By Alric Lindsay
A 64-year-old man appeared in the Summary Court yesterday, October 30, 2024, facing charges of causing harassment, alarm or distress, damage to property and common assault. The man was sentenced to 30 days for damage to property and 2 months for common assault, which run concurrently. These sentences were suspended for 2 years. Regarding the charge of causing harassment, alarm or distress, this was withdrawn by the Crown during sentencing proceedings.
Background
The Crown summarized the background of the incidents that led to the charges, describing an awkward set of circumstances in which the man had been living in the laundry room of his family’s premises.
Reportedly, while the 64-year-old man was not home, his brother’s wife went to do some washing in the laundry. However, on this particular day, the man allegedly returned home before the brother’s wife had finished washing. Reportedly, an argument occurred, and the brother’s wife called her husband to assist her.
When the brother arrived, the 64-year-old man allegedly used a piece of wood to damage four or five cameras installed around the house to survey the premises.
Reportedly, when the 64-year-old man was confronted by his brother about the damage to the cameras, the 64-year-old man advanced towards his brother with a piece of wood, leading his brother to run to the side of the house. Subsequently, a fight occurred.
Allegedly, the 64-year-old man attempted to use his fingers to gouge out the eyes of his brother during the fight. His brother then allegedly bit his fingers.
When the fight ended, the police were called.
Sentencing
Before sentencing the 64-year-old man, his attorney, John Meghoo, explained to the Court that there were some challenges in completing the man’s social inquiry report. Reportedly, the man provided information on his education and upbringing but questioned the relevance of providing information on his friendships for the social inquiry report. As a result, the report was said to be incomplete to assist the Court with sentencing.
Meghoo added that the situation which the man finds himself is “untenable” i.e., living in his brother’s laundry room. Meghoo suggested that it is predictable that a similar event may recur if the man does not relocate.
Attorney John Meghoo
Delivering the man’s sentence, Magistrate Hernandez noted that it was “probably not humane” for the man to live in a laundry room in his family’s home under the circumstances. In addition, his social inquiry report did not provide enough information to adequately describe his full history and background when considering the sentence.
In the circumstances, Magistrate Hernandez credited the man with pleading guilty on the earliest occasion. However, she noted that he deliberately destroyed several cameras and advanced towards his brother with a piece of wood in his hand. She said that these deliberate actions must be punished.
Therefore, she sentenced the man to 30 days for damage to property and 2 months for common assault. The sentences will run simultaneously and will be suspended for two years.
She also warned the man that he would face imprisonment if he committed further offences in the next two years.
She did not order compensation for the damaged cameras since the man had no means to pay and was on public assistance.
Magistrate Hernandez
Note to readers:
While this case concerned common assault and damage to property, the case details highlighted an issue of possibly inhumane living conditions of an elderly person. In this case, he lived in a laundry room at his family’s house. While the details that resulted in these living conditions are unknown, they still raise serious concerns regarding the level of care shown or available to seniors in the Cayman Islands.
