Hill criminal case worries MPs
(CNS): The use of ICT legislation to prosecute Sandra Hill, the owner of the Cayman Marl Road website, over a controversial podcast last year about local businessman, Matthew Leslie, worried two MPs who appeared in court last week on her behalf. Chris Saunders (BTW) queried why Hill was in the dock and Leslie wasn’t, given the long standing allegations that had not been investigated, as he spoke up for Hill at her sentencing hearing.
Both Saunders and Kenneth Bryan (GTC) said they believed that if there was an issue to address it should have been in the civil court and if Leslie felt that the things said about him were untruthful, he should have sued.
In a difficult moment for the court during the trial, as it had rejected the idea that the truth of Hill’s broadcast was not the main issue, Saunders told the judge that a number of his constituents have complained about Leslie’s behaviour over the years. Even an underage female member of his own family had been solicited by the former political candidate.
“It boggles my mind why he has not been prosecuted,” the MP stated, but added this was probably because people don’t trust those tasked with carrying out the investigations.
Saunders said that families were reluctant to go to the police as they believed victims would not be well treated by the justice system. As a result, many had remained silent. Saunders told the judge that there are times when the legal system falls behind justice and people seek the justice elsewhere, for example on Hill’s platform.
While Saunders said he appreciated that Leslie had not been prosecuted for his alleged behaviour, what was worrying his constituents in this case was that the person “who had called it out” was being punished.
The MP said other media in the past would not address these types of issues and things were swept under the rug. But Hill was not afraid to question these things, he said, adding, “I was surprised by the verdict.”
Saunders said he had “thought long and hard” about coming to speak for Hill because of the importance of the separation of powers between politics and the courts. But he made it clear that he was worried about the implications of the case for the media as public figures had to be held to account.
He said he did not always like what was published by Hill and even he had been a target recently, but he added that it “might be ugly but we need to do it”, as he spoke of the unpleasant things that can be exposed by the media.
Bryan, who stayed clear of labelling Leslie, was also worried about how Hill had found herself in criminal court. However, he was cut off by the judge when he tried to give evidence that prosecutors appeared to have misused the ICT law in the case against Hill.
He argued that Hill was a reflection of the changing media landscape as a result of social media and that she “should be praised” for what she was doing with the website, not prosecuted, because it was part of the changing times.
Bryan also noted that her role in society is unpleasant because she exposes wrongdoing and holds people to account, especially when it came to taboo subjects that Cayman society had neglected to talk about. “We need that now,” he added. “We do need to challenge the taboo topics in society.”
He said Hill was “pushing boundaries”, implying that not everyone liked that, but he pointed out that this was what the public demanded.
When asked by the prosecutor if they had listened to the whole podcast at the centre of the issue, been present during the trial or read the judge’s ruling, both men said they had not. But when crown counsel Darlene Oko pressed them on whether they believed it had been right for Hill to label Leslie as a sexual predator or paedophile, both MPs pointed out that if the accusations were untrue Leslie should have sued in civil court.
Kenneth Bryan is like a dog attached to a cart- any where the cart goes he goes. Doesn’t stand up for anything unless someone else is.
At the moment his cart seems to be MacKeeva headed for Jamaica.
Full Disclaimer: A lot to consume but definitely some food for thought.
First, I don’t like or agree with everything that is posted on CMR, however, state media controlled by our future oligarchs on standby is just on the horizon and much closer than most think.
Silencing every media house that we don’t agree with or airs the dirty laundry of those that make the lives of the struggling even harder is not the solution. Even though you might not always like it, obsessive foul calling is not always a bad thing; especially in this era of false prophets, Trump-like cults and legions, rich demons and affluent deviants crying their own foul with personal lawyers and attorneys at their beck and call.
I strongly implore those seeking demise here need to look beyond their nose.
If truly immoral or criminal activities are occurring, the assailants deserve to be called out by anyone who sees it. Criminals (especially these days) rarely out themselves, volunteer to be arrested or be held responsible for their actions even when caught red-handed, whether white collar or blue, public figures or not.
To be fair, CMR has a history of unprofessional journalism and disrespect to parties affected by their style of covering some events and stories in the name of first reporting. (Fatal and non-fatal car accidents, drunken escapades, public slander, etc.) Albeit attempts at reform, given recent legal actions and is rightly due for a gut check.
However, the devil you know (so to speak) is definitely much better than wolves in sheep’s clothing yet to be revealed to us all.
A reasonable amount of free press and professional critical journalism is required in any democratic country to keep everyone in line with law and order and maintain basic civil rights and liberties for every individual.
But if you have to have such a strong conviction to conceal your dirty deeds, criminal behaviors, and corruption toolbox that negatively affects the general public, you should think twice before doing them and be very afraid of any public, legal, and moral consequences that will follow over your shoulder.
Second, we should not have to question Crown prosecution, however given the cherry-picked Crown interventions that have taken place in recent times, what are the true motives here? Where is Crown prosecution each time laws and amendments are passed that either strip Caymanians of understood birth rights or fly in the face of what the majority of citizens want? I wonder how a criminal case involving a certain Member of Parliament will be handled in the coming weeks!!
Third, the very bedrock concept of free speech in the Cayman Islands is coming under siege.
Be very careful of wrongfully scrutinizing the current and prospective change politicians and leaving the status quo ones and the characters they allow here to open Pandora’s boxes unchecked in these God-fearing islands, all in the name of personal greed and privatization of any old or new presents made available for Cayman’s people.
As citizens of the Cayman Islands, we collectively are in desperate need of taking a good, hard look at the corruption and bad actors amongst us, done both by some of our own Caymanians and some (not all) foreigners that are “only here for the business” and use the tourism bogeyman to run their mouth and cause uproar to get their way. Our current situation, long before the coronavirus, has only benefited the evil and suffocated the good in the process. The worst part is we can’t even certainly tell who is who!!!
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke
I strongly encourage everyone to research the following terms (Oligarchy, Autocracy, and Plutocracy). Our little Caribbean nation and many others around the world are slowly treading down these dangerous paths of deathly corruption with no easy reversals and always end in catastrophic collapses of state and eradication of global identity.
Firstly, I feel that there is definitely a thin line to tread here. I’ve always had trouble grasping the solution to Hill and CMR. I’m a firm believer in maintaining the right to freedom of speech and the freedom of the press as they are essential to a free and democratic society. We have to be careful not go down a slippery slope.
That being said, what Hill attempts to pass off as journalism is immensely suspect. She attempts to convince the public that she is merely attempting to seek the truth and expose the underbelly of our society. Investigative journalism is an important practice and has been responsible for many instances in which corruption and misconduct have been exposed. So I cannot fault her for attempting to live up to that ideal, however, I feel she misses the mark.
I know of one incident, with reasonable certainty, in which she published a false narrative within one of her articles. So that leaves me with little doubt that she has done it before that incident and again since then. If her record is suspect then how are we to discern when she is actually exposing corruption or merely fabricating it? Such is the importance of a high standard of fact-based reporting.
CMR attempts to straddle the line of journalist media and gossip blog. It wants the credibility without any of the standards that are applied to warrant that credibility.So what then is the answer to someone who continues to slander and in some cases, targets people to a degree that it could be conceived as malicious? Freedom of speech grants Hill to say what she pleases, it doesn’t grant her freedom of the consequences of that speech.
Unfortunately, the response to this issue is being driven by a man who’s moral character may even be worse than Hill’s. Leslie is problematic, I’ve heard more than enough stories to validate that opinion. The fact that Hill is facing criminal charges for attempting to address the issues of Leslie muddies the affair. Leslie is within his rights to seek criminal action against her if he feels he’s being harassed (it’s valid to suggest maybe he shouldn’t do what he does if he doesn’t want to be harassed but I digress). He did, and due process was exercised as is her right. She was found guilty. Leslie’s problematic antics doesn’t excuse the antics of Hill’s (and vice versa if that wasn’t already clear).
It’s entirely surprising to me that these two MPs would not see that. Saunders’ concern that “it’s the person who called it out who is being prosecuted” misses the point of the whole issue. Furthermore, for Bryan to attempt to almost construe this as some new form of media endeavor that the court doesn’t understand is ridiculous. This is not some independent media that is being muzzled. This is a person who habitually slanders people and publishes false information. More importantly, she is a person who used her platform to attack persons beyond what is legally acceptable and who ought to be held accountable for her actions. Why is that not clear for these individuals to see?
clearly this is an insurance policy to prevent them getting their pretty little faces splashed all over CMR in the future ! quite clever really BUT self serving and an utter slap in the face for all her victims
Come on…. smdh
These two political heroes should be renamed Donald Bryan and Chris Trump!
Dumb and Dumber would be more appropriate
Says Hillary licker
The entire case against Sandra Hill should be thrown out immediately. As has been said over and over, the “cure” for speech you don’t agree with is not less speech, but rather more speech. That is, if you disagree with Hill, then publish your own opinion. But do not, under any circumstances try to shut her (or others) down. You will only fail if you do. Besides, she’s usually spot-on in what she reports!
This is one of those times when both sides are wrong!
Or put another way: I want both sides to lose!
All Marl Road needs to do is cut the clickbait and gutter, unadequate reporting and actually fact check before going to print. It isn’t a news site, it’s a gossip outlet that more often than not reports inaccuracies that impact a person’s life. She needs to understand there are consequences for gossiping in public when it impacts reputation.
Some of what she does goes beyond reporting unfact checked gossip, and is quite deliberate targeting of individuals. Even civil action doesnt seem a deterrent for those of you who seem to think a civil remedy is the appropriate course – hasnt worked in the past.
The extra silly season has begun.
Kenneth has lost my support
And gained mine
Gained mine long ago, but it is Sandra who has me taking a second look, thanks to Kenneth and Chris. I respect both men and representatives for the stance they have taken. I totally agree that Sandra might need a lot of opposing narrative to counter her material (and I do not know much about it, but from what I have seen) but it is very worrying that the official organs of state were used against her. If you are harmed, then sue her.
Kenneth is CMR’s next “news” corespondent. 😂
ICYMI, Kenneth actually used to report for the silenced Cayman 27 that everyone was up in arms about two years ago.
The same arguments he was making then, he making now. (Check the CNS archives or Cayman Crosstalk if you don’t believe me)
Trust me, I love to make jokes about CMR too, but this issue is very serious and we all need to pay attention.
She is a disgrace to Cayman. And so are those 2. Everyone knows about the backdoor deals she makes. Always calling around the place trying so hard to get a story just for the sake of clickbait for her vile website. And those 2 including the other hopeful alric lindsey always appearing on her podcasts should know better. The ‘good’ she does pales in comparison to the damage she reeks. They are selling their souls or already have. Maybe they can ask here why she allegedly contacts children for news stories.
If she is a disgrace, then who is the Speaker? The stuff we read today in mainstream media is mind boggling and nobody seems to mind.
How is this about him? Changing the subject much? Nobody agrees with him but I bet she’d make a deal with that one if it paid well. But even he won’t involve himself with her. First its the canadian, then mac then whatever else. They all have done wrong and her worst than the rest because she keeps breaking the effin law.
Now we know where she got the leaked PAC documents smdh disgusting behavior from two supposedly “honorable” MPs
People will do anything for power
So everybody is harping that she doesn’t fact check and blah blah blah and then you go and say this? Hypocrite much?
Shocking that these two MLA’s would hang there integrity hat on Sandra’s hanger. Surely you both jest !!
Equally shocking is that they both seem to be disregarding the facts on trial: This isn’t a question of whether a bad guy got shot during the robbery but rather that he was shot using an illegally possesses gun.
Its two very different matters gents, so trying to morph the two is simply using an old trick in Sandra’s bag; fancy words and misinformation to make things appear how you want it.
Grow a pair and lets hope (not) that voters don’t remember this poor display of character come 2021 election date.
PS.. yea we see you sitting at that Cafe in Pasadora Place sipping beverages early in the AM with her …
Scheming and trying to find ways to discredit everyone else with rumors for sure.
People shuld take photographs of the fools that sit with her. Johann is another one of her cafe buddies that talks out of both sides of his mouth. Don’t for a second think is the voice of reason. You know they are both sitting there trying to come up with ways to bring the whole place down. They are both unsuccessful past political candidates and both so very bitter. You know the saying “misery loves company”. At least he helped with the port but he made a lot of false accusations along the way. More of that to come between now and May.
Waiting for laws that would make taking photographs without consent illegal.
CMR will surely lose her mind over that!
To say nothing of them repeating the allegations about Leslie. Its not far off using the floor of the house to make allegations that outside would be subject to libel action. Surprised the judge allowed it, as the truth or otherwise is not relevant to the charge, and of course the truth of their testimony cannot be tested in that forum. Hardly a “difficult moment for the court” CNS – a completely irrelevant moment for the court. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as 1:19 points out. Truth would be a defence for libel or slander – it just isn’t for the criminal charge of misuse of an ICT network. And repeating an allegation, without giving the person a chance to respond, isn’t exactly justice either.
Ok… so hypothetically speaking, if someone stepped forward about their dealings with Mr Leslie, they all went to court to have it settled, and Mr Leslie was convicted, would the court issue Sandra an apology and compensate her for this situation?
You obviously don’t understand what is going on, neither does Sandy. She broke the law and got convicted. On a very separate note…If she had REAL evidence, not heresy, and the parents of the minor should choose to have it investigated if they gave a f then it would have been investigated and if were actually true. WTF are they waiting for??! Sandy loves to make up lies and put words in people’s mouth. She needs to pay the public back all the money we keep having to waste bc she keep messing with people that arent dealing with her sh*t.
Here say and heresy are very different things!!
Uhmmmmmmmm…. it’s Cayman Bobo! Errybody afraid to stand up and say anything! Where have you been?
If you think this is about Sandra, or Chris, or Kenneth you make a huge mistake. It is quite in order and probably required for political representatives to be mixing with all types at various hours; that is how they know what time of day it is. You, on the other hand, will never know if you stick to 9-5, church on Sundays, uppity behaviours and activities. But more importantly, this is about free speech. Freedom in a modern democratic society. The thing about free speech is that you can counter bad speech with better speech, but when you try to silence anyone, you simply empower corruption and crime. People are afraid to speak up if you prosecute anyone for expressing themselves. But responsible speech happens when you allow people to seek redress in court for damage to your reputation based on lies. In this case, the official arm of the state prosecuted a reporter and removed the ultimate defence against defamation which would have been the truth, because she was quite deliberately not charged with defamatory behaviour. Why not, do you think? I say it is a shame and a sad day in the Cayman Islands.
As much as I like Chris and Kenneth, this was very wrong for them to use their political capital to sway a judges decision. Sandra dug her own hole, she was convicted, she must accept the punishment meted out by the judge.
Alden is licking his lips right now..Watch how this plays out during elections..
It’s more than wrong for politicians to ‘intervene’ in criminal cases. It breaches the three heads of any democracy with the law and politics delineated for a reason. Any politician worth his/her salt would not only recognise this but actively follow it. It is yet another example of the inept ‘politicians’ in these islands.
Disgraceful and shameful behavior by these two .
so what about whe govt does something wrong..they drag cases till the person either dies or gives up????
govt does what it wants…fyll stop..
Thanks for.not.letting things be swept under the rug
More like she creates a haze of dust so that no one knows what the actual truth is. Accusing people without evidence is a dangerous game. She plays with fire so….
bizarre intervention from saunders and bryan….
dirty tricks again by local mla’s
Anybody who back Sandra Hill has serious issues. Maybe it is because her knockoff storytelling site always paints these two in good light.
What an ignorant comment that is! Sandy has called them BOTH out in the past – just two weeks ago for Saunders and the whole bank thing and when Bryan supported McKeeva she held his butt to the fire too. So … come again!
Okay Sandy (eye roll)
You noticed the turnaround on the CIMA story, tho – right. Followed by Saunders deciding to appear as a character witness on her behalf.
Isn’t Kenneth Bryan a convicted drug dealer?
It’s funny how if drug dealers and women beaters are convicted can still run for election, an become M P’s. Only in corrupt Cayman that can happen
There has been talk of a couple of politician beating their wives. But yet, they profess to be whiter than lilies.
Correction: wives and girlfriends. And thats why Mac is covered because if he goes down, so will the rest.
This young man that you tear down has built himself into a respected member of this society and is doing an excellent service for his community. His achievement is even more impressive if, as you say, he was a drug dealer or is a convicted drug dealer. In civilized societies we respect when people turn their lives around for the better. If you do not agree with him that is quite OK; we do not all have to agree. But why do you feel the need to destroy his reputation? Does it make you feel better about yourself?
If I was in his constituency, I would probably support him because I respect him more each day for his unpopular but principled stances.
How TOTALLY disgracefully for these 2. Isn’t this abuse of power or abuse of their office as an elected MLA???
BTW and GTC- PLEASE dispose of them May 2021
Many think they will be 1 term wonders.
Dunno what many you’re referring to. LOL … certainly not the voters in either area!
How wuld you know? All your rumors are wrong Sandy.
I am born and bred 100% Caymanian who has lived abroad and I can tell you we have less freedom here than most countries. Be careful we are on a slippery slope.
Where did you live? China?
the fact that our elected MPs endorse this woman’s social media behaviour speaks VOLUMES
What does it say p, exactly? That they are in 2020 and the rest of Cayman is not? That they understand that most people can draw their own conclusions in fact and fiction?
Looks like a tie for Jackass Of The Week!
Awesome comment!
Maybe the judge will cut Hill the same slack that the judiciary showed Bryan when he was convicted 😉
Or Austin Harris or the countless others who have done far worse and have had nothing recorded against their record?
If Saunders has evidence he needs to bring it. Or STFU. Bryan is a waste of time and space, always has been, always will be.
Saunders- always flapping his gums with irrelevant F*****Y.
If you had any sense you’d know only the victim can do that – poor child! SMH … maybe you need to STFU!
No if its a minor. A parent can as well. Perhaps Mr Saunders will lead the charge as a “very well respected” politician who has proof. Surely he has the resources Sandy. Maybe the 2 of you can get your brilliant heads together lol.
Way to go!
👍🏼For Truth and Honor!
Good Luck Ms. Hill
10:26 Truth and Honor do not even go in the same sentence as Sandra Hill.
Sandra burst the bubble and the whole world knows the stories. Too many times the criminal is exhonorated and justice squeed. We are living in the 21st Century and technology is leading the way, so why try to curtail or stiffle it.
Because it is lies and the only ones it hurts after the dust she creates settles are the true victims.
Now that’s an oxymoron – mentioning Sondra and Truth and honor together.