A ‘ruthless and dangerous’ convict, who posed such a danger to Cayman that he had to be sent to the UK’s most secure prison, has lost his appeal to change the terms of his sentence.
Elmer Wright, who is serving an indeterminate life sentence for breaking into an elderly couple’s home as they slept, tying them to chairs and then robbing them at gunpoint, was jailed for life with a requirement that he serve at least 18 years before becoming eligible for parole.
In addition to the aggravated burglary and robbery, Wright was also jailed for possessing a bulletproof vest and 112 rounds of ammunition of varying calibre.
Appearing before the Court of Appeal on Thursday, 25 April, Wright’s attorney, Keith Myers, argued that the sentencing judge made a mistake by imposing a life sentence without knowing the potential danger or lack thereof that Wright posed to the community.
“The fact is, there were no presentencing reports, or expert reports that would suggest the level of danger he posed to the community, or the likelihood of him reoffending,” he said.
According to Myers, Justice Roger Chapple should have sought the opinions of psychiatrists and probation officers who would have been able to provide thorough reports which might have altered his decision.
In opposing Wright’s application, Scott Wainwright, assistant deputy director of public prosecutions, told the court Chapple was entitled to forgo a report, based on Wright’s extensive criminal history.
“The appellant first began his offending at the age of 15 years old, when he and others robbed a gas station,” said Wright. “In 2012, he was sentenced to a total term of nine years for that robbery during which he beat two of the customers, and discharged a weapon. He was released from that sentence in August 2016. Ten months and 11 days later, he was in possession of 112 rounds of ammunition.”
When dismissing Wright’s application, the court noted that not only was Chapple within his right to forego a pre-sentencing report, but also that Myers, who was the defence attorney at Wright’s initial trial, had agreed to proceeding to sentencing without the reports.
“The court is bound to take into account the wider offending,” said appeals court president Sir John Goldring when returning their judgment.
The appeal judges accepted that Chapple could have clarified the basis for his decision to treat Wright as a dangerous man who was highly likely to reoffend, but then stated, “This was one of the cases where the judge was right to arrive at the conclusion he did based on the evidence before him.”
Prior to the completion of the hearing, Wright, through his lawyer, told the court that by being sent to the UK he is being punished twice because he has no contact with his family, no support and now struggles with mental health issues which amount to a breach of his human rights.
When dismissing the application, the court noted consideration had been given to Wright’s current circumstances.
Related Videos
