Witness can’t claim self-defence over illegal gun

(CNS): A 22-year-old man from West Bay is hoping that his evidence in a murder case that helped put two killers behind bars will see him avoid a mandatory ten years in jail over the possession of an illegal gun. Justin Ebanks (left) was caught with and has admitted having a small Beretta firearm in January, which he acquired after threats were made to his life because he was a witness in the trial of Osbourne Douglas and his brother, Justin Ramoon, for the murder of Jason Powery. But the court heard that the young man could not claim self-defence to avoid the serious charge.

During a sentencing hearing before Justice Charles Quin Tuesday, the court heard how Ebanks was one of only two witnesses that came forward, prepared to give evidence over what was believed to be a gang-related shooting outside a George Town bar in the summer of 2015, where there were many more people who saw the killing but remained silent.

After he gave a statement about seeing the murder and who shot Powery, the brothers were charged, and although Ebanks became the subject of an anonymity order, police and prosecutors were not able to keep his identity under wraps for legal reasons. He soon became a target and received threats to his own life. Just before he was arrested with the weapon, the police had been making arrangements for Ebanks to go to a safe house because of security concerns.

In the end however, he was taken into custody in January when police were called to Kelly’s Bar in West Bay after a report that Ebanks had been seen there with a gun. At the time of his arrest Ebanks told the police he had the gun for his own protection.

But during the sentencing hearing Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Patrick Moran said that the law was clear and Ebanks could not claim self-defence as a defence to the possession of the gun, regardless of the genuine security issues. Moran said that would set a dangerous precedent as the law did not permit anyone to be illegally armed because of the escalating gun violence in Cayman.

He said it could not be considered an exceptional circumstance against the mandatory minimum sentence “and if the court sanctioned it”, that would mean condoning the possession of guns as a way of meeting gun violence with more guns. But the senior prosecutor said that the court could reduce a mandatory minimum sentence by as much as two-thirds for assistance to the authorities.

He said it was “regrettably a common feature that witnesses are reluctant and unwilling to help the police”, which created problems for the entire criminal justice system in Cayman. Judges have already accepted cooperation with the crown as a justification for exceptional circumstances and moving away from mandatory sentences.

But Moran said that, given the fact that Ebanks had gone to a bar armed with the loaded gun, it was still appropriate to mark the seriousness of the offence and the need to deter others with a custodial sentence.

Defence attorney John Furniss accepted that his client could not claim self-defence, despite the very real threats to his life. These had continued when he was incarcerated in HMP Northward, where the two men he was giving evidence against were also being held.

Furniss said significant concerns had arisen over Ebanks’ security when the anonymity order was lifted a few weeks before his arrest. He pointed out that there had been several high-profile cases in Cayman that had been derailed by witnesses refusing to come to court, but despite the threats and his exposure, Ebanks never recanted his evidence.

“From early on and throughout he was prepared to give evidence,” Furniss said, noting that a conviction was recorded against the two men for murder, the worst possible crime.

The murder case was the reason why Ebanks had the gun and Furniss made it clear that the young man would not have been threatened or armed himself if he had not been a key prosecution witness. As a result, while self-defence could not be a defence, it explained the reason for the weapon and was linked to his assistance to the authorities.

Furniss said Ebanks had set an example when many others declined to come forward and he should be commended and exceptional circumstances applied. Furniss said it was important to send a message to those willing to help the police that they can expect to have their own cases reviewed and sentences cut.

Still a very young man who had worked in the watersports sector before his arrest, Ebanks had just one conviction for assault and was considered a “reliable and truthful” witness during the trial, the judge said. Despite some confusion during cross-examination in the murder trial, the judge said he accepted that Ebanks had acquired the gun in question after he had witnessed the murder and not before.

Justice Quin told Ebanks that he wanted time to consider the case and would deliver his sentencing decision later this month.