Marl Road owner guilty of cyberbullying

| 06/08/2020 | 119 Comments
Cayman News Service
Sandra Hill

(CNS): Sandra Hill, the owner of the Cayman Marl Road (CMR) website, has been convicted of abusing and harassing on an ICT network in connection with a podcast on the site and related social media, where she accused local businessman Matthew Leslie of being a sexual predator. In the first case in which the ICT law was used to prosecute a member of the media, the judge said he did not believe Hill was a proper journalist.

The case was heard by Justice Roger Chapple, sitting alone without a jury. In his written verdict read out in court on Thursday he said that “cyberbullying was an awful phenomenon” and was an apt description in this case.

As she left court following the verdict, Hill told CNS she was not surprised by the verdict, given the way that the case had been managed from the start, and once she had seen the full written ruling she would likely be appealing the conviction.

Reading his judgment via Zoom from the UK, Justice Chapple said he found that both Hill and Leslie had lied during their evidence. But he was satisfied that Hill was engaged in a long-standing campaign to harass Leslie and saw herself as a crusader, believing she was protecting the public from him.

The judge said the crown had demonstrated that Leslie had been seriously abused and harassed. And while it was obvious he was also annoyed — another element in the charge against Hill — the judge said the law should be playing no part in whether or not people were annoyed by anything on the internet.

The judge said his decision was based on whether Hill had intended to seriously abuse and harass Leslie and his right not to be bullied, balanced against Hill’s right to freedom of expression. Justice Chapple said he was satisfied that she had gone beyond the bounds of what is “a jealously guarded” but not an unfettered right by targeting Leslie in the way she did and lying about her intentions and knowledge of what this campaign would do to him.

He found that Hill was not a proper journalist as she did not follow any professional standards or specified journalistic ethics in the course of her work. The judge also said she had not given her target the opportunity to respond. He said true investigative journalists invite the subjects of their work to give their side of the story.

During the trial the court heard that Leslie was blocked from accessing Cayman Marl Road.

Leslie, who has run for elected office twice, has never been convicted of any sexual offenses, However, he was exposed on social media soliciting a prostitute, which derailed his second attempt at a seat in the Legislative Assembly in 2017.

In the podcast broadcast on CMR, entitled “Surviving Matthew Leslie”, which Hill had styled on the “Surviving R-Kelly” TV mini-series, she had recounted numerous allegations about Leslie by a number of anonymous women and accused him of being a paedophile. She also spoke of historic allegations about women who were sexually abused by police officers back in the 1990s, when Leslie was a member of the service and had left under a cloud as a result of his connection to the case.

She also accused Leslie of improper business conduct, in particular in relation to the Winter Carnival he had organised after at least one person involved in the event claims that Leslie still owes him money.

Hill will be sentenced in October. But on Thursday she remained defiant about the subject she was addressing, saying that if she had “to go sit down in Fairbanks” as a result of exposing the truth about a person who she claims poses a risk to the community, she was prepared to do that.

Share your vote!

How do you feel after reading this?
  • Fascinated
  • Happy
  • Sad
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Afraid
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , ,

Category: Courts, Crime

Comments (119)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Annie says:

    In the words of Janis Ian. You’re mean girl Sandra. No one will feel sorry for you, because you are mean for the sake of being mean. Sad though, that that the billy goat will now be able to cross the bridge.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Never forget the threats against those children’s lives, too…

  3. Anonymous says:


    CNS – if you would like me to send you the email, I will.

    CNS: No, please don’t. It sounds spam email and you should delete without clicking on anything, or send it to the RCIPS as they have the technology to deal with it and can see if it is criminal or not. Please don’t send it to anyone else.

  4. Anonymous says:

    As I understand it, the stuff she said was not challenged as to whether it was true. She was convicted because it abused her target? So telling the truth is a crime if it hurts the subject? Is that not comparable to a criminal record disclosure hurting someone’s chances of getting a job? What BS! Very fair system

    • Anonymous says:

      From what I was told, he sued her and got a default judgement on the slander. She offered no defense. The podcast activated the criminal side because she did not stop the harrassment. She got what she deserved. So many others out there that should go after. Leslie not my favorite person but she was obsessed with him.

      • Anonymous says:

        @12:41 pm she has no shame and seems to be taunting the prosecutor and courts. Even today she still at it and asking people to make memes of her in jail to win a prize. Leslie not a fan of mine but she clearly has no respect for anyone that tries to correct. Her way or the highway AKA a bully.

    • Anonymous says:

      @10:34am you are clearly missing the point of everything. The issue with CMR aka Sandra is she makes things personal. She did the same stuff to Mr. Archer, tried to destroy him plus numerous others. Why can CNS report on a subject and not degrade people? She could have reported on Mr Leslie but what she did was set out on a bullying exercise. Same thing with the Minister of Health and the issue surround his wife exercising during covid. She doesn’t just report she sets out to destroy, degrade and call people names and bring into her reporting ex wives and things that have absolutely nothing to do with her. She is not reporting, she is gossiping. She sets her on hooks on someone and don’t let go until she has climaxed 💣 . That is an unhealthy person and I dare I say bio-polar at times.

      If you are still lost look at headlines and compare CNS, INEWS, Loop and compass against Ms Hill and maybe you can see why she ain’t no journalist!! Your comparison about same a police record foolishness and you know it.

    • Peter Parker says:

      There is a saying, “Two wrongs don’t make a right”.
      While her intentions MAY have been sound, her conduct was unlawful and she knew this, yet she refused to change her approach.
      I don’t know anyone who thinks much of Mr. L, but nether do I of Ms. C-H. Her form of ‘journalism‘ leaves much to be desired as she does not properly research / verify her source material and prints outright lies.
      I truly hope that she learns a lesson from this and changes her approach in the future. All of us are redeemable if we are willing to learn & change.

    • Anonymous says:

      She did not prove that what she was saying was true. It’s not up to Leslie to prove that he is innocent, he is not on trial. If you’re saying that he should then prove it like Hill should have done. Otherwise it is slander.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Calling CMR gutter journalism would be a compliment. She is the lowest of the low.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Only moments after the court case she proceeded to bully XXXXX on her Instagram account. Lock her up! She is dangerous to this society!

  7. JTB says:

    She’s a vigilante, not a journalist

  8. Anonymous says:

    Something tells me we won’t have seen the last of Sandra! Anyway, i enjoy reading Marl Road knowing that its sensational and not to be taken as fact. With CNS, the 2 of them have taken over the local news/entertainment as the legacies all but disappear (Cayman27, Compass..soon). If CMR goes, another will jump in rapidily as there is a market for it, sometimes better the devil you know.

  9. Anonymous says:

    I’m not a fan of CMR.
    I read all the negative comments about SH here, what makes me laugh is that all of you, including myself follow her FB page.
    If we all left as followers she would have a page to report (well gossip) about anyone BUT of course we won’t becuase we are Caymanians and love the gossip from the marl road.
    I’m glad she was found guilty.

  10. BYE, FELICIA! says:

    Here’s the law that Sandra was found guilty on indictment:

    Information and Communications Technology Law, Section 90 Use of an ICT service to defraud, abuse, annoy, threaten or harass

    “(1) A person who knowingly uses an ICT network or ICT service to defraud, abuse, annoy, threaten or harass any other person commits an offence and is liable, on summary conviction on indictment to a fine of twenty thousand dollars and to imprisonment for two years.”

    “(2) In addition to imposing any penalty under subsection (1), the Court may, by order, restrain the person from using ICT services or ICT networks as it sees fit.”

    That’s $20,000 AND 2 years imprisonment.

    Not “or” 2 years.

    “AND” 2 years.

    Judging from how disgusted the judge seemed with Sandra in his ruling, chances are that Sandra’s getting the maximum penalty as provided by law…especially with about a half dozen other criminal trials waiting in line!

    • Anonymous says:

      She also has the right to appeal the case and can remain on bail during that time !!!!.

    • Anonymous says:

      A glorious day for Justice in the Cayman Islands. Persons have been using CMR to smear their dislikes for years. Shame on those persons.

      Sandra simply went too far in this case.

      We all applaud persons who shine a light on private sector incompetence and any government mismanaged but it has to be done in a responsible manner.

      I hope Sandra will reflect on her behaviour while she is in fairbanks and the impact she has caused to her own family and others.

      The judge has put another nail in CMR coffin by ruling she is not a journalist.

      I am boycotting any company that advertises on a site that would harass another person.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Y’all are showing your caymankind Christianity bs very well when it comes to Sandra. Wow.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Thank goodness the industry I work in has determined that Facebook is Fake and not to be taken seriously … In Cayman they believe face book is the government operations portal..and to be believed ..just another joke…

    • Anonymous says:

      You couldn’t resist taking an opportunity to insult the Cayman Islands. Good luck to you with your insulting attitude.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Despicable person who got what she deserves.

  14. Anonymous says:

    I don’t understand why she refers to CMR in the third as if CMR isn’t her. She makes it sound like she’s not behind it and alway say that “someone else puts the stories up so she can’t take anything down” even other outlets report stating she’s the administrator as opposed to the owner. She’s the head cook and dishwasher. I’m happy the judge saw through the evasive behaviour. If twitter and Facebook can pull Trump..then let’s see here! This ruling is only going to send her plump mad to bully harder .

    If memory serves me well, years ago Elio Solomon had a web page bearing a similar name and reported using that trash style news – can’t recall name, but it got shut down or something happened and disappeared

  15. Anonymous says:

    Wonder if this news is posted on CMR?

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually they posted it before anyone else did and she also hosted a livestream from the court steps before anyone else had it up.

  16. Anon says:

    Sandra Hill is criminal something we all knew.
    She thrives of making peoples lives a misery and certainly a journalist she is not . There is no impartiality and no opportunity for her poor victims to even have a say. She simply blocks their point of view And she wouldn’t know a the truth of it fell out of her shower cap !
    Cayman spends literally millions to carve a warm welcoming cayman kind experience for tourists and overseas investors which 90 percent of the population rely upon for their jobs.

    Sandra simply Railroads this ethos she is an embarrassment and belittles without fact every aspect of life / government with her vitriolic vile opinion
    She is jealous of anybody who is successful and thrives on her people’s misery
    Clearly the Cayman Islands need to update its laws on cyber bullying and enforce these charlatans Who profess the freedom of speech to destroy innocent people
    And equally to blame are the uneducated lowlife followers of hers who have nothing better to do than “join the bandwagon” my suggestion to them are to go get a job and make something of your miserable lives .. as far as Sandra hill is concerned I hope the judge bans her from the ITC network and locks her up in Fairbanks. Great to see you get your own medicine !

  17. Anonymous says:

    Like her or not, she takes risks. Anyone else reporting on “four lines of Pablo’s finest”?

  18. Anonymous says:

    I can’t think of anything good to say about the woman, but I really don’t see why our government should have become involved in takin her to court.

    If the wild chickens start pursuing and eating baby green iguanas would that bother anyone? Or if the green iguanas ate the wild chickens, it’s a blessing either way.

  19. Anonymous says:

    Without CMR and CNS alot would have been brushed under the carpet. You know its true. Exposure is good.

    • Anonymous says:

      @ 4.53 Utter crap. CNS doesn’t do hatchet jobs on anyone. She does. The sooner the plug is pulled on her keyboard the better. Too many gullible fools believe the dross she writes.

  20. Anonymous says:

    I was shocked to see Miracle Brokers advertising with her. Thought Irma had more common sense. Doesn’t she know who this Sandra Hill is? Boycott them all.

  21. Anonymous says:

    This citizen, like everyone else, has a God-given right to earn an income by which to pay bills, feed herself and build a rainy-day fund; however, if her livelihood depended on me reading the questionable material she publishes on her platform, she would have filed for bankruptcy a long time ago. In other words: if you keep reading, she will keep doing this. Think about it, Cayman.

  22. Anonymous says:

    “Proper journalist” lol. OK boomer.

  23. Anonymous says:

    If you have been victimized by this muckraker, on her website or her Facebook page or otherwise, then get in contact with the Ombudsman. They have the power to investigate her and fine her…they just need people to complain.

    CNS: The ombudsman is a government watchdog. It does not have the power to investigate a non-governmental entity. Take a while to look at the website here.

    • Anonymous says:

      I am referring to the Data Protection Law which covers any organization that processes personal data, government or otherwise. There is a big exemption in that law for journalism but as we can clearly see now this judge doesn’t believe she qualifies as a journalist.

      CNS has a privacy policy. Why? The Data Protection Law. So yes, the Ombudsman, under the data protection law, certainly covers private entities.

      This is from the Ombudsman’s manual on the Data Protection Law:
      “If you exercise control over personal data by making decisions about why and how personal data is
      handled, you are the data controller.”
      “The DPL defines processing very broadly, covering any conceivable use of data. In fact, any activity which
      affects personal data in any way constitutes processing; mere storage or retention will constitute
      processing as well.”
      “A data controller can be any legal person, i.e. an individual, corporation, either aggregate or sole, or any
      club, society, association, public authority or other body, of one or more persons.”

      “The DPL applies to you as a data controller if you are:
      o established in the Cayman Islands, and the personal data is processed in the context of that
      establishment; or,
      o not established in the Cayman Islands but the data is being processed in the Cayman Islands
      (otherwise than for transit purposes).
      “Established” in the Cayman Islands means:
      o you are ordinarily resident in the Islands;
      o you are a body incorporated or registered as a foreign company in the Cayman Islands;
      o you are a partnership or other unincorporated association formed under Cayman Islands law;
      o you maintain an office, branch or agency, or regular practice in the Cayman Islands.”

      “An example of where a data controller is not established in the Cayman Islands but where personal data
      is being processed in the Cayman Islands other than for transit purposes would be where an overseas
      entity targets and collects personal data of Cayman residents. The applicability of the DPL will not be
      triggered simply because a foreign-based service is accessible or available to Cayman residents; there
      must be an indication that the data controller is seeking out Cayman residents for its service.”

      An online social network based in a third country solicits Cayman residents as users. The personal data
      is processed in the Cayman Islands because the personal data of residents is collected locally. The DPL
      is triggered because the social network actively targets Cayman residents.”

      All of the above in quotes is directly from the Ombudsman manual which anyone can read online. Interestingly, the example sounds very much like The Marl Road!—Guide-for-Data-Controllers.pdf

      The Ombudsman can put on a free seminar for you as it has done for many other entities if you want to understand the law more fully and how everything in it applies to private organizations just as much as public. In some cases it can even apply to private citizens!

      CNS: I stand corrected.

      • Anonymous says:

        The Ombudsman can even levy administrative penalties of up to $250,000 without a court of law even being involved. Of course, the penalty can be appealed to the court. The court can also levy a fine on top of the administrative penalty if it thinks it’s appropriate.

        Leslie should have filed, and likely can still file, a complaint to the Ombudsman. Under the Data Protection Law if there is a finding that the Marl Road contravened the law then Leslie could seek damages under section 13 which states:
        “A person who suffers damage by reason of a contravention by a data controller of any requirement of this Law has a cause of action for compensation from the data controller for that damage.”

        It seems like he would have a great case!

        Anyone can seek redress under this law regardless of where they live or their nationality. There are many rights and protections for people under this law but sadly no one has made the appropriate effort to tell the public about them!

        If you want a “Viewpoint” written about the law just say “Yes, please” and I’ll contact you.

        CNS: Yes, please

        • Anonymous says:

          What personal data of Matthew Leslie was used or misused? She was reporting on allegations of him being a sexual predator and shammer, as afar as I am aware she did not misuse or mishandled any of his personal data in her reporting. She has done it in the past in other instances on other people but not in the Matthew Leslie case….

          • Anonymous says:

            Actually she did by releasing those voice notes on him and his wife. Also she released the private info on all his staff that worked for him. Their names and contact info. I was one of them and reported it to the police. That was a breach. Also other business info on him went around. She even contacted me for an interview and I told her go to hell. She kmows exactly who this is if she reading this comment.

      • Anonymous says:

        Where does it say that the ombudsman can enforce this?

        • Anonymous says:

 Take a look.
          The Ombudsman Law is very short but says the Ombudsman enforces the Data Protection Law.
          If you don’t believe me just give that office a call. They actually answer their phones!

    • Anonymous says:

      Shows how much you know. 😂

  24. Yeah but... says:

    It would have been better if she went down over one of her other attacks. It was difficult to feel good cheering for the other side in this one.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s called KARMA. It has its timing. She’s been sowing bad seeds from the beginning, Matthew is just the one to chop the weeds down.

      • Anonymous says:

        Matthew came out of nothing and rose to become a player in the game. He pissed a few people off along the way but that is every businessman for you. Also XXXX. That is how they maintain power and influence. So it took someone like Matthew to cho the weed that is Sandra. She messed with the wrong one that time. So I do not see it as a win for Matthew. I see it as a win for everyone she has scandal and harrass.

  25. Slip slidin’ away says:

    I understand the basis of the ruling, but there is something unsettling about a single judge determining what a journalist is in such a subjective way. It’s a slippery slope… BTW, watch those Facebook posts, people!

    • Anonymous says:

      @3:23pm please elaborate why you find it unsettling. I think it’s clear. She’s not a journalist! I don’t see any other journalist bullying anyone. Not ever Wendy when she was called stupid bullied or went on a witch hunt? It would be a single judge or jury so do share.

      I do agree with you though that people need to watch those Facebook posts and private messages they are sending to her and leaked info. All that stuff is traceable and leaked data/info is a crime. She makes no secret in saying she has people in all places and I’m sure she’ll make no hesitation in revealing sources if you piss her off.

      • Slip slidin' away says:

        (Responded to wrong comment previously) Fair comment/question. I actually was referring to facebook posts in general that criticize other people as being subject to prosecution. And I would add tweets to that. This sets an interesting standard for criticism of people holding themselves out in commerce and for elective office, notwithstanding my personal distaste for(journalistic or other) vendettas.

        As to my being unsettled, if I applied your definition of journalist, I would not be unsettled. But I imagine the umbrella of what constitutes a journalist and journalism is broader than you suggest. The appeal will be interesting.

  26. Anonymous says:

    Justice finally! She is a menace to society. Through her lies, gossip mongering, and wickedness she has embarrassed and caused much harm to innocent people. I hope her “website” is shut down. And to all her followers who obviously have some deep-seated jealousy and resentment issues toward other people, go and find something positive to do with your lives.

  27. Anonymous says:

    She’s exactly where she’s supposed to be

    • Lov says:

      LOCK HER UP…..& She should be made to tell who her CRONIES & RATS are who work in government departments who have been giving her inside tips…They should be SACKED and LOCKED UP TOO…enjoy your time in Northward and hopefully none of this weekends out larky..

      • Show me your company and I'll tell you who you are says:

        The governor stated at the press briefing that the police were investigating those leaks and it is baffling which civil servant would risk being FIRED just to disclose any information to the press.

        Public Service Management Law states in Section 5(2)(h) that “The Public Servant’s Code of Conduct is as follows: a public servant shall not directly or indirectly disclose information which comes into his possession in his official capacity”.

        It is also a criminal offence to publish whatever “leaks” Sandra obtained when she conspired with the government workers in contravention of the Public Service Management Law.

        Section 322(a) Other Conspiracies state “A person who conspires with another or others to prevent or defeat the execution or enforcement of any law or regulation commits an offence.”

        Looks like they’re going after her and her entire gang!

    • Anonymous says:

      Yes. Free and loving life.

  28. Anonymous says:

    The most interesting part of this story is, ‘He found that Hill was not a proper journalist as she did not follow any professional standards or specified journalistic ethics in the course of her work. The judge also said she had not given her target the opportunity to respond. He said true investigative journalists invite the subjects of their work to give their side of the story.’

    That pretty much sums up the problem with the internet doesn’t it? Anyone can wake up one morning, decide they’ve suddenly become a ‘journalist’, create a fancy website (or simply use a platform like Facebook) and start posting complete rubbish online.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s time for Sandy Hermiston, who if you didn’t already know is the current Ombudsman, to look in to this creature’s “business” and knock her off her self-imagined pedestal! Do something Sandy, don’t be a “gray man”!

  29. Anonymous says:

    Sandra crossed too many limits which were unjustified. She needs more people to file lawsuits and maybe then she will be cognizant of how many innocent people she hurt with her pathetic approach to journalism.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Maybe she wants to go down in history as some sort of Caymanian martyr. She never shows remorse even when wrong so who knows but I feel she does have vendettas and uses the platform to get whatever is in her system out or she an angry person. I’ve watched her and she sits there and just rant for hours at time without moving…just like Trump jumping from topic to topic…very incoherent.

    I agree companies that advertise on CMR in my opinion cannot day they are against bullies when they support a bully

  31. Anonymous says:

    Da Wah She Get sickening thing she is

  32. Anonymous says:

    CMR states that they have the biggest audience. CMR thrives because people edge her on. Let’s see if her 20,000+ strong supporters will protest on her behalf against the courts decision.

    • Anonymous says:

      Everyone loves a good train wreck

    • Anonymous says:

      and you know when people ‘egg’ her on , they may end up with egg on their face.

    • Anonymous says:

      Protest? We dont want to protest for our pension. I doubt anybody going protest for her!

    • Anonymous says:

      Nope. More coming on board. Check the numbers and see.

      • Anonymous says:

        Nope, Sandra.
        Using robots and buying software to purchase followers don’t count for genuine increased numbers.
        Such a shame that your narcissism and ego shut you down when you were trying to get the highest followers and traffic to your site.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Whatever , just think of the number if high placed low lifes exposed thanks to CMR.

  34. Anonymous says:

    All the companies that use her online platforms for advertising should be blackballed, they are disgusting. To get to this fiend you have to hit her where it hurts, her pocketbook. It’s the only way to go when someone doesn’t have a conscience, ethics or an ounce of human decency.

    • Anonymous says:

      Popeye’s and Burger King are all over her pages. Someone need to say something to Peanut. Same with Miracle Brokers.

      • Anonymous says:

        Cyber bullying is not a matter to take lightly, regardless of the target. By financially supporting this outlet, you are financially supporting the crime. Do the right thing and let the advertisers know how you feel and boycott them if they continue to support it. We can and should expect better.

        Ask yourself how many people do you know who have been subjected to incorrect reporting, invasions of privacy, and outright personal attacks by this site? I’m betting you know someone. Whether it’s reporting on someone’s death before their family knows, posting gruesome photos of their demise, or simply attacking anyone who posts negative comments and then blocking them, we’ve all been victims of its yellow journalism.

        And it stops with cutting off funding. Get to the source. This is a rallying cry for the people of Cayman. Please do us proud and answer.

        • Anonymous says:

          Why shouldn’t they be able to advertise where they wish? It’s exposure. And CMR gets a lot of traffic.
          This type of boycott feels like bullying to me.
          Biggest bunch of bullies I’ve ever seen in my life. And I’ve lived a LOT of different places.

          Cayman – Land Of The Bullies.

      • Anonymous says:

        Their chicken sandwich is not even that great.

  35. Anonymous says:

    It’s so sad when an adult never learns from any of their experiences … That’s the saddest part … She has some good in her BUT she’s insistent on exposing her negatives! Unfortunate but true … She foolishly thinks airing others dirty laundry is worthy of her efforts? Really? Sad because she’s educated and I wonder why she doesn’t utilise that aspect and be an asset to her island community?
    Keep her in your prayers that she will take a long, hard look in the mirror and learn to love the woman looking back at her! I truly think she has some deep issues needing resolution.. Pray she does
    She is after all a daughter, sister, wife, mother & aunt!
    Let’s pray she finds this an avenue of deep reflection & uses it going forward for better of herself, her family and community! I pray so!

    • Cindy says:

      This alien face totally deserve this.. Feel how it feels to be harrased..karma is sweet from ur friend who u once call “dumb af” oh and what was ur line…
      One less donkey following ur page when i unfollowed u… cus thats what she considers all her followers..

  36. Anonymous says:

    Sandy does more good than bad. I hope she wins an appeal on this.

    • Anonymous says:

      hmm, not sure about that. She started off with seemingly good intentions, but went astray somewhere along the way. Shame…

  37. Concerned Diver says:

    Amen. Karma in action!

  38. Anonymous says:

    I hope Matthew Leslie don’t get cold feet and have any sympathy towards her… this woman deserve this guilty verdict! She harassed this man and many others for so long…. Sandra carton is nothing but a bully.. having personal vendetta against people she do not like doesn’t give her any rights to put people on her “gossip site”

  39. Anonymous says:

    I hope an appeal is lodged in this ridiculous case.

  40. ELO says:

    Let’s get something clear, she is not a journalist. She causes headaches with her inaccurate, false stories. She gets to persecute people via her very own internet based forum. A very biased and unfair individual who thrives on negativity and malice.

  41. Jonathan Adam says:

    I have a question for Nicky; XXX

    CNS: Hi Jonathan, we just haven’t decided yet. It might be a review.

  42. Anonymous says:

    A lot of people to blame for the behaviour because they edged her on. So let’s see if they protest for her at courthouse now. No, because they loved the gossip and dirty news now matter who she was hurting. She could have used her platform for good knowing she has a child growing up she would set a better example.

  43. Anonymous says:

    Bout damn time.

    Just hoping the courts put a stop order on her “journalism” entirely

    • Anonymous says:

      The Ombudsman/Ombudsperson(?) should be all over this as this menace commits data protection offences daily on her website and especially Facebook. Let’s see if someone can find their big girl panties and put them on for a while and hold this violator accountable.

  44. Anonymous says:


    • Anonymous says:

      That’s just what you get for bucking the established canned press in Cayman. Cayman doesn’t like it’s dirty underbelly exposed and still continues to allow persecution of citizens that are brave enough to speak up.

    • Anonymous says:

      I just threw up a little in my mouth.

    • Anonymous says:

      This is one comment I never wish to see again.

  45. Anonymous says:

    Praise all the gods that have ever been worshipped…these are truly happy days for all the people of the Cayman Islands and indeed around the world that have been victimized by this low life. Karma’s a B!TCH!!!!!!!!

  46. Anonymous says:

    Well said Judge. There is a clear difference being being a journalist and being a bully. The host in question has thrived on bullying people to gain an audience.

    • Anonymous says:

      Not to gain the audience but also for those persons that finance her to bully victims on their behalf.

      Never believe for a minute that she exists solely on her own financing!

      • Anonymous says:

        Easy to see who those business are. Just look at the ads.

        • Slip slidin' away says:

          Fair comment/question. I actually was referring to facebook posts in general that criticize other people as being subject to prosecution. And I would add tweets to that. This sets an interesting standard for criticism of people holding themselves out in commerce and for elective office, notwithstanding my personal distaste for(journalistic or other) vendettas.

          As to my being unsettled, if I applied your definition of journalist, I would not be unsettled. But I imagine the umbrella of what constitutes a journalist and journalism is broader than you suggest. The appeal will be interesting.

        • Anonymous says:

          It was also interesting that one pension company could do not wrong, but Britcay & Fidelity were the worst people in the world

      • Anonymous says:

        She was frequently in company of many members of the leg assembly at a now closed coffee shop.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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