Duo Get 14 Months In Prison For Laundering Money After It Was Stolen From RBC ATM Machines In Cayman. Total Reportedly Stolen From RBC ATMs By Other Parties Was $140,000.
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Alric Lindsay
Stefano Giuseppe Palomera appeared in the Summary Court yesterday, December 18, and today, December 19, 2024, to hear sentencing arguments concerning his theft of $10,500 from RBC ATMs, money laundering, disguising criminal property, and possession of an article for use to defraud. Palomera received 14 months. Alejandra Marivi Ramirez appeared alongside Palomera to be sentenced for money laundering. She received 14 months. A deportation order was made for both parties following completion of their sentences.
Background
According to the prosecution, Palomera arrived in the Cayman Islands on April 8, 2024. Ramirez came later on April 18, 2024. They flew from Chile to Panama to Cayman.
As detailed in a previous story, Palomera stole $10,500 from RBC ATMs, which had an impact on various customers.
According to the prosecution, the thefts by Palomera happened in the same month that RBC reported that several ATMs had been compromised through the use of skimming devices. Following an investigation, it was reportedly discovered that cloned cards had been used to withdraw funds from the accounts of 40 local customers. The total stolen via RBC ATMs was $140,000.
Based on the prosecution’s account, Palomera was seen on RBC cameras with other persons withdrawing cash. The prosecution added that Ramirez was seen next to Palomera at the RBC ATM. However, she was not seen withdrawing money.
Regarding the other persons spotted on CCTV, the prosecution noted that one was previously arrested and sentenced, while another left Cayman.
How Palomera and Ramirez transferred the money out of Cayman
To transfer the stolen money out of Cayman, Palomera and Ramirez “recruited” various persons by befriending them and asking for favours to send money by Western Union on their behalf.
For example, one man said he was introduced to Palomera and Ramirez, who told the man they were brother and sister. Ramirez said her name was Marivi.
The man and Ramirez exchanged numbers and saw each other about four or five times. One day, the man got a message asking him to do a favour and send $1,275 overseas by Western Union, which he did.
Another man said he saw Palomera and Ramirez at a bar one night. Ramirez approached him, said “hi,” and asked if he spoke Spanish.
Ramirez left the man’s table and returned with Palomera. Ramirez reportedly told the man that Palomera was her cousin.
Ramirez gave the man her Instagram, and they arranged to meet up. When they met up, they had a smoke, and they kissed and touched. On another day, Ramirez messaged the man to ask if he could do a favour and send money to her mother and son in Chile. Reportedly, her mother needed medicine, and her child needed money. When the man asked why Ramirez couldn’t do it herself, she reportedly said Western Union had told her she was only on a visa in Cayman and could not send money without a work permit. The man sent $1,275 to Chile by Western Union.
The man did not hear from Ramirez after making the transfer as she stopped replying to his messages.
Palomera and Ramirez stopped at the airport
According to the prosecution, on May 9, 2024, Customs & Border Control officers alerted the police when Palomera and Ramirez were attempting to leave Cayman. They were both arrested and telephones and a laptop were seized.
When Palomera’s laptop was analysed, a series of videos were found, reportedly from pinhole cameras placed above keypads of ATMs, showing PIN numbers being inputted.
The analysis of the telephones showed images of identification for several persons to whom money was sent by Western Union from Cayman.
Sentencing considerations
In Summary Court, the prosecution proposed the following sentences for Palomera’s offences:
- Theft: Maximum penalty for theft is 7 years where the value does not exceed $5,000
- Money laundering: 2 years and/or a fine of $500
- Possession of article used to defraud: 4 years imprisonment and/or a fine of $3,000.
The prosecution proposed the following sentences for Ramirez’s offences:
- Money laundering: Starting point of 18 months
Arguing on behalf of Palomera, his attorney Greg Walcom said that while his client is a thief, he is not the international criminal mastermind that the prosecution painted.
Walcom explained that Palomera used clone debit cards to withdraw from the accounts of five different RBC customers on five occasions. The thefts totalled $10,500 and were done over seven days. Only this amount was attributed to Palomera and not the whole $140,000 that RBC reported stolen from RBC customers.
Walcom added that Palomera was not charged for being part of a criminal enterprise and acting together with others to steal $140,000, which was the picture that the prosecution had apparently painted for the Summary Court.
Walcom noted further that a sophisticated scheme led to the theft. The scheme required the creation of a skimming machine.
According to Walcom, Palomera was never found with a skimming machine, and there is no evidence that he was involved in designing or creating a skimming machine.
Walcom noted that although the prosecution recovered skimming machines over seven months ago, nothing links the skimming machines to Palomera. As a result, the logical conclusion was that Palomera was not involved in the design of the skimming machine, the coding of the skimming machine, the installation of the skimming machines at the ATMs or the retrieval of the data from the skinning machines.
Regarding the videos found on Palomera’s laptop, Walcom said that although they show pinhole camera images of persons entering their PIN codes on the ATMs, there is nothing that shows that those videos are connected to the offences that Palomera committed.
In the circumstances, Walsom said the videos are irrelevant to the facts.
Concerning the sentencing proposed by the prosecution, Walcom emphasized that Palomera played “A limited role, limited function under direction.”
In the circumstances, Walcom suggested 18 months of custody with a sentencing range of 36 weeks to 3 years of custody for theft.
Walcom suggested that the starting point of 18 months be reduced given that Palomera has no previous convictions, is of previous good character and entered a guilty plea. Based on Walcom’s calculation, this would reduce the proposed sentence to under 12 months. In the circumstances, Palomera had already served seven months in jail.
Regarding the money laundering charge, Walcom suggested a starting point of 18 months. He suggested further that whatever sentence is finally given for the money laundering offence, it should run concurrently with the theft sentence.
Turning to Ramirez, her attorney, Stacy-Ann Kelly, reminded the Summary Court that Ramirez previously pleaded guilty to two counts of money laundering.
According to Kelly, Ramirez has been in jail since May 9 and has no prior conviction.
Kelly suggested that Ramirez did not engage in the thefts but only transferred overseas sums that were not legitimately hers.
Kelly accepted that Ramirez befriended a man, lied to him and used him to transfer money overseas.
Kelly argued that while Ramirez may have coerced others to send money, she was not involved in theft and skimming.
Regarding what the Summary Court may propose as a sentence, Kelly noted that Ramirez has no previous convictions and has a history of good character. Her early guilty plea also saved the court resources and demonstrated her commitment to rectifying her wrongdoing.
In the circumstances, Kelly proposed the following sentence for Ramirez:
- Starting point: 18 months.
- A one-third discount for the early guilty plea reduces this to 12 months.
- Ramirez’s 31 weeks in custody should be deducted from the above.
Kelly suggested that any remaining sentence not consumed by Ramirez’s time served should be treated as a suspended sentence.
Kelly noted that Ramirez would not object to a deportation order as that would allow her to reunite with her 6-year-old son in Chile, rebuild her life, support her family, and contribute positively to her community.
Judge’s decision
After considering submissions from the prosecution and defence counsels, the Chief Magistrate noted that Palomera and Ramirez were involved in a “sophisticated scheme” with many parts.
The Chief Magistrate added that Palomera “arrived in the jurisdiction for one purpose only- to steal from innocent persons by engaging in skimming operations and engaging others to launder and then leave.”
The Chief Magistrate continued:
This jurisdiction and the particular bank were targeted.
Whilst the bank is the ultimate victim, and will compensate the actual victims, I must not forget that there are real persons who were affected who also struggled to make ends meet until compensated by the bank. One person remains unresolved many months later.
In the circumstances, the Chief Magistrate made the following sentences:
| Name | Description |
| Palomera | Theft: 12 months |
| Money laundering: 14 months Theft and money laundering sentences will be served simultaneously. Therefore, the total sentence for Palomera is 14 months. | |
| Ramirez | Money laundering: 14 months |
The above sentences will be reduced by the time already spent in custody by Palomera and Ramirez since May 2024.
The Chief Magistrate made the following additional orders:
- Forfeiture of cloned bank cards
- Forfeiture of cash, jewelry and cologne
- Deportation following completion of sentences
Note to readers:
For the previous story and a breakdown of sums stolen by Palomera, please see the below link:
