Gunman was returning fire, says lawyer
(CNS): Mikkyle Brandon Leslie (36) could be facing more than a decade behind bars over a loaded gun that he fired outside a bar in George Town in February 2020. But at a sentencing hearing on Wednesday, his defence attorney told the court that Leslie had come under fire before he used the gun, which should be taken into consideration. The mandatory minimum term of ten years in jail for the possession of an unlicensed firearm could be increased because of a previous conviction in the United States for smuggling guns, but Carina Clare, from Samson Law, tried to persuade the court not to increase the sentence, arguing that Leslie had fired the gun in self-defence.
Leslie, also known as Brandon Leslie-Ebanks, was initially charged with attempted murder after he was arrested at the airport days after the incident on Shedden Road, in which at least two people were shot, one of whom was severely wounded. However, it was later discovered that Leslie only fired his weapon after another gunman started firing a hail of bullets into the crowd, which included Leslie, outside a bar on Shedden Road.
Clare pointed out that the gunman who had actually wounded people that night has never been apprehended. The court heard that as the bullets were raining down on Leslie and the group he was with, he pulled out his own gun and returned fire.
Leslie is no stranger to guns. In 2013 he was convicted in Florida of smuggling guns and ammunition from the US to the Cayman Islands inside refrigerators and was given a 46-month sentence. He was arrested in connection with that case in 2011. About a month before that he had been acquitted on appeal of murder here in Cayman and had returned to Florida, where he had been living before he was jailed. Leslie was one of three men whose 2010 convictions for killing Omar Samuels were quashed.
During the sentencing hearing for this latest case, prosecutor Scott Wainwright suggested that Leslie’s previous conviction in the US for gun-running was an aggravating factor, especially since some of the ammunition smuggled into Cayman was used in a crime here. He also argued that because the gun he used in this case was fired multiple times, the judge could increase the minimum ten-year term.
Justice Phillip St John-Stevens, who presided over the case, said he would need time to consider the arguments and would deliver his sentencing ruling in August.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
My understanding from reading the article is that Leslie is charged with illegal possession of a firearm. If this is the case, the attorney is grasping at straws that do not even exist. Regardless of Leslie’s reasons for using the weapon, he is in fact guilty of illegal possession. His prior conviction for a very serious gun-related crime should give rise to at least the consideration of an increased penalty.
Doesn’t the lawyer have to say there should be a difference between people who have guns and attack and people who have guns and defend themselves? Not saying he wouldn’t be guilty, but there has to be a difference? No?
Yah what he suppose to do? Stand there and get shot up?!!!!
@3:46 and @6:39:
You arguments fail in that the charge is not for returning fire at his assailant: Leslie is charged with simply HAVING the illegal firearm in his possession. Of that charge, he is obviously and absolutely guilty as he could not have returned fire had he not been in possession of the firearm. What he used the firearm for is irrelevant to that charge.
The bottom line: Leslie was charged with possession, not shooting. He was in possession; therefore, he is guilty.
The cops are out in force on this thread!!!😂 why don’t you go catch ones that were shooting at him and murdered people in this incident or ANY of the other similar murders there were at the time???? This guy is one of about 15 that summer and he’s the only one caught!
You and yours need to start talking to the police.
Wave if you a police on here!
@1:53:
That is irrelevant in this case. Leslie was properly charged and properly convicted. I shall assume that the police are looking for the assailant(s). Unless people come forward to identify the assailants and criminals involved in this and other shootings and murders involving witnesses, the chances of catching the criminals is slim. In any case, I should deem that catching 1 out of 15 is better than zero out of 15. What should the police do? Let Leslie off the hook because others committed similar crimes?
Considering Cayman’s tough gun laws and 400 member police force (plus CBP, Coast Guard etc), there shouldn’t be more than 2 or 3 gun incidents a year. What is wrong? Who is going to deal with this? It looks like the Governor, the police commissioner on down are satisfied with things as they are, or they are incompetent to deal with the problem.
This dude is a killer and a gangster. Protected for years by his brother and his political connections and connections with the underworld. Came from a very respected family but just could not keep away from the lifestyle. I feel for his children. Beautiful kids and now left to the world without a father because he is finally behind bars. No one wins.
I hope the judge kept a straight face. Oh, I’m sure it will be taken into account. I’m just not sure you’ll agree with the account it is given. (Extra time on sentence for firing wildly.)
Of course, we all know that the only way to stop gunmen is good men with guns … I think we have found another problem with this idea. 🙂
It has been proven, good men with guns causes active shootings.
@2:04:
In order to get a clear picture of the “good men with guns” scenarios, one must weigh the cases involving defensive gun use (DGU) and the outcomes of those incidents. One credible USA report proffered that “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million.” Other research gives lower DGU numbers. In any case, the outcomes of such DGU’s must be given due consideration.
A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, regardless the number, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns relate consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims when compared with incidents in which victims used other defensive strategies. The debate is worthy of carefully sifting through often conflicting data. All too often the data is skewed depending on which side of the pro-gun/anti-gun argument the purveyor stands. I have been well-trained in the use of firearms. I am probably a bit rusty now; however, I would much rather have a gun in my hand if faced with an attacker with a gun in his, but our laws are designed around a substantially gun-free society and I must respect those laws and hope that I may never be faced with a criminal with a gun.
If he was still being charged with attempted murder self defence might have the vaguest glimmer of relevance. But he is charged with possession of the firearm – whether he was picking his teeth with it or firing it isn’t relevant. Fact he has a record of prior involvement with firearms is however highly relevant.
@3:14:
Your reasoning utterly fails in that nowhere in this story is there a good man with a gun.
he is good boy from good family …its not his fault
Yes, he is a little darling and goes to church every Sunday. I wonder why he was carrying an illegal firearm though?
He is a criminal through and through and is dangerous to society and should be put away in prison for at least 30 years
Sounds like he was the target, if his story is true, how is that a defense though ?
Yeah he losing this case, Good try though…15 pieces easy
Fact of the matter is that he had a concealed, unlicensed gun. It should not matter that he shot back in self defense as he should never had had the gun in the 1st place. To add to that, this isn’t his 1st offense. He has a history of dealing with guns, especially smuggling them into the island. To be perfectly honest the judge should consider maximum penalty as he is proven to be a repeat offender and is a potential danger to society. As a previous commenter said, only unless he is giving information/evidence to bring charges against the other shooters or smugglers should a lesser sentence be considered
So he’ll have provided the police with the name of the person that was shooting at him then?
We all know he is family to Mac and also a very fine handsome chap who can dress with class…
However, with a history like that you can see he is more dangerous than one would think!
B keep your head up!
What are you even saying?
Sounds like da thugn love
I hope his father is ashamed of him.
Why?? He has made more headlines than you! #USAgangculture
He will be off the front page soon unless northward has a paper. Maybe he can bring his clippings with him.
There is a reason we dont have much gun violence here…govt/police keep them out of crimanals hands and off street! Good job government….the guy deserves a lengthy sentence along with all others involvef….full stop!
Can’t tell if you’re joking.
Let’s please get his sentence right this time!
That’s a puny sentence for someone brought before the courts for gun related crime times and time again. These are the worst offenders on the island, why not a life up sentence and shipped off to shark island??
If thats the best defence, you’re screwed and part of the problem.
The poor gun smuggler was shot at and returned fire because he was living a life of crime and carrying a concealed unlicensed firearm. Unless he’s giving evidence against the other shooters to secure their concurrent conviction, or providing some other valuable intelligence, then he (and his lawyer) should expect to have the book thrown at him. Returning fire in self defense is a police officer’s internal investigation alibi, not a criminals.
This is so true. Let’s have a serious sentence, Mr. Judge.
Lock him up and throw away the key!