Cops retain gun in contentious case

| 14/08/2019 | 50 Comments
Cayman News Service
Cayman Islands courts

(CNS): Police have confirmed that they have retained a gun that was seized from a property in the Crystal Harbour area of West Bay in March in a case that has become particularly contentious. A wealthy US businessman in whose house the weapon was found was arrested and is now suing a local blogger for defamation. The police have confirmed that Blake Ducharme was released without charge after they discovered that the weapon was not his.

The case was made public when Cayman Marl Road reported the arrest and raised questions about why the millionaire had not been not charged when other people had in cases that on the surface appeared to be comparable.

In response, Ducharme took legal action and filed suit, securing an interim injunction to have the story removed. But Sandra Hill, the administrator of the popular local blog, defied the order, standing by the story she had posted, which not only questioned why Ducharme had been released without charge but also the whereabouts of the gun.

But police told CNS on Wednesday that they had possession of the firearm.

In a short response to our questions, an RCIPS spokesperson stated, “The weapon was recovered by police and police are currently in possession of it. Comprehensive investigative inquiries were conducted, and it was determined that the weapon did not belong to Mr Ducharme.”

Although a file was prepared and sent to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, no charges were preferred, according to the spokesperson, who confirmed that the RCIPS is not investigating Ducharme for any other offences.

The acting director of public prosecutions told CNS in response to questions that the office “would not ordinarily comment on the work of any investigative agency”.

Both Hill, who also alleged customs violations in the same article, and Ducharme’s lawyer from Ogiers were in court Wednesday over the defiance of the order. The lawyers fell short of asking for Hill to be jailed but sought to sequester her assets as a way of forcing her to remove the article. However, after legal arguments by Hill and Ducharme’s lawyer, the judge adjourned the case to allow Hill time to take legal advice, on the condition that she obey the order and take down the original article.

“I granted the injunction because I believed there was an argument that the content could be defamatory,” Justice Ian Kawaley, who heard the case, reminded Hill. However, the judge appeared sympathetic to Hill, who was unrepresented in what she has called a David and Goliath case, but he pointed to a number of factors in her article where she had made serious allegations against Ducharme and local law enforcement officials.

After the case was over Hill told CNS that she planned to continue the fight, because she stood by her story and was prepared to go to trial.

However, the case may not be what it appears. CNS has learned that the weapon in question, which is now in police custody, was lawfully licensed to an unnamed individual who had arrived in the Cayman Islands from the United States on Ducharme’s boat. The weapon was then said to have been inadvertently taken to Ducharme’s home by the owner of the gun while Ducharme was off island and unaware of the existence of the weapon.

CNS understands that in such circumstances the firearm should have been reported to customs officials but it is not clear whether or not that happened.

Tags: , ,

Category: Crime, Police

Comments (50)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    She’s one of the few interesting people around.

    8
    12
  2. Anonymous says:

    She should really stick to posting pictures of fender benders and obstructing the efforts of the police. The things she is capable of.

    21
    21
  3. Doing anything illegal to boost ratings? says:

    First, Sandy posted something against someone after which they took her to court and successfully got a court order for her to remove it from social media.

    Second, she wilfully refused to comply with the court order and further publicly declared her intention that she was prepared to go to jail before she took it down.

    Third, faced with certain jail for ignoring a court order, Sandy quietly took down the article while NOT reporting the ENTIRE truth of the matter to her followers that she in fact took the article down.

    Sandy is TOTALLY BIASED when reporting the facts when it comes down to HER acts, yet viciously goes ALL IN on anyone else.

    And what happened to all that big talk about running her CMR show from jail?

    We’re still waiting on that.

    43
    7
    • Anonymous says:

      Amazing how you’re so wrong in your facts. His lawyers said they were not seeking jail. So faced with certain jail is an inaccurate statement. They were seeking financial penalties and even that the judge was hesitant to grant.

      What was actually said in court since you don’t care about facts is if she didn’t remove it she couldn’t even argue her case as the court could refused to hear her. Seems to me as an observer there that was the reason she agreed in the interim to take it down and appeal the decision.

      2
      4
  4. Anonymous says:

    CNS, you didn’t publish my comment about XXXX

    CNS: Sorry, we can’t find any reference to the news item you refer to.

  5. Da-wa-u-get says:

    I’m not a personal fan of SH, that being said, she does shine light on many things that would otherwise be swept under the carpet because the perpetrators were from the “monied ” layer of our society.
    Many of us that live here can cite many examples of sudden attacks of deaf – blind and muteness amongst our law enforcement leadership over the last 4 or 5 decades!
    XXXXX

    73
    17
  6. Anonymous says:

    The gun is out of circulation and will be destroyed – job done, end of story. Why push it?

    7
    67
  7. Anonymous says:

    All she is doing is putting a spotlight on corruption on this island that favors the rich and who you know. Good for her and CNS for doing everyone else’s jobs. I wish more Caymanians had her balls, morality and intelligence.

    90
    20
  8. Penal Code Section 121 Disobedience of Lawful Duty says:

    Penal Code Section 121 Disobedience of Lawful Duty
    “A person who wilfully disobeys any law by doing any act which such law forbids, or by omitting to do any act which such law requires to be done, and which concerns the public or any part of the public, commits an offence and, unless the law provides some other penalty, is liable to imprisonment for two years.”

    So many judges have given Sandy warnings about her repeatedly breaching people’s privacy and their universal human right to due process.

    XXXX

    Which other news media outlet would continue to defy gag orders from the courts or would incite kill threats from the public against someone when naming a teenage sexual offender?
    https://caymannewsservice.com/2015/08/suspects-ability-to-plead-in-child-sex-case-in-question/

    Even though Sandy publicly bangs her judge’s gavel on her show when declaring her “judgment” against whomever she is talking about if she is impersonating a judge, she is still subject to obey the law.

    51
    14
  9. Caymanian gossips says:

    XXXXX

    As for CMR and Hill, she is a blogger not a journalist, most of what she posts is from Cayman’s marl road, which we love gossip.. Gotta say she has some big b… Who she takes on.
    I didn’t agree with everything she writes but she does at time do some good, like child abuse and rape cases.

    68
    18
  10. Anon says:

    Sandra is not a journalist. She is a massive gossip with an over inflated ego who wants to be seen as a martyr. Of course she is saying that she will go to jail over this story. She is above the law, didn’t you know? She wants to be seen as acting on behalf of the ‘common folk’ and ‘fighting the good fight’. She is actually an ill informed, stubborn, hot head who acts before she thinks. Isn’t if funny that CNS makes a quick enquiry with RCIPS about the gun and finds out straight away that it didn’t even belong to this gentleman?! Even if this businessman wins the case, every time you google his name, he is going to be connected to these allegations. And that is point. Everyone who ‘features’ on her website and facebook page are forever tarnished with the untruths she tells which can potentially hurt their careers, their families and businesses. Someone really needs to end CMR.

    86
    25
  11. Anonymous says:

    If you read her blog then you are part of the problem. stop reading it, stop commenting and stop forwarding the articles and bingo no more marl road

    66
    33
    • Anonymous says:

      Without her none of us would even know an illegal unlicensed firearm was identified as being in the islands and no scrutiny would be applied to the police in relation to their handling of the situation. I am not suggesting that the police did anything wrong, but it is appropriate in any democracy that those with power have some scrutiny applied to their conduct. We need to find a balance so that the public can trust the authorities as fully as possible. That trust has diminished significantly, perhaps for good reason!

      79
      21
      • Anonymous says:

        Agreed, balance is important, naming people is a step to far. We are telling our kids to watch yourself online because things stay forever, but naming someone without the full story is not right when it stays out there forever as ‘fact’.

        43
        1
        • Anonymous says:

          If she had left it at foreign caucasian multi millionaire it would have been ignored and have no scrutiny applied to it. The mainstream press wouldn’t even touch it on that basis. That is the problem. Apart from CNS, that cannot be everywhere all the time, there is no free open investigative journalism in Cayman. Sandra seems to fill a void, however inelegantly, or even inappropriately. She shines light in the darkest corners, and perhaps allows us to see things that would otherwise fester. We might prefer not to see them, but then there would be a risk that nothing would ever get fixed.

          46
          14
          • Anonymous says:

            Half of what she “shines a light on” isn’t even true!!! She makes it up, it is not just ‘inelegant’ it is malicious and wrong! Just wait for what is coming on her horrible misinformation on the BT alleged child abuse incident. Misinformation is dangerous!

            5
            2
      • Anonymous says:

        Very true!

        16
        1
      • Anonymous says:

        Exactly! This would be a non-story – she broke it and now the police are forced to answer some questions. Even if it’s only 2!

        23
        2
    • Anonymous says:

      Simple – don’t read it. I’m not sure she will care. BUT I do see she has the largest readership according to the FB analytics they have shared. So … seems a lot of people secretly reading and going back for more too!

      8
      4
  12. Anonymous says:

    Hill is out of control, she can harass people and make their lives miserable on a daily basis and nobody does anything….best thing to do is boycott her and not to read her so called news!!

    78
    38
  13. Anon says:

    Everyone tip toes around Sandra Hill she’s not a qualified journalist she a blogger !
    She needs to be dealt with not pandered to by the legal system
    5 percent of what she prints maybe the truth the rest is her twisted opinion. She deletes Facebook posts that doesn’t support her view. And leaves the 30 or so supporters comments up

    The premise of law is that you are innocent until proved guilty ..Sandra has the opposite approach guilty then you have to prove your innocent

    Clearly she has no impartiality in her article against Ducharme

    In the last few months I’d like to congratulate her on naming and shaming alleged child rapists and alleged corruption from high officials. Therefore totally jeopardizing any potential future trial in Cayman

    I’d like her to congratulate her in naming the 11 year old victims mother and therefore disclosing any anonymity this child should have ( it’s an innocent child for heavens sake)

    The list goes on with her personal attack on Ohearn , Williams2 owners and the Mendoza’s …she incites violence and is polarizing the community

    I’d like to congratulate the RCIP who clearly have a leak in their organization who keeps feeding this vile women the stories in the first place
    Instead of doing their jobs and prosecuting her to the full extent of the law

    108
    35
  14. Anonymous says:

    Hill may not have been represented but is a qualified lawyer and no stranger to the operations of the court, both civil and criminal, or on the effect and consequences of breaching injunctions or the laws of defamation. She must have a very short memory given her run in on similar issues with Marco Archer. She got off lightly- most other judges would be considering jailing her for contempt pending her taking down the article and complying with the court order.

    53
    15
  15. Anonymous says:

    Wish I had the free time, balls, and fks to give to blog to the point where I got sued.

    39
  16. Anonymous says:

    So many questions.

    20
    1

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.