Coincidences lead to attempted kidnap conviction

| 24/01/2019 | 65 Comments
Cayman News Service

Police car outside the rear entrance of the courthouse in George Town

(CNS): Sean Roy Scott (37) from West Bay was found guilty on Thursday of attempting to abduct a nine-year-old girl, who was visiting Cayman with her family last May, as she played with her sister outside a Seven Mile Beach condo. Scott was accused of trying to pick up the child with the intention of taking her away but had claimed that he was not the man in question. After his arrest, however, Scott told police that he had talked with some children in the area that day in what appeared to be very similar circumstances as those described by the victim. As Justice Roger Chapple, who presided over the case, gave his verdict, he spoke of “many coincidences, too many” that led him to be sure Scott was the guilty man.

Scott had not been picked out of a picture identification by the victim, her sister or their grandfather, who had also reportedly seen a man in the area at the time of the incident. The victim and her sister also gave a very different description to police that did not fit with Scott’s appearance but a list of other issues all pointed to him being the man who had tried to abduct the child.

When Scott gave his first interview to police he had made no comment but in a second interview, made without his attorney the next day, he said he wanted to tell police what happened. He admitted to being in the area of Plantation Village at the time, which was verified by the electronic tag he was wearing, as he was on remand in relation to a separate incident. The tag was also described by the victim when she gave her statement to investigating officers.

Scott described talking to two blonde-haired girls, who he believed were sisters, that matched the description of the children who made the report. Scott said he had asked them if they wanted to play a game, which also tied exactly with what the sisters said the man they had seen said to them.

Scott said he had made a gesture to the girls, pointing to his eyes and then them, which the children had also related. Scott was wearing a blue football jersey with a number on it, which the girls had described to police about the man who had approached them.

At the time of the interview, however, Scott denied trying to pick up either of the children he had spoken to. After he was charged, Scott took the position that he was not the man who had spoken to the girls in this case and that they must have spoken to a different person. But he did not give evidence at his own trial, which the judge said led him to believe Scott had no plausible answer to the crown’s case.

As the judge explained the reasons for his findings, he said that if Scott was not the man who had approached the victim in this case, then that meant at the exact same time a second man was in the area also wearing a blue football jersey and an electronic tag. Since the 911 Emergency Communications Centre had confirmed that Scott’s tag was the only one recording in and around Plantation Village, this meant that this other electronic tag was not registered.

This other man then also talked to two blonde-haired children, asking them if they wanted to play a game and making the same gesture as Scott, just as he was talking to another set of blonde sisters.

“Logic and common sense says this can’t be,” the judge said. “This is many coincidences, too many. The evidence drives me to the conclusion that there was only one man and it was this defendant.”

Following the verdict, Scott was remanded back into custody and a sentencing date was scheduled in May in order to allow for the necessary reports.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags:

Category: Courts, Crime

Comments (65)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    HE’S NOT A BRACKA BUT A BAYA, I GREW UP WITH HIM! BRACKA.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Perhaps parents need to know the public areas in Cayman are not a safe place for there children, would make a great marketing campaign for the tourism sector this latest incident goes for beyond the typical robberies on the beach and if the police or the courts are not willing to address this with a long term solution then the citizens of this island need to take the matter into there own hands seems this man should of been taken care of long ago, too much money depends on the tourism sector to have animals like this roam free.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Deport him please!

  4. Anonymous says:

    Was this the guy who tried to abduct that girl in west bay last year? The girl who got away?

  5. Anonymous says:

    Put him away and chop off his D.

  6. Anonymous says:

    From West Bay? He a Bracker.

    • Anonymous says:

      Thinking about the wrong Sean.. he na from brac

    • Nunya says:

      He’s from West Bay, lived over on Cayman Brac for a while.

    • Anonymous says:

      I genuinely do not give a flying fudge either way.

      • Anonymous says:

        You should. Were he not from here we should be expecting his deportation after sentence. Since even the officials seem to not give a flying fudge, people who should be deported are not. Thank you for your contribution to making Cayman less safe than it should otherwise be.

  7. Anonymous says:

    The description the girls gave wasn’t that different from Scott’s appearance. They described his as dark-skinned, which, to be fair, he is compared to them.

  8. Anonymous says:

    (Used to) know him well.

    Had dreams of being a priest or pastor once upon a time.
    Seriously.

    Anyway, not sure which is the chicken or the egg here; but in addition to pedophilia, drug abuse has changed him into a totally different person.

    I suspect he is need of professional help as well as incarceration.

    Btw, I trust we all appreciate, as long as we accept any other sexual ORIENTATION apart from heterosexual as “natural, we must include pedophilia as such.

    Bear in mind, until very recently homosexuals and pedophiles were equally and officially categorised as disorders.

    CNS:
    Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. If two adults of the same sex want to be in a relationship, sexual or otherwise, that is their choice and their business. The important words are “consenting” and “adults”, i.e. there are no victims, therefore making this a crime is imposing morality on people for no other reason than you think it’s wrong, which is unacceptable under local and international human rights legislation.

    Sexual acts of any kind with a child, whether same-sex or not, remains illegal because the child in question is a victim and needs to be protected by society. So stop interfering in the lives of consenting adults and concentrate on grown men dating under-age girls, something that for some reason doesn’t attract sufficient outrage. And citing the ignorance of the past as justification for ignorance of the present is simply absurd. Stop it.

    • Anonymous says:

      Priests and child abuse, hardly a surprising combination. It’s “paedophilia” by the way. Just because our American cousins did not have the benefit of a classical education, it does not mean we should dumb down the spellings of words in English.

    • Anonymous says:

      Can’t thumbs up 11:09am’s comment so this comment is in reflection of the CNS comment within which is SPOT ON.
      Thumbs up to that

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually, it is FAR from SPOT ON.

        I suggest you review my follow up post when the comments are updated.

    • Anonymous says:

      Respect to you CNS..

      Implying that allowing TWO consenting ADULTS to love each other will result in pedophilia is akin to implying that allowing adults to eat meat will result in cannibalism.

      • Anonymous says:

        No one implied any such thing.
        What webpage are you people on?

        See my response to CNS for a thorough breakdown of the issue at hand.

        Thanks.

        • Anonymous says:

          You said it yourself!

          “The challenge at hand is as follows; once we depart from heterosexuality being the only acceptable sexual orientation, we open the doors for analysis and consideration of all other forms thereof.”

          You’re directly implying heterosexual relationships should be the only acceptable form of relationship in society else we open the doors to everything else. False. You cannot claim that allowing homosexuality is a gateway to accepting pedophilia relationships. 2 adults. No children.

      • Anonymous says:

        Damn, that’s actually a good analogy because I’ve seen Unison try that argument before.

        “if we go against the bible and allow homosexuality then what’s to stop us from pedophilia?”

        “if we eat chicken legs what’s to stop me from eating your leg?”

        Common sense lol.. I doubt criminals/pedos have any.

    • Anonymous says:

      What the hell is wrong with you? I shutter to think you’ve procreated and passed on your ignorant nonsense.

    • Anonymous says:

      Dear CNS,

      Definition:
      “Pedophilia (alternatively spelt paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual ATTRACTION to prepubescent children.”

      In other words, pedophilia is NOT the act of sexual activity with a child or underage person. It is the mindset, a sexual orientation.

      Other forms of sexual orientation are; homosexual and heterosexual, amongst others.

      Not so long ago, the standard and accepted description of homosexuality was as follows;

      “Homosexuality is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult experiences an exclusive (or primary) sexual attraction to the same sex.”

      Again, we are dealing with a sexual orientation NOT the act of actual gay sex or sexual activity.

      Do you follow me so far?
      It comes as no surprise that you (and your supporters) have completely missed the point of my post – which is a common mistake at times like these.

      The operative term here is ORIENTATION.
      (It was capitalised in my original post for a reason.)

      Your response was based on sexual acts, therefore failed to address my actual post.

      E.g. I am a straight male. My friend is a gay male.
      My friend is sexually attracted to me.
      There will be no sexual activity between my friend and I because I do not share his sexual orientation.
      Nevertheless, that makes him no less gay than he is.
      Gay (or homosexual) is his sexual orientation.

      Granted, young children have no say in the matter and if the orientation of pedophilia is acted upon, we have a situation of child rape or sexual abuse.
      HOWEVER, that still does not translate pedophilia itself into sex with a child – there is a clear distinction.

      As it is a disturbing issue, most fail to understand and grasp the elements.

      However, due to supposed enlightenment, political correctness, or social progress, we have seen a dramatic shift in respect to homosexuality and therein lies the genesis of the complex and disturbing issue at hand.

      How does one classify or qualify a sexual orientation?
      Gays are granted protections and equality today on the basis of their sexual orientation being an immutable characteristic of their being.

      Is pedophilia not also an immutable characteristic of one’s being?

      Today it is a great offence to suggest one chooses to be gay.
      Do pedophiles CHOOSE to be pedophiles?

      Does rate of incidence qualify a sexual orientation?
      Many argue this is a basis of homosexuality being removed from the list of “psychiatric disorders”.
      Therefore, what about pedophilia?

      The world over there is clear evidence of a high incidence of pedophilia – and this is by way of discovered child abuse only – exclusive of those hiding the sexual attraction / orientation toward children.

      The challenge at hand is as follows; once we depart from heterosexuality being the only acceptable sexual orientation, we open the doors for analysis and consideration of all other forms thereof.

      (The ability of one to give consent is IRRELEVANT to an ORIENTATION.
      I cannot stress this point enough! E.g. My lack of consent to sex with my gay male friend has ZERO impact on his sexual orientation. He will still be attracted to men in the morning.)

      Or we could just opt to be “bigots” and hypocrites in this regard as most appear to find acceptable.

      Bear in mind, until recently, the world and its authorities were confident in their stance re homosexuality being a horrible and criminal sexual orientation and the penalty for being revealed as such was severe on countless occasions.

      Have we finally got it all figured out? Has the train stopped? Are we good?
      What is the way forward?

      In short time, society will be faced with a myriad of challenging questions and assessments in our apparently bottom-less quest for tolerance combined with the junking of traditional parameters – all in the name of political correctness, of course.

      You don’t have to believe any of the above – but it shall come to pass.
      I suggest we all prepare for it.

      Good luck.

      CNS: OK, drum roll…….. you have a point. There is an argument that being attracted to children is, as you say, an orientation that the person in question cannot help. An interesting commentary we received from a reader a while back lays out the argument – see Dealing with paedophilia

      The short version is that if society treats attraction to children as an orientation and not as a crime or a mental disorder, it is easier to prevent. But that’s the point – whether it’s nature or nurture (and I do not know if there is any consensus on this) we still want to prevent it because there are victims, i.e. someone is physically or emotionally harmed.

      I think we agree that what goes on inside people’s heads is not a crime and cannot be legislated away. It is the act that is a crime, and it remains society’s responsibility to protect the vulnerable. So where we part ways is that I do not believe – and it has not happened in any progressive country – that acceptance of homosexuality leads to acceptance of sexual acts with children.

      • Anonymous says:

        There is now overwhelming evidence that criminality is hard wired into the brain too. It is not such a “moral choice” as previously believed. But that does not mean there is not an imperative to lock the blighters up to protect society. The issue will be whether one day we have the guts to scan their brains and lock them up before the commit crimes.

      • Anonymous says:

        “Paedophilia” is not an “alternative spelling”, not in a British territory at any rate. We should not lower ourselves to the standards of those that did not study classics.

      • Anonymous says:

        @ CNS,

        Again, we are not “parting ways” as I am only concerned with society’s fickle classifications between sexual orientations and psychiatric disorders within people.

        How does pedophilia differ from homosexuality?

        Both represent an instinctive orientation toward what is an undeniable deviation from the naturally / biologically intended primary function of human sex.
        Therefore, how can one be defined as a “psychological disorder” and the other not?

        That is the road on which we find ourselves.
        It will be interesting to see where it ends.

        *Thanks for that throwback link. Very interesting exchange in that comment thread.

        • Anonymous says:

          You’re ridiculous. There is a huge difference between an act between two consenting adults and an adult preying on innocent children.

          The two aren’t even comparable and it’s outrageous that the importance of this topic, which is the victimization of children incase you’ve forgotten, is being overshadowed by this failed analogy.

          Clearly you’re having to rationalize this in a far fetched manner to appease your own conscience of your inner thoughts…

          Signed off – the homo

    • Say it like it is says:

      CNS I cannot for the life of me fathom how 11.09am could receive 3 thumbs up..I am afraid to say it indicates we have a number of retarded contributors whose to be in sympathy with this sexual deviant. Your comments are certainly spot on.
      Having said this it is possible there is confusion as to whether the “thumbs” relate to the contributor or to your response.

    • History says:

      I have read the replies and I see one comment that keeps popping up.

      “Classical Education”

      I for one do not hold this “Education” to a high standard because of the simple fact of the matter.

      In Roman times the Roman Rulers of Brittania believed, and quite regularly engaged in, the sexual exploitation of young boys for sexual gratification. It was considered to be NOBLE for a Lorde to have sex with underage boys and the younger the better.

      When Brittania became what it is today, the UK, that trend continued. In fact it is still acceptable, although less advertised today, for a Lorde to have a young male sexual partner, hence why a large portion of those Lordes travel to Asian countries.

      Because this situation us so embedded in the UK culture it was necessary for them to push for what they called “Human Rights” and legal recognition of GAY rights.

      Just a little history.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Lets get this guy some actual help!

  10. Anonymous says:

    Wish they would stop labelling people by a district they are not even from. 90 percent of the time these criminals cant stay in their own district, so they move to west bay or george town etc. CNS should put up a pic of this fella to show people who he really is.

  11. Robyn says:

    He used to touch himself outside our complex dirty man, police used to come and have meetings saying he was harmless. We all had whistles to alert other neighbors wen he was around ?

    • Anonymous says:

      Yup this same pedo pulled out his wanker and tapped my friend on her shoulder at her apartment. Hopefully, he goes away for a long time.

      • Anonymous says:

        And yet our police allowed him to be free to do this? At what point are they negligent? At what point does their negligence become criminal?

        • Anonymous says:

          You do know that police only police. They can arrest, but they don’t jail people. That is left to the courts. Don’t like the sentencing then lobby your MLA to amend the laws.

          • Anonymous says:

            So when the guy is caught openly masturbating in public, was it the police or the courts that said, don’t pay him no mind. He is not hurting anyone?

        • Anonymous says:

          Not the police, our courts are to blame.

  12. Anonymous says:

    All the Phsycologists in the world cannot cure a Paedophile…….fact!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Not the most ignorant end their posts online with either “fact” or “end of” or “nuff said”.

  13. Buford T Justice says:

    Jail this sicko same dude that was hanging round Smith road plaza with his creepy behavior with a bandana on his head finally got caught this time now trying to molest people children better get off that stuff ???

  14. Anonymous says:

    Sick pervert! Hope he gets the max sentence!

  15. Anonymous says:

    This gives Cayman such a bad bad name. We depend on tourism.

    • Anonymous says:

      Highly unlikely, I’m sure that Cayman is a very much safer place compared to the places any tourist here comes from.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Castration order?

  17. Anonymous says:

    Hon. Justice Chapple is not a familiar name here so he is probably a visiting Judge but i sure hope if the accused is guilty of this crime his sentence is one that serves as a real deterent to those who might even think of harming our children

  18. Anonymous says:

    So did the sisters say the person picked them up and/or tried to carry them away? Did the grandfather say that? Did the person seem to try and runaway with them or could it have been “playing a game”?
    Seems sketchy. Don’t touch anyone’s children.

  19. Cess Pita says:

    For sure this vile man will not get any discount on his sentence as he tried to lie his way out of it.

  20. Anonymous says:

    44 month sentence in April 2017, attempts to abduct a child 13 months later. Well done system, well done.

  21. Anonymous says:

    I’ve chased this guy away from my house before. Complete drain on society.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Creepy fella with a long rap sheet. Put him away before, only for him to be released on ridiculous technicality’s. Had anything happened to these girls, a lot of people would have had a lot to answer for.

    • Anonymous says:

      They still do. We should not wait for someone to be raped or killed before we take this crap seriously. Who made the determinations that allowed him to be free and why? Can we please have some accountability without having to have a dead tourist before someone in power actually does something meaningful.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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