Man Who Presented Fake $100 Bill To Buy Cigarettes & Root Beer At A Store In Cayman Brac Faces Sentencing For Obtaining Property By Deception
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Alric Lindsay
Charles Michael Ebanks appeared in the Grand Court today, November 22, 2024, to hear matters being considered for his sentencing concerning using a fake one-hundred-dollar Cayman Islands bill to buy cigarettes and root beer in Cayman Brac. Due to the nature of the submissions made by his lawyer, Oliver Grimwood, and the prosecution, Justice Richards determined that additional time is required to deliver a sentencing judgment, which will now occur on or around December 6, 2024.
Background
Gabriel Milton-Job of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions explained that, in September 2022, Ebanks went into Marketplace Supermarket in West End, Cayman Brac, to buy A&W Root Beer for 85 cents and a pack of Rothmans cigarettes for $10.50.
Reportedly, When Ebanks approached the cashier to pay with a $100 bill, the cashier noted that it appeared worn out. Nevertheless, she put the bill in the cash register and gave Ebanks the change of $88.65.
Subsequently, a customer in the line behind Ebanks told the cashier that the $100 bill appeared fake.
After the cashier’s manager examined the $100 bill with a detector pen, the manager reportedly confirmed it was fake.
Ebanks was arrested a few days later on suspicion of uttering a forged note.
When Ebanks was interviewed in November 2022, Ebanks reportedly said he was not at Marketplace Supermarket and didn’t know what the police were talking about.
Matters discussed for Ebanks’s sentencing
Based on the evidence caught on CCTV and the forged note, Ebanks was charged with uttering a forged note. At the time, this was an offence under section 295(2) of the Penal Code.
This section stated:
295(2) A person who knowingly and fraudulently utters a forged bank note or currency note commits an offence and is liable to imprisonment for ten years.
As an alternative, he was charged with obtaining property by deception. At the time, this was an offence under section 247(1) of the Penal Code.
This section stated:
247(1) A person who by any deception dishonestly obtains property belonging to another, with intention of permanently depriving the other of it commits an offence and is liable to imprisonment for ten years.
Ebanks eventually pleaded guilty to obtaining property by deception, and the prosecution offered no evidence of uttering a forged banknote (this note was one of a batch of $100 notes bearing the same serial number, D1292395).
Turning to recommended prison time, DPP counsel Milton-Job suggested that Justice Richards consider the sentencing guidelines, which come into force on December 1, 2024, as no sentencing guidelines currently exist in the Cayman Islands.
Based on his analysis, DPP counsel Milton-Job recommended that Ebanks’s punishment be between a fine and a community-based sentence, i.e., community service. He added that Ebanks would be entitled to a 10% reduction for an early guilty plea.
In addition, it was noted that Ebanks committed this crime while subject to a suspended sentence for common assault. The significance of this is that the Grand Court may now activate this suspended sentence and add it to whatever it will determine as appropriate for the new crime of obtaining property by deception using the fake $100 bill.
Lastly, DPP counsel Milton-Job suggested that Ebanks pay compensation of one hundred dollars.
Speaking on Ebanks’s behalf, Oliver Grimwood said he disagreed that a case presented to the Grand Court by DPP’s counsel was relevant to the sentencing proceedings. Grimwood added that DPP’s counsel had “overstepped” his role by purportedly suggesting that Ebanks was “unsuitable” for a sentence which was based on him doing community service (DPP’s counsel, Milton-Job, later clarified that this was not what he was suggesting and was merely reading social inquiry reports prepared for Ebanks).
Grimwood also asked the Court to consider that, although Ebanks has a suspended sentence for common assault that could now be activated, the use of the fake $100 bill was not a further violent crime.
From a practical standpoint, Grimwood suggested that since Ebanks was currently working on tour boats to Stingray City with various tour operators and earning money daily, the Grand Court may consider allowing him to continue working in that role and have employment stability. By doing so, Ebanks could pay any compensation order from his salary.
In addition to Ebanks repaying his debt, Grimwood appeared to suggest that an order for community service may be considered the Grand Court.
Sentencing date set
After hearing submissions from both sides, Justice Richards noted that she needed some time to consider what was presented. Therefore, a sentencing date was set for December 6.
