Crown challenges jail times in high-profile cases

| 02/11/2016 | 23 Comments

(CNS): As the Court of Appeal opens this week, the prosecution is on the list for this winter sitting challenging the sentences handed down by judges in two high profile cases. While it is not uncommon for those convicted of crimes to appeal their sentences or convictions, the crown is taking advantage of its rights this session to dispute the jail terms given to a man convicted child-sex offences and a white-collar criminal.

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has filed appeals against the 3½ year term given to Robert Aspinall in a fund fraud case and the 12 years Michell Anderson Garcia was given for rape and indecent assault on children.

No details were available ahead of the hearings describing the grounds on which the sentences are being appealed.

At the time of Aspinall’s sentencing the crown was accused of overloading the indictment against him, and the visiting judge, Justice Tim Owen, suggested that the crown should not have charged the British white-collar thief with money laundering just because he spent the cash he had stolen.

Aspinall was originally charged with 14 different counts covering several different offences but all relating to the same crime when he stole money from client funds while working at Deloitte. The judge found that charging Aspinall with two counts of theft would have covered the criminal conduct. The crown argued, however, that this type of offending has a particularly adverse impact on the country’s financial services sector and the local authorities needed to show international regulators that they were acting against offenders in these circumstances.

But the judge found the multiple counts of fraud and money laundering were unnecessary and sentenced Aspinall to three and a half years, which included a discount for his immediate admissions and cooperation with the authorities.

Acting Justice Micheal Mettyear sentenced Colombian national Michell Anderson Garcia to twelve years in jail after he was convicted of sexually assaulting a 5-year-old child while working as an air conditioning technician, raping a teenage girl and collecting over 1,000 pornographic images of children.

At the time of the sentencing the judge handed down a complex series of sentences for the multiple offences, which amounted to an 18-year term reduced by 33% because of Garcia’s early guilty pleas to all of the crimes. Despite the gravity of the multiple offences, the judge said he had to consider the totality of the sentence.

The crown’s appeal against Aspinall’s sentence is scheduled to be heard on Monday, 7 November, and against Garcia on Friday, 11 November.

Simone Russell Flint QC, a UK barrister, has been instructed by the crown to argue the Aspinall case along with crown counsel Toyin Salako. Aspinall will be represented by his attorney, James Austin-Smith.

Deputy DPP Patrick Moran will put the case for a heavier sentence for Garcia with support from prosecutor Eleanor Fargin, while Garcia will be represented by Lee Halliday-Davis.

See the full CICA listing for the winter session in the CNS Library

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , ,

Category: Courts, Crime

Comments (23)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    The fact that so many posters are getting this wrong is a real cause for concern.

    Our DPP has been doing a fantastic job. How many of you would stand up and do their jobs. But wait not many of you can even understand that the DPP is appealing a light sentence so not much hope.

    • Soiled son says:

      I really wouldn’t say that the DPP is doing a fantastic job. In fact, I’d argue that they’re from doing a fantastic job. Their record has been abysmal. In this case, they are correct to appeal, but their overall record stinks to the high heavens!

    • Aunt Agonist says:

      Reading is not for everyone.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Wow, so many fully trained and qualified Judges on this island…

  3. Anonymous says:

    20 years……no opportunity for parole……this only so he can’t use the money he stashed till the inflation rate sores.

    • Anonymous says:

      Ummm..No. A precedent in any other jurisdiction would never levy a sentence of 20 years with no parol to someone, given similar circumstances of financial crime. Please be realistic in comments.

    • Jotnar says:

      Except he paid it back but don’t let facts get in the way of a good rant

      • Anonymous says:

        I do think 3 1/2 years is too lenient, but in addition to paying back the money he also covered his companies legal fees, not sure anyone’s going to get rich stealing 500k and repaying 625k!

  4. Anonymous says:

    “Can’t wait for the next election” ?? Tell me, what will be different? Perhaps just a different set of bozos or the same ones get a second term? Same difference!!

    Until more educated younger Caymanians step up to run for public office, nothing will be different! But most qualified, eligible persons won’t touch Cayman politics with a 10 foot pole. Pirate Jim Bodden’s stinking formula is still too entrenched!!!

    That is his only legacy!!

  5. Anonymous says:

    CNS can you confirm this wording please.
    “The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions”.

    The same office that is supposed to prosecute is the office that is making the appeal against the sentence or the verdict?

    Am I missing something here? Is Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions want more time in jail or less for the convicted individuals??

    • Anonymous says:

      The DPP is appealing because they believe like we all do that the sentence was too lenient. 8:06 please wake up the DPP is doing the right thing.

      Wow how can this be misunderstood.

  6. Soiled Son says:

    Aspinall did the right thing to confess (only after getting caught) so at best, he should get a minimum of 10 years. Had he confessed before getting caught, the current sentence would have been appropriate. Garcia doesn’t need to see the light of day again.

  7. Anonymous says:

    DPP should be the Department for Public Pardons.

    Can’t wait for the next election. The swamp of Cayman corruption will be drained and all these legal entities of our government that cannot uphold the law will be flushed away!

  8. Easystreet fan says:

    Its always a problem when certain people have to go to jail eh????? especially those from the mother country. My question is where is he getting the money to appeal his conviction if he gave it all back I hope it aint legal Aid

    • Anonymous says:

      Why don’t you re read the article instead of going off half cocked in your rush to badmouth the ‘mother country’ . He is not appealing the sentence, the crown and prosecution are appealing what they consider to be a lenient sentence in the hope of extending their jail time. But hey , why let the facts get in the way of a good piece of xenophobic rabble rousing.

    • Anonymous says:

      You appear to have misunderstood almost every part of the article, assuming you bothered to read it at all before commenting. The Crown is appealing against sentence, Aspinall makes no appeal.

    • Anonymous says:

      Read the article moron. It is the DPP that’s appealing not the defendant.

    • Anonymous says:

      Some people have savings

  9. Anonymous says:

    “In a civilisation frankly materialistic and based upon property, not soul, it is inevitable that property shall be exalted over soul, that crimes against property shall be considered far more serious than crimes against the person. To pound one’s wife to a jelly and break a few of her ribs is a trivial offence compared with sleeping out under the naked stars because one has not the price of a doss. The lad who steals a few pears from a wealthy railway corporation is a greater menace to society than the young brute who commits an unprovoked assault upon an old man over seventy years of age……” (“The People of the Abyss”, by Jack London, Chapter 16, Property versus Person).

    The People of the Abyss (1903) is a book by Jack London about life in the East End of London in 1902.

    Has anything changed in the judicial system based on English common law?

  10. Anonymous says:

    Feel free to argue against the perv but I believe Aspinall’s sentence was fair.

    • Anonymous says:

      Both too lenient. As pinball should be in jail for a minimum of 10 years. Otherwise it makes white collar crime in the Cayman Islands quite a lucrative profession.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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