Defendant too young, judge says
Mandatory sentences for a firearm offence did not apply in a recent case where a 16-year-old defendant pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm. Justice Argenon Smith came to that conclusion after hearing the facts earlier this month.
The case stems from an incident on 6 May in West Bay in which, police, acting on information received, saw the teen with several older males in a garage. When officers approached the individuals, the teen ran to the rear of the premises.
While giving chase, officers said, the young man was holding his right pocket. Once cornered by police, he threw something shiny into the bushes, before falling to the ground.
After subduing the teen and searching the area, police found a loaded .40 calibre pistol. The teen was arrested and charged with possession of a firearm; he pleaded guilty, telling the officers that one of the older men told him to take the gun and hide it when they saw the police.
He said he had had the gun in his possession only for a matter of minutes and he did not know it was loaded, nor did he intend to use it.
The maximum penalty for possession of a firearm in the Cayman Islands is 20 years. The conviction also may carry a maximum fine of $100,000.
The sentencing guidelines set out in Section 39 Sub Section 2a (2006 revision) states the Court may, “in a case where the individual pleads guilty, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of at least seven years with or without a fine. … unless the relevant court is of the opinion that there are exceptional circumstances relating to the offence or to the offender which justify its not doing so.”
Justice Smith said the Youth Justice Law has established a special regime for the trial and sentencing of young offenders. “This may be described as special legislation,” said Justice Smith, who added that the firearms law is general legislation.
He pointed out that any doubt or ambiguity should be in favour of the accused and ruled that the mandatory minimum sentence does not apply to young offenders.
Justice Smith said the family of the defendant, who has served roughly eight months in the Eagle House facility for young people, have indicated that there is a special programme, similar to a boot camp and located in Georgia in the United States, that the teen could attend, after which time he would move on to a boarding school in Utah.
He asked the Crown to get advice from the Attorney General regarding what types of certificates would have to be issued in order to facilitate the order, which essentially is one of probation.
“The fact that there is no precedent should not deter us if we are all agreed that this is the appropriate order,” Justice Smith said. “The young man’s welfare and the possibility of him making something of his life may mean that the matter may have to come back at a later date.”
After it was agreed that an inspection of the proposed institution would also have to be done before any certificate could be issued by the AG’s office, Justice Smith ordered that the matter be heard again on 3 December and remanded the young person in custody until that time.
Related Videos
