The jury in Lyndon Martin’s trial heard statements from a Jamaican national who said he received documents purporting that he was legal in Cayman and he received them from Martin.
Weldon Oswald Shaw has since returned to Jamaica and did not appear in court. His statements were read by Senior Immigration Officer Jeremy Scott.
Defence Attorney Ben Tonner questioned the officer about Mr. Shaw’s reason for not returning to Cayman for the trial.
In the statements, Mr. Shaw said he had worked in Cayman on a permit since 1997. His last permit, as a carpenter’s helper, expired on 26 April, 2006. About three or four weeks before then, his boss said he had a letter for him. It was a going home letter.
Several days later he saw Lyndon Martin, whom he knew through his boss. Mr. Martin said he would see what he could do to help him with his residence and would need his passport.
Some time later, Mr. Martin said he needed $350 for residence. Mr. Shaw said he took the money to him and Mr. Martin said he would see what he could do.
He later went to Mr Martin’s house and received his passport and a paper. The paper had a government slogan and his picture on it – the same picture as in his passport.
He asked ‘Am, I legal on the island now?’ and Mr. Martin said yeah. Later he went to Mr. Martin’s office, where he received a ‘residence receipt’.
Mr. Shaw said he showed the papers to his boss, who said he should check it out. He then attended the Immigration Department.
He later stated that he had received his passport back directly from Lyndon Martin early on 9 May, 2006 at Mr. Martin’s residence.
Assistant Chief Immigration Officer Jeannie Lewis told the court she checked computer records as recently as that morning. There was no application for permanent residence for Weldon Shaw.
Shown a document that said ‘certificate of fixed term work permit’ Ms Lewis said it was not valid. Questioned by Mr. Tonner, she pointed out details that made it different from a genuine document.
Ms Lewis was also shown two documents with the same receipt number. She said she did search to see if that receipt number existed and it did. The official receipt did not relate to Mr. Shaw – it related to another person and the amount was $10. The receipt for $350 was not valid.
Other officers gave evidence in person or had their statements read in relation to a search at Martin’s home and office and the recovery of computers on 11 May, 2006.
One officer confirmed that the search warrant did not include an apartment at another location or an office at International College of the Cayman Islands. Mr. Martin either invited or gave permission for officers to search those premises without a warrant.
On Friday, an officer of the Financial Crime Unit told the court how he retrieved information from a computer seized from Lyndon Martin. He explained that the computer recorded the date and time a document was created and last written. But the computer had to be correctly set to be relied on.
Martin has pleaded not guilty to five counts of obtaining property by deception and four counts relating to false documents.
He began giving evidence on Friday.
Crown Counsel John Masters is conducting the case for the prosecution. Justice Paulette Williams presides.
Martin testifies
On Friday, Defence Attorney Ben Tonner reminded Lyndon Martin of the case against him: that he took $350 from Weldon O. Shaw and gave him two forged documents in exchange.
‘Absolutely not,’ Martin replied.
The former Member of the Legislative Assembly is also charged with obtaining property by deception from two other men. The jury and Justice Paulette Williams began hearing evidence last Wednesday.
Martin told the court that for two years he had looked forward to coming before a jury of his peers and a judge to tell his story because the issue had been painted inaccurately across the media in this country and he had been tarnished. He and his family had suffered extensively, so he had insisted from the start that he testify.
Mr. Tonner asked specifically about Mr. Shaw’s statement that he went to Martin’s house on the morning of 9 May 2006 and received from him a piece of paper labelled ‘certificate for fixed work permit’ and later the same day went to Martin’s office where he received a ‘residence receipt’.
Martin said no to both.
Asked if Mr. Shaw did come to his house that morning, the defendant said yes – that morning and the night before.
He explained that he knew Shaw probably from 2004. He was a carpenter’s helper with S and R Construction, a business he (Martin) started to do some work with after he lost the 2005 election.
After Shaw received going home letter, he approached Martin numerous times for help to get either exempt employee status or permanent residence. Martin explained the point system for permanent residence – ‘I was part of the team that introduced it,’ he said, referring to the immigration review team that was responsible for the 2003 revision of the law.
He said Shaw did not have enough points, but kept insisting on applying. Martin told him that to do all the paperwork when it made no sense, he would have to charge him $300. He also told Shaw to plan for life after Cayman.
They had a conversation about Shaw going to Canada. On the night of 8 May, Shaw came to his house and asked to use his computer to type a letter to the Canadian High Commission.
Martin said yes and showed Shaw his son’s room where the computer was. He opened a word document for him but did not stay with him. He estimated that Shaw stayed until around 7.30 pm and then came back early the next morning. Martin did not know how long Shaw stayed because he was getting his children ready for school.
Later, while he was at his office, Shaw called and said he needed a character reference. He came to the office and got it.
Martin said his computer did have software to scan documents.
He also said he had a government receipt with the same number as the number on the false receipt. His government receipt was issued in relation to his domestic helper; her papers were kept with others in filing cabinets in his son’s room.
Mr. Tonner asked a hypothetical question: If Martin wanted to change a receipt and forge it, would he have used his helper’s receipt? Martin said no, because it would be easily traceable to him.
He said he did not owe Shaw $300. He said he did owe money to two other men named as persons from whom, he allegedly obtained it by deception. However, Martin said, because of missing paperwork, their applications had not been completed by the time he was arrested. After his arrest he did not want to break conditions of bail – which included not having contact with witnesses.
Crown Counsel John Masters was scheduled to cross-examine Martin on Monday.
Related Videos
