Supergrass challenges removal of residency right

| 21/01/2016 | 38 Comments
Cayman News Service

Cayman Islands Department of Immigration

(CNS): The man coined as a “supergrass” by his own lawyers after giving evidence for the crown in three major trials against a dangerous gang of robbers as well as the gunman in a murder case is challenging the removal of his permanent residency and employment rights following his own conviction. Marlon Dillon, who was released from jail last year following his own conviction for his part in the robbery at Cayman National Bank in 2012, gave evidence against his fellow robbers but he now faces deportation because of that conviction.

Dillon was arrested shortly after the daylight heist at the Buckingham Square branch of CNB after the gang’s escape was foiled by an armed van that blocked the getaway car. The police were able to track him to his West Bay home, where he was found with a significant amount of cash hiding under a shed.

“Supergrass” gave evidence for the crown against the gang at the bank case trial and for a robbery by several of the same gang at a local TV station office. He also gave evidence in the trial of David Tomassa, one of the robbers, and Brian Borden in the murder of Robert Mackford Bush in West Bay in 2011. Although Tomassa was acquitted at the half way point, Borden was convicted and is currently serving a life sentence.

During his time in custody on remand after he agreed to give evidence Dillon stayed in jail at the George Town lock-up in a windowless cell in conditions described as unfit for human habitation. He also spent several weeks at the lock-up in West Bay in nothing more than a cage. As a result, he was given a relatively lenient three-year sentence but was released from custody last year.

Dillon claimed he had been promised by the prosecution that he would be able to go to the UK to reunite with his family, who were relocated there as part of a witness protection scheme as their lives were in danger due to his decision to testify against a dangerous group. However, Dillon faces deportation to his native Jamaica, where the gang he helped to convict is believed to have connections and there are fears that he would be vulnerable to reprisals.

According to the documents filed in the Grand Court by legal heavyweights Walkers, Dillon is challenging the revocation of his permanent residency by the Immigration Appeals Tribunal (IAT) as he claims the decision was wrong in law and the IAT failed to identify or apply the relevant legal test. He also claims that it failed to have regard to all the relevant and applicable statutory and constitutional provisions, made findings of fact without any foundation in evidence and reached a an unjustifiable, irrational conclusion.

Dillon received residency because he is married to a Caymanian.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: ,

Category: Courts, Crime, Immigration

Comments (38)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Marcia says:

    The USA will deport a PR back to their place of origin if the PR commits a felony whether or not they have a wife or children in the country. Try applying for PR in Canada and you better have some kind of degree. Why is it that a tiny country like Cayman is hell bent on fostering all the criminals and uneducated. Cayman has laws to protect this criminal and then award him with deportation to the UK. It seems that the UK has become a dumping ground for all these criminals. Imagine a bank robber’s human rights protecting him and no consideration to the Cayman public’s human rights to not have a criminal like him live among them nor foot the bill to send him to the UK and/or pay to protect his family there. He never though about tbeir safety when he was planning to rob the bank. It sames as only certain nationalities have buman rights in Cayman.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Rebove & Send home everyone who come here and create problems!!!! GT voter.

    • Anonymous says:

      Ja mon, and all those that live here and create problems too. Otherwise that would be racial and xenophobic behavior which to my knowledge (apparently) does not exist in Cayman.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Deport him to Jamaica is correct as its the land of his birth..Do you all remember a few years ago a man from Jamaica was serving time in prison for molesting his daughter guess where they deported him to??? To the UK as that’s where he was born..The man did not know a thing about UK as he left there as a baby was raised in Jamaica with his parents came here as an adult..He had a very hard life in UK ….So Dillon need go Jamaica and try figure out for him self how to get to the UK..The End

  4. Knot S Smart says:

    Without further a-dooh just put him in a Jamaican canoe and let the police boat tow him within sight of Jamaica and set him adrift…

  5. Fred the piemaker says:

    How is it a breach of his rights. It’s not as if he is at risk from the authorities, or persecution because of his religion, politics,sex etc.He is at risk from fellow criminals, which is a consequence of his r choices, and it can be dealt with by concealing his identify or moving him to another part of Jamaica. Bottom line is hi problems are his doing not an excuse to stay. Otherwise you are breaching every else’s rights to live without worrying about him continuing his criminality

    • Anonymous says:

      So anyone who is prepared to witness criminal behavior in court and put criminals behind bars should just be thrown on the rubbish heap? Great, that’s why people don’t talk to the police now even though they know who committed crimes and they perpetuate the crime circle…

      • Anonymous says:

        We is cheap, stingy bastards we is.

      • Anonymous says:

        There is a difference between an innocent witness to a crime giving evidence and being protected and a participant in a crime who only gives evidence to get a light sentence and to be sent to the UK means that criminals will now use the system that is supposed to protect us from them to reap numerous benefits. Send him to Jamaica. He chose to be a criminal and to endanger the lives of the persons he and his friends robbed. The fear they put in those people and the possibility that they could have been shot is a decision he took willingly. He infringed on other people’s rights – maybe they should sue him now for what he put them through but I have no sympathy for him. I feel bad for his wife and children but again, if one of his bad man friends had shot and killed him it would be the same thing i.e. they growing up without him! He should have thought of them before doing the criminal act!

      • Fred the Piemaker says:

        He was one of the armed robbers for heavens sake, not a passer by. He got his reward for testifying against his friends through his reduced sentence – should have been up for a minimum of 10 years given the firearms. And he is hardly being “thrown on the rubbish heap” – he’s being returned to the land of his birth having violated his immigration conditions. He doesn’t need to go back to the same part of Jamaica or see his criminal associates again. What do you suggest we do as an alternative? Reward criminals by granting them residence if they testify against associates? That would make for a safer society, wouldn’t it.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I believe our Government should do whatever it takes to re-unite him with his wife and family.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Make it a lesson to be learned, your life can be ruined by associating with the wrong crowd even if you end up trying to do the right thing

  8. Sharkey says:

    Please don’t let the correct spelling police after me.

  9. Sharkey says:

    Why don’t we just let Immigration and the Lawer talk this out , because I think that the Immigration has more rights than a criminal.

  10. Anonymous says:

    I think 8.51 is correct-that and you cooperate with the crown and end up being separated from your wife…Court of Human Rights could cost Cayman a pretty penny…

    • Anonymous says:

      The man “coorporated” because his ass was guilty and looking for a easy sentence. Only reason he did is because he got caught. Screw human rights!

    • Anonymous says:

      Thief and criminal like him cooperating to try and save his ass. It’s time to kick ass, now.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Send him back to jamaica, they will sort him out there, THIEF

    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly why the Article 2 point was made below. Because CIG has to act to a higher standard than cavemen like you.

  12. Anonymous says:

    If he received Residency because he was married to a Caymanian, it was not permanent but only a 7 year RERC, and depended on him living with her and being of good character. I wonder what his wife knew?

    • Anonymous says:

      but is he with the wife no she in the UK so what does it matter? he quick to be removed to the UK but not back to Jamaica. The Law also talks about loss of residency on being apart from the spouse and obviously hey been apart for a number of years. He need to go back!

    • Anonymous says:

      Section of Immigration Law says
      33. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the holder of a Residency and Employment Rights Certificate who is the spouse of a Caymanian or has obtained a Residency and Employment Rights Certificate as a result of his marriage to the holder of a Residency and Employment Rights Certificate under section 30(16) or any other earlier analogous provision, shall forfeit his rights under that Certificate if-
      (a) he falls within any of the provisions of section 38;
      (b) his spouse ceases to be a Caymanian or to be a Residency and Employment Rights Certificate holder;
      (c) within ten years of the marriage, it is dissolved or annulled;
      (d) he ceases to be legally and ordinarily resident in the Islands; or
      (e) he and his spouse are living apart-
      (i) under a decree of a competent court;
      (ii) under a deed of separation; or
      (iii) in circumstances where, in the opinion of the Board, the marriage has irretrievably broken down.

      • Anonymous says:

        You should have added s.38 which includes if you are a damn criminal!

      • Anonymous says:

        Hmmmmmm ! Makes me wonder hhow many marriages Re broken down and, by agreement, wait after the 10 years to get divorced. Does immigration check on this??

      • Anonymous says:

        So: has wife ceased to be a Caymanian? has the marriage been dissolved or anulled? are they living apart for any of the reasons – (i) under a decree of a competent court;
        (ii) under a deed of separation; or
        (iii) in circumstances where, in the opinion of the Board, the marriage has irretrievably broken down?

        • Anonymous says:

          We could revoke her status, or we could just rely on s.38, or we could finally confront the fact that any cabinet grant to her was possibly illegal and void in any event.

  13. Anonymous says:

    No surprise, dozens of our laws are poorly written and have loopholes big enough to sail ships through! One would think that residency or citizenship should be revoked if one breaks major laws especially after being convicted of a felon, but Cayman is “absurdistan”, so who knows!

    • Sonia says:

      Has anyone actually read the immigration law? does anyone actually know the facts of this case? If you don’t shut up please. the comments here are hilarious… the immigration law should allow revocation of an RERC on conviction. That’s exactly what happened here. Oh my godness Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Wake up

  14. Anonymous says:

    He cannot be deported to Jamaica. It would be a clear breach of his Article 2 rights, let alone whatever rights he has under Article 8.

    • Anonymous says:

      Well lets deport him to the UK then, given his right to family life and all. They can enjoy the article 8 rights. Anyone know how the wife became Caymanian?

      • Anonymous says:

        Mass status grant. Instead of us allowing educated people to stay, we send them home and allow uneducated poor people to remain.

        • Anonymous says:

          Yes, terrible to allow uneducated poor people with accrued rights the benefit of those rights. What would Jesus think?

          • Anonymous says:

            Probably, return unto Jamaica that which does not deserve to be here and is from Jamaica.

            • Anonymous says:

              All imported criminals should be deported from this rock. All we are getting out of their criminal behaviour is another smugg on our face. Why tthey don’t want to go back to their homeland? Are they wanted back home? Continue to purge these islands.

            • Anonymous says:

              He might also add: let whoever amongst unna wha has not gone into another man’s yard fi commit a serious crime cast di first rock stone.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.