Police are searching for two armed men who robbed a woman as she returned to her home in George Town on Tuesday evening.
She was robbed in Webster Estates in Antoinette Avenue, off South Church Street.
“The woman had just arrived home when she was suddenly confronted by two men, one of whom was in possession of what appeared to be a firearm,” police said.
The men demanded cash and made off with a small quantity of the victim’s money and some jewellery.
They received the report of the robbery at 7.27pm, Tuesday.
No shots were fired and no-one was injured in the robbery.
No descriptions of the suspects are currently available.
Anyone who was in the area at the relevant time tonight and has any information that could assist police is asked to contact George Town police station on 949-4222, the RCIPS tip-line 949-7777, or Crime Stoppers 800-8477 (TIPS).
Related Videos
how did i know they were going to day no shot’s were fired, and no one injured.
Like if that’s the mantra to say don’t worry, everything is alright.
I have said it once, and I will say it again. Making guns hard to own, only arms the criminals.
Todays Breaking news, I quess no one was hurt here either, so all’s well..
A woman was mugged at the junction of Eden Road and South Church Street at 7:05 a.m.
The victim tells Cayman 27 she was walking to work and saw a guy sitting on a fence. When she walked passed him he said stop, give me your bag. He spoke with a Caymanian accent.
And here’s one more morning tidbit for you….
Police are investigating a robbery attempt that occurred near the BJ Tape Club in Bodden Town.
The robbery attempt occurred about 10:30 p.m. and police confirm no one was injured.
Is anywhere safe these days ?
The Government seriously need to press to send this types of low life criminals to Cuba. No need to waste tax payer dollars and waste rehabilitation on scumbags predators like these.
Do what you have to do to get rid of this ever increasing cesspool of SCUM BUCKETS which is eroding the fabric of this country on a daily basis!
Ninty five percent of the people I talk to are in favor of some kind of self protection, namely pepper spray. What in the world is wrong with the authorities on this island, get your head out of the sand, Cayman;s reputation is on a serious distuction course. Issue permits for people to carry self defence protection.
I truthfully believe that the RCIPS is OK with people being unarmed. And they most likely feel that it’s better people get robbed with no resistance than to have the periodic bad guy getting shot dead or the incident turning into a shootout. The problem with this is that the bad guys are the only ones with Guns and they know they will encounter no resistance so to them it’s like taking candy from a baby and they know the RCIPS is not going to meet force with force. Unarmed citizens and an unarmed police force make it as easy for them as a wolf in a sheep’s den..
No shots were fired and no-one was injured in the robbery.
This began to be the authorised (and standard, automated) response from the RCIPS some time around the early to mid 90s…when firearms began to be used more prevalently in robberies.
It sends a distinct message that ‘robbery is ok, as long as no shots are fired and no one is injured’;couple this with the standard police advice that victims should meekly surrender their belongings and not fight back…and you have the police playbook for citizens self-defense and self-protection.
Under British/Caymanian ‘possession of offensive weapons’ laws…the list of offensive weapons is extensive, all encompassing, even.
And British and Cayman’s police can charge anyone with the use of anything on their person that is used to injure another person, even in self-defense, as use of an offensive weapon.
Under British/Caymanian law, self-defense is neither an excuse for possession of an offensive weapon, or causing actual/greivous bodily harm to another person/persons with whatever could be termed as an offensive weapon by investigating police officers.
Under these draconian laws and system, it is up to an individual to guage the risks and take the necessary precautions, at what ever risk is present to themselves.
I’ve had the question asked, by civil servants involved in enforcement/public safety roles, when teaching weapons dis-arms in self-protection classes, what if a person is cut/stabbed with their own knife while I am attempting to disarm them?
My answer is, it is you who must decide who’s life and safety is more important at the time, yours or theirs, and decide accordingly or, in other words how important is your own life and safety to you?.
It might even mean a trip to the police station and an appointment before a magistrate but at that time…the only question that should concern any victim is, how important is my own life and safety to me?.
Possession of any tool to be used in potential self-defense/protection situations is also a matter of honestly answering that question and taking the necessary risks involved.
So basically Firey, I guess it’s simply against the law to defend yourselves against an attack.. How great this must be for outlaws…Sone you will see criminals pressing charges and filing lawsuits against law abiding people for hurting them, when they rob them…
NJ2CAY
I guess, technically, what I’m saying is that under British law…it is, unfortunately.
The immorality of such a position seems to be totally lost on the British political and law enforcement authorities; the Commissioner of Police in Cayman is only playing by the British rule book.
In Britain, if you injure or kill someone, for example, in a home invasion while protecting your home and family…the police are definitely going to charge you…with murder, or whatever else, regardless of the circumstnaces.
It is up to higher authorities to uphold or drop those charges but consider the stress of a family who has been through a horrifying experience of violence being hoisted upon them by another party, who themselves, have had to involuntarily resort to violence to protect themselves, now having to worry about criminal charges and convictions for doing what was necessary to defend and protect themselves from harm.
Some of these people have never exerted violence against another person in their entire lives and have to live with the traumatic experience of having hurt or even killed another person, involuntarily.
The alternative is to they, themselves, be the ones lying in a hospital bed or on a morgue slab and which natural-thinking human being would voluntarily choose that alternative, for the sake of not harming another human being who was doing their endeavour best to harm them ?
There is something vile and unjust about the British and Caymanian police and authorities policies and approach to the divine-given right of an individual to protect oneself, family and property from harm by other people.
And…as you well know,
The 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that gives an individual the RIGHT to bear arms in the USA was based on one basic premise; that every single individual in the United States of America has a divine-given right to protect themselves from harm, violence and tyranny.
The honest acceptance that the world is a violent place, that there are vile, violent human beings out there who find enjoyment in hurting other people and that violence is sometimes necessary to combat and defeat such people is a documented part of human history and current society.
Anyone who denies this right to another human being, is imo, going against the very laws of nature itself.
NJ2CAY,
In Britain, if you injure or kill someone, for example, in a home invasion while protecting your home and family…the police are definitely going to charge you…with murder, or whatever else, regardless of the circumstnaces.
Murder is out of context if you kill someone in home invasion, the element of premeditation do not exist.
The rule is thou shall not kill regardless of circumstance. Do whatever damage you want to assailant, injure him, disable him, pulverize him, but leave a drop of breath and I’m pretty sure you won’t be charge.
You obviously don’t know how British police operate…and you’ve, quite obviously, never been in life-threatening combat with another person or person.
If you actually think that your picture-perfect theories work in real life, you should put them to the test.
In my experience, they would get you killed, against anyone who was fully committed to harm or kill you and had even a mediocum of skill and experience to do so.
If you cannot match your attacker’s committment, energy and determination, there is only going to be one winner…and I can guarantee you, it won’t be you!
British police and law DO NOT take into consideration any element of premeditation; once the other party is dead…you are arrested and charged with murder IMMEDIATELY, while they investigate the entire set of circumstances of the incident.
If you doubt me, Google the recent cases of the shopowner, a 72-yro man and a houseowner who were arrested and charged with murder after defending their homes from attacking robbers, in which one of the robbers, in each case, was stabbed to death during a struggle.
That the charges were later dropped is beside the point.
I was particularly horrified, when I read about the Eden Rd. incident, since I live on that road and a friend of mine was coming at that time to medicate my cat. Fortunately, I later learned that she hadn’t arrived until 8:45AM.
The headline needs to start reading: Shots were fired and one was injured in the robbery.
Two outcomes are possible:
1) A dead or injured criminal (the only good kind to have)
2) An innocent person is killed or injured, which will finally jar the public out its Pollyanna-style complacency and have them demanding the right to self defense and the right to bear arms (which like the dangerous weapon definition can be all encompassing. Pepper spray can legitimately be called arms)
So I guess the best choice would be to aim for the leg and hope you don’t hit a blood vessel. Funny how tho police never do this..
In most cases, the element of total control of how much violence is enforced on an attacker lies within the realm of highly trained, skilled people but those are the type of people that are rarely attacked, except in duty-bound situations like police and military and security work.
The average person, male or female, is reacting from the need for self-preservation, which comes from the natural gut-instinct to survive; the skills necessary for total control of how much violence is used is beyond their capabilities, in the majority of cases.
Those innocent people fighting for their lives from this perspective usually come out on top, regardless of what happens to their attackers.
Maybe they have a sense of divine justice on their side; why should the innocent die, so that the quilty may live ?
firey,
If you doubt me, Google the recent cases of the shopowner, a 72-yro man and a houseowner who were arrested and charged with murder after defending their homes from attacking robbers, in which one of the robbers, in each case, was stabbed to death during a struggle.
The news tells it’s a murder but who would you believe the law or the news? UK law clearly defines murder as the one with intention and premeditation, in the absence of murder elements they call it manslaughter which have lesser penalty.
Exactly, Don Q,
Which brings me back to my original point…
It is an individual’s responsibilty to take whatever steps are necessary for their own protection..in Britain…and the Cayman Islands.
In Britain, or Cayman,no innocent citizens have recently been CONVICTED of either murder or manslaughter, having killed their attackers (do you remember the homeowner who shot the RCIPS-tagged burgler to death in Cayman not so long ago ?)
The purpose of my comments is to inform my friends and family of the risks of the law under which they are living…
They don’t have to worry about me.
Both my person and premises are very well protected, at the risk of the very LIFE of any predator who would choose to target them.
The police in Britain, where I live, know this very well…
As well as they know that I know the laws under which we live.
My only objective is to inform the forumites of British/Caymanian law…
In the final analysis, they are responsible for their own decisions and actions.
A robber approach with their guns drawn and with yours holstered, are you suggesting you are going to do a quick draw and out-shoot the attacker or someone sitting in their living room with a stray bullet.
That poor lady must have been terrified and is probably still in shock.. It goes to reason that If she had a gun in her purse, another gun would be on the street..
A quick search show:
Homicide rates tend to be related to firearm ownership levels. Everything else being equal, a reduction in the percentage of households owning firearms should occasion a drop in the homicide rate.
Evidence to the Cullen Inquiry 1996: Thomas Gabor, Professor of Criminology – University of Ottawa
Gun Deaths – International Comparisons
Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):
Homicide Suicide Other (inc Accident)
USA (2001) 3.98 5.920.36
Italy (1997) 0.811.10.07
Switzerland (1998)0.50 5.8 0.10
Canada (2002)0.42.00.04
Finland (2003)0.354.450.10
Australia (2001)0.241.340.10
France (2001)0.213.40.49
England/Wales (2002)0.150.20.03
Scotland (2002)0.060.20.02
Japan (2002)0.020.040
Data taken from Cukier and Sidel (2006) The Global Gun Epidemic. Praeger Security International. Westport.