Brothers’ conviction for ‘clinical’ killing sticks

| 10/12/2018 | 30 Comments
Cayman News Service

Justin Ramoon (far left) and Osbourne Douglas escorted by prison officers as the court visits the scene of Jason Powery’s murder

(CNS): Brothers Osbourne Douglas (32) and Justin Ramoon (28), who were convicted of killing Jason Powery in a gang-related shooting outside a George Town bar in 2015, have failed in their appeal after the higher court delivered its ruling Friday. The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal found that the crown had presented a “strong case” against the brothers in what has been described as a clinical execution which was “left wholly unanswered” after the men failed to give evidence at trial. They also upheld the life sentences, which included minimum tariffs of 34 years for Douglas and 35 for Ramoon, who had a previous gun conviction.

In the ruling the appeal court found that it was “quite impossible to say that these convictions are unsafe or unsatisfactory”, after pointing to the eye-witness evidence from two men and corroborating CCTV footage. The ruling stated that there was the clearest evidence at trial to accept the crown’s case while rejecting the defence.

Douglas and Ramoon had claimed they were innocent and implied that the two witnesses, friends of Powery who had sealed their convictions, were the killers and they had colluded to blame the brothers. However, neither of the brothers ever took to the stand to spell out their allegations at trial and had inferred the collusion through their cross-examination and in their lawyers’ final arguments.

But the appeal judges supported the trial judge, who had heard the case alone without a jury. They, too, found that the idea that the two witness, who were at the bar enjoying a drink and a smoke with the victim without any sign of an arguments, were the killers was “far fetched”. The appeal court stated that the evidence given by the witnesses was corroborated by the CCTV evidence, which they would have to have predicted in order to collude and kill their friend and then frame the brothers.

The judges also found that the tariffs handed to the men for their life sentences were appropriate, given the nature and circumstances of what has been described as a clinical assassination, which the brothers believed they could get away with because they did not think anyone would dare to give evidence against them.

The brothers are serving their time in prisons in the UK after local law enforcement authorities saw them as a security risk and sought to remove them from this jurisdiction. They were at first sent to HMP Belmarsh, where they were incarcerated together, but they have since been separated and are now serving in two different jails understood to be in the north of England but which have not been disclosed.

The brothers have both filed a judicial review regarding that removal, which the appeal court did not address as the case has not yet concluded, and indicated that whatever the outcome of that case, the brothers will serve the full sentences, whether that is in the UK or the Cayman Islands.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , , , ,

Category: Courts, Crime

Comments (30)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Just Me says:

    While I agree with the provision of legal aid, having gone through the judicial system myself, I for one would like to see some form of restitutionon their part. If you knowing committed a crime, was convicted and still try to appeal and lose again, you may have the right to continue an appeal. But after all is said and done you still lose then I believe that there should be some way of obtaining some restitution from that individual.

    Perhaps some form of forced labour, perhaps finacially penalizing his family, such as wife, mother, father etc……

    The genneral public should not have to bear the costs of trying to free someone who is obviously guilty. If the family of the accused, as well as the accused themselves, are so certain of the accused innocence then there should be no hesitation in providing surety for legal representation.

    Most of these appeals cost around 15k to 20k minimum to complete. The court cases themselves cost around 20k to 30k minimum to complete.

    Just my thought on the matter. I am sick of having to pay for idiots lies……

  2. Anonymous says:

    What a waste.

  3. Anonymous says:

    1.25pm what about the human right of the person they killed?? These murderes gave up their rights when they committed this horrendous crime! Well done to the judicial system of Cayman. At last justice is done.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Time to pull all legal aid for criminal appeals. Too many locals appealing with public money on hopeless attempts to get away with their crimes. Allow no win no fee on appeals, as then lawyers would take meritorious appeals only, and that would be far fewer than the present raft of appeals clogging the courts and wasting public coffers.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Why not contract out life terms to one of the private prison contractors in the USA? That would really hurt them 🙂

    • Anonymous says:

      Belmarsh in the U.K. Is no holiday camp.

      • Anonymous says:

        9:36 I agree it’s no holiday camp but I can think of a lot worse (and arguably more appropriate?) places these two should be locked up in.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Update us on their status in 30 years. For the next 29 years, we don’t care!

  7. Anonymous says:

    Hopefully they take this case to the Privy Council!

    • Anonymous says:

      1:49 You’re a troll!

      • Anonymous says:

        Not a chance. The case was / is weak. Nobody want’s to rock the boat to find out what really happened.

        • Jotnar says:

          The case is weak, but it persuaded 3 independent court of appeal judges from the UK with no local interest one way or the other, and a Court of appeal who have overturned murder convictions before so clearly not biased…who not only agreed with the first instance judge but said the Crown had a strong case that was wholly unanswered? Or we go with your view? Based no doubt on years of legal experience.

    • Anonymous says:

      Yeah and get more time added on for their gangland execution!

  8. Anonymous says:


  9. Ed says:

    Two murderous brothers with different surnames.
    Cayman’s problems in 6 words.

  10. say it like it is says:

    What are these completely groundless appeals costing the taxpayer?. I seems this process is automatic even when there’s absolutely no chance of success, and serves only to keep the lawyers and judges occupied.

    • Anonymous says:

      11:11 It’s their ‘human right’ and while the UK is still part of the EU we’ve got to live with that.

      • Jotnar says:

        Leaving the EU will not affect the UKs human rights obligations sorry.

        • Anonymous says:

          Jotnar, you’re clearly not up top speed on this – dumping ECHR is (or maybe was now?) one of the key factors in the case for Brexit.

          • Jotnar says:

            Think I might be moving a little faster than you – difference between the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights.

            “Since the UK’s membership of the ECHR is entirely independent of its EU membership, the UK will remain bound by the ECHR after Brexit, and subject to the rulings of the ECtHR, which is separate from the Court of Justice of the EU in Luxembourg (ECJ).” George Peretz QC

          • Anonymous says:

            4:34 ‘tis you who are not up to speed. If you cannot understand something as basic as the difference between the ECHR and the ECJ then you should not spout off on human rights issues online.

      • Anonymous says:

        Need to bring back hanging for these two. Waste of my tax dollars feeding them. I’ll happily pull the lever too.

      • Anonymous says:

        The UK also established their rights to day and night, so that cuts their time in half so instead of 30 it’s going to be 15,smh.

        • Anonymous says:


        • Dunz says:

          English laws are that a.y sentence over three-four years they do three quarters of the sentence with good behaviour etc. In their case they were not tried or sentenced by the uk.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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