth, and put her on a chair in a room adjacent
after, some people came into the retail store. The man untied
out of the re. He warned her that if she tried anything he would be-
ber killed he had a gun.
robbery must have been a terrifying ordeal. Ms. Ebanks-Dixon
say: “This is a hold-
face mask with holes
punted at her and put
told her that if she
duct tape around her
to the store room. A
her so she could get
uld shoot her, and to
on told the probation
18 office.
19
20
21
22
Sentence Judgment, Rv.
who prepared the Report:
I still panic, especially because I work in the evenings,
killed. The only thing going through my mind was my four
I could have been
children.”
015376
Page 3 of 5 </doc>
<doc> 1 8. The re-
2 CIS50.
3 None of
4 the jewel-
5 9. I am s-
6 senten-
7 – an o-
robbery involved the theft of jewellery with a retail w-
8,000. I accept that the robbery has had a detrimental eff-
ef the stolen jewellery was recovered; there was over $6,500
ellery store; and Ms. Callan felt unable to run the business af-
tistified that the offence is so serious that I must pass an
e on you both. Under the Guidelines, the starting point for
efence of high culpability with a category 2 level of harm
value of more than
ect on the business.
worth of damage to
anymore.
immediate custodial
ar offence like this
– is a sentence of 9
8 years’
9 Where
10 factors
11 more s-
12 10. I have
13 submis-
14 11. There
15 a mask
16 don’t re-
17 when imprisonment. The range of possible sentences is 9 – 14 y-
your sentence falls within that range depends upon the ef-
fect and mitigating factors. Aggravating factors are things that
serious and mitigating factors are things that make them less
heard oral submissions on your behalf from counsel and I re-
sions and authorities they provided.
ere a number of aggravating factors. The offence was premi-
ance of aggravating
arrears license plates. It also involved a firearm or im-
creat that as an aggravating factor because I have already u-
sessing void culpability. The robbery was prolonged; Ms. ears’ imprisonment.
nce of aggravating
make your actions
serious.
have read the written
dictated. It involved
a firearm, but I
taken it into account
Ebanks-D'on was
18 subject-
19 commi-
20 12. Ms. E-
21 former
22 commi-
Sentence Judgment: R v C
ed to a lengthy ordeal of some 1 ½ hours. The robbery by contributing to a public sense of insecurity.
thanks-Pol, there were two aggravating factors specific to
employee, so the offence involved a breach of trust, and
ted another offence, theft of jewellery, against the same em-
ployer.
[Criminal Code (Adela) and Ebanks-Pol (Madernsy). Helman J. (Actg). Date: 22.06.21
ly impacted on the
you. You were a
d you had recently
lover.
18
Page 4 of 5 </doc>
<doc> 1 13. There
2 not been
3 14. Mr. G.
4 been of
5 never I
6 15. Ms. Eb.
7 the inf.
As very little mitigation. You have both shown no remorse, and recovered. But there is some mitigation.
a, you were previously of good character. That means you convicted of any offences. If you had not known Ms. Eb.,
have carried out the robbery.
thanks-Pol, I accept that your judgment and moral compass
influence of financial pressure and clinical depression. These
and the jewellery has
had not previously
nks-Pol, you might
were impaired under
the things were made
8 worse
9 bruised.
10 16. Mr. G.
11 until she
12 childre
13 was out
14 although
15 17. You are
16 time w
17 because you had recently lost your job, although that was so
upon yourself. Until recently, you, too, had been of good
a, up until the robbery, you had lived a good and useful life,
orderly before the robbery, so had you. You are the single m
and you look after your mother. I accept that for both of
man and you look after your mother. I accept that for both of
of character. You have both been assessed as having a low
of character. You have both been assessed as having a low
in your case, Ms. Ebanks-Pol, I am sceptical about that as
h in your case, Ms. Ebanks-Pol, I am sceptical about that as
be both equally culpable. I sentence you both to 12 years’
rich you have already spent in custody will count towards
something which you
character.
e. Ms. Ebanks-Pol,
other of two teenage
you, your offending
risk of reoffending,
assessment.
imprisonment. The
your sentence, but
17 that time
18
19 Dated this the 22nd
20
21
22 Justice Stephen H.
23 Acting Judge of the
Sentence Judgment. R v C
24 Where you have spent on custody with not:
June 2018
Hellman
e Grand Court
(a) Mr. G. (Madeira) and Ebanks-Pol (Madeirays). Hellman J. (Actg.). Date: 22.06.20 </doc>