Judge explains suspended sentence

Owen Clifford Smith was sentenced on Friday, one week after a jury found him guilty of causing grievous bodily harm to Jeremy Manderson at a Boxing Day party in Smith’s yard in West Bay on 26 December, 2009. 

He received a one-year term of imprisonment, but it was suspended for one year with five conditions. One of them was payment of $5,097 to cover Mr. Manderson’s hospital bills for treatment of his fractured jaw. As the owner of a water sports operation, he also received $8,000 in lost income because he was unable to work during the weight weeks his mouth was wired shut.  

Justice Karl Harrison had remanded Smith, 52, in custody after the jury’s verdict, asking for a pre-sentence report and a victim impact statement. Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Trevor Ward advised the judge on the relevant sentencing principles and defence attorney Lucy Organ spoke in mitigation. 

The judge summarised all of the factors that went into his decision to impose the sentence and then suspend it. 

Mr. Ward had pointed out that Cayman’s Court of Appeal recently agreed that the United Kingdom Sentencing Council guidelines do apply in the Cayman Islands. Those guidelines put grievous body harm offences into three categories, depending on the seriousness of the harm to the victim and the culpability of the offender. 

This case fell into the middle category, the judge agreed, because the injury was serious, but there was no planned attack and no weapon used. 

As Ms Organ pointed out, the jury accepted evidence that Smith had punched Mr. Manderson and kicked him once, but Smith was barefoot at the time. Smith had maintained that Mr. Manderson was sitting in a chair being noisy and refusing to leave, so Smith said he picked him up by the shoulders and Mr. Manderson fell. 

Against that background, Justice Harrison said Smith continued to maintain his denial of guilt, saying his actions could not have caused the injury. But Smith also told the officer who wrote the pre-sentence report, he felt bad about the injury and if he had known the outcome, he would have stayed in the house instead of going out to the yard where Mr. Manderson was. 

Justice Harrison said the victim had suffered physically, financially and emotionally. As Mr. Ward told the court, it was clear that Mr. Manderson was affected by the fact that he and Smith had shared a friendship for more than 30 years, yet his former friend had not offered an apology. 

There was some question as to whether the physical effects of the injury, including numbness, were likely to be permanent: one doctor said yes, another said no. 

Mr. Manderson had said he would not like to see Smith go to jail. The judge said he could not act on the victim’s recommendation, but he would take it into consideration. 

He also considered Ms Organ’s representation that Smith could be treated as a person of good character for the purpose of this sentencing; he employed 10 people in the business he operates and which he has used for the good of individuals in the community; he was financially responsible not only for his immediate family, but for several relatives who are handicapped. 

Justice Harrison said the starting point for a category two offence of causing grievous bodily harm is 18 months. He then summarised the aggravating and mitigating features before deciding on one year. In suspending that sentence, he cautioned that Smith would have to serve the time if in one year he commits another offence punishable by imprisonment. 

He also set conditions: That Smith attend on his probation officer when instructed to do so; that he take part in an anger management programme; that there be no personal contact with Mr. Manderson; that he does not cause anyone to interfere with Mr. Manderson; that he pay compensation, as his attorney said he was willing to do. 

The judge gave Smith six months to pay.