A request to have a UK citizen returned there for prosecution went was dealt with in Summary Court on Monday after the defendant did not contest proceedings.
In fact, Defence Attorney John Furniss told the court, Michael Charles Lindsay would be happy to return to the UK because he considered he had a very good case and would defend the matter in due course.
Mr. Furniss said Lindsay, 38, had been living and working openly in Cayman for the last 18 months to two years. He had not disappeared down a bolt hole to evade UK authorities.
Because Lindsay had been arrested at his workplace on 5 September, he had not been able to put his personal affairs in order, Mr. Furniss said. He therefore applied for bail until arrangements would be made for the defendant to be accompanied back to the UK.
Lindsay was quite prepared to be placed under house arrest to deal with his affairs. Plus, his mother had come to visit him. ‘His being in custody is not an ideal arrangement for her to spend time with him,’ Mr. Furniss noted.
Solicitor General Cheryll Richards objected to bail on the basis that the offence Lindsay was alleged to have committed was serious and the circumstances were such that he was a flight risk.
Lindsay is accused of conspiracy to use a forged instrument. Details are that he and others conspired between June 2001 and March 2002 to use 32 false cheques with the intention that others would accept them as genuine.
The possible sentence is ten years. Ms Richards said some of Lindsay’s alleged co-conspirators had already been tried and convicted.
Mr. Furniss pointed out that Lindsay had been on bail in the UK for quite a considerable period, reporting to the police station on a number of occasions. Then he was told that he no longer had to surrender to bail, but the matter was still under investigation.
There were civil proceedings, but no findings against Lindsay. After he was released from bail, he came to Cayman, obtained work and has made three visits back to the UK since. When he left, there were no bail conditions requiring him to remain, Mr. Furniss said.
There was an occasion when police spoke to the attorney representing Lindsay in the UK. It seemed the attorney gave an undertaking that Lindsay would surrender on a particular day to be interviewed. The attorney went to the appointment but Lindsay did not, so the situation was that Lindsay was alleged to be a flight risk, Mr. Furniss summarised.
Ms Richards countered by pointing out that UK officers never told Lindsay he was free to go. If he were genuine, he would have advised them of his whereabouts, she said.
British police made the decision to charge him in April 2004 and an appointment was made, but Lindsay did not appear with his lawyer. Since then, Lindsay had not returned to the UK, Ms Richards told the court.
Mr. Furniss said the implication was that Lindsay knew what was going on. But if he knew, he would not have stayed here and gone to work everyday, the attorney argued.
Magistrate Grace Donalds ruled that there was a likelihood Lindsay would fail to surrender, based on the nature and seriousness of the charge and the probable sentence.
Mr. Furniss said Lindsay consented to be returned to the UK, except that he was asking for bail. This might be applied for in Grand Court, he indicated.
Formalities
Ms Richards then handed up the required authenticated documents for the extradition. These included the original request from the UK authorities to Cayman’s Governor along with the particulars of the person whose return is sought and particulars of the offence he is accused of.
The procedure then is that the Governor gives the authority to proceed, the arrest is made and the person is taken before the magistrate.
The magistrate must be satisfied as to the authenticity of the documents and be satisfied that the evidence would be sufficient to warrant trial if the extradition crime had taken place in Cayman.
The equivalent offence in Cayman of using a forged instrument is uttering a false document, she explained. The offence is extraditable in that the sentence is more than 12 months.
Ms Richards said Lindsay was treasury accountant for T Mobile UK, formerly One 2 One, and had access to the company’s cheque signing machine, along with information about the sequence of cheque numbers issued.
It is alleged he made contact with others and gave information about cheques. As a result, 32 fraudulent cheques were issued and the proceeds were withdrawn for the benefit of co-conspirators, Mr. Richards summarised.
The final document dealt with by the court was the notice of committal to the Governor. This put in motion the process by which UK marshals will be notified and will make arrangements to come to collect Lindsay for the trip back.
Related Videos
