Jury acquits MLA

| 13/05/2011

(CNS): Updated It took the jury of five men and two women less than one hour to find the UDP member for Bodden Town not guilty of perverting the course of justice. The verdict was handed down Friday to a visibly relieved Dwayne Seymour as well as a full public gallery containing four cabinet ministers. With this case behind him, the MLA now faces lesser charges in the Summary Court in connection with the same incident, in which the prosecution claims that Seymour assaulted Garrone Yap, a man whom he believed was having an affair with his wife. This case hung on the words that Seymour was accused of saying to a security guard in a bid to stop him being a witness to the fight. 

As the jury acquitted the politician, the public gallery erupted into cheers and Seymour’s friends and family as well as his political colleagues were clearly delighted with the outcome. Ministers Mike Adam, Rolston Anglin and Mark Scotland, Deputy Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly, as well as back bench MLA Cline Glidden, were present for much of the judge’s direction to the jury.

The verdict came one day later than expected when legal arguments led to the jury being excused throughout Thursday. The legal wrangling was down to objections raised about the defence counsel’s controversial closing speech to the jury. Seymour’s lawyer, Steve McField, had, the prosecution claimed, inflamed and prejudiced the jury beyond the realms of acceptability.

McField had offered different interpretations of the law, posed possible theories that had not been put before witnesses, accused the prosecution ofcorruption, as well as justifying his client's behaviour on the basis that his wife was, contrary to law, his property, when he referred to her as Seymour’s "sacred vessel".

In the wake of McField’s closing speech, crown counsel John Masters made an application to the judge to discharge the jury based on some 40 different points in which he said McField had overstepped the mark.

Masters told the court that the defence counsel’s closing statement was “the most outrageous he had ever heard in his twenty-four years at the bar” and said that he did not believe any amount of direction from the judge could rectify the prejudice and damage done by the speech.

He said it contained preaching, false evidence, incorrect points of law, total irrelevances, unfounded allegations, racism, suggestions that the crown and police were corrupt and generally undermined the local justice system.

The crown argued that the judge would not be able to repairthe harm done by the comments and made the extraordinary move of applying for the discharge. Masters identified some sixteen irrelevances that McField had made, along with more than a dozen incorrect directions in law. He also identified numerous comments that, if the jury was not dismissed, the judge would have to rectify.

Justice Smith, the presiding judge in the case, opted not to discharge the jury and gave an undertaking to direct them robustly. In his directions on Friday morning the judge told the jury to “completely disregard” the irrelevances and to concentrate on the issue in question, which was whether or not they felt the defendant had implied to a security guard that he should not say anything to the authorities by using the phrase: “Security, ya not see nothing.”

The judge told the jury not to allow sympathy or prejudice to interfere with their deliberation and that they must consider their verdict based on the evidence presented by the witnesses. He warned that they must not speculate on what might have happened and said they were at liberty to reject the closing speeches made by counsel.

Transcript – Closing submissions to the jury by Steve McField

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Crime

Comments (165)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    the performance of Mr. McField in this case was embarassing XXXX.  how could "perverting the cause of justice" be allowed to be turned into an expat v caymanian issue is beyond me and quite honestly embarassing for fair minded caymanians like myself and others.  this was all a disgrace and shows how this country is now being governed and the "heavies" we are up against when we speak the truth.  disgusting and disheartening and ignorance rules!!!

    • Name changed by moderator says:

      Attorney’s CHEWBACCA DEFENSE STRATEGY WORKED!

      According to CNS report  ; On  Thursday May 13, it took the jury less than an hour to reach a verdict to find the Bodden Town MLA “not guilty” as charged. The prosecution presenting the case against the MLA provoked the crown counsel John Masters to make application to the judge to have the jury discharged. This decision was based on some 40 points in which crown counsel claims that Mr. McField had overstepped the mark.CNS also  reported  that Mr. Mcfield’s differed interpretations of the law posed possible theories that had not been put before the witnesses, and accused the prosecution of corruption. Attorney Steve Mcfield also defended his clients behavior  by justifying his response to her lover and  referred to her as Seymour’s sacred vessel!”.
      Such a statement by Mr. Mcfield the defense attorney has brought “shockwaves” across the nation. This kind of strategy used by a legal pundit in a court of law is called the “Chewbacca Defense”. It was used as a fictional legal strategy that was used in episode 27 of south Park Chef Aid that premiered on October 7, 1998.  Extraordinary great  criminal defense  attorneys often use this strategy with the aim to deliberately confuse the jury by making use of the false reasoning known as ignoratio elenchi or “red herring” it concludes that the prosecution has brought a charge on an innocent person and  is continuing to make nonsensical  conclusions that should not be ignored by the jury.
      This same concept was adapted as a defensive “vice”  by the late Johnny Cochran, the attorney whose closing arguments defending O.J. Simpson in his murder trial, well he had a few choice but powerful words for the jury;  “IF THE GLOVE DON’T FIT YOU MUST ACQUIT!” OJ was  a FREE man.
      Shall we say that this is the work again of a legal pundit  of a wizard and déjà  vu all over again? Mr. A. Steve  McField’s  asserted in his closing argument on behalf of  his client, Dwayne Seymour, MLA for the district of Bodden Town;  that “ his wife was, contrary to law, HIS PROPERTY!!!!, when he referred to her as Seymour’s "sacred vessel".
      XXXXX
      Despite the defending Attorney's popularity status quo Mr. McField  is one of a kind, a unique defense attorney in his own right and we congratulate him as a Caymanian attorney that has demonstrated unique legal strategy in defending his client in this case at the highest level. 

      CNS: Could you please register if you are going to use your real name – the log in box is on the LHS column. Thanks.

      • Florence Goring-Nozza says:

        CNS: We now require people to register if they are using their real name. Read this for more. There are links to register a new account below the comment box or on the left hand side column. Thanks.

      • Anonymous says:

        It is about convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent, a trial is not a game.  Perhaps the time has come to allow the Crown to have the last closing speech as it is the Crown that must prove the case.

        This would overcome your Steve McFields and the Chewbacca defences. In other countries he would be disbarred. 

  2. Anonymous says:

    I hope someone spares a thought for the poor security guard in this instance who was brave enuf to stand up against the "establishment" and tell the truth!!  I also hope also that a careful watch is made on this permit holder at renewal time and see what happens then and who influences what!!  well done sir, continue to speak the truth cost you what it may!

  3. Anonymous says:

    The trial was supposed to have established whether or not a threat was delivered or concequences implied to the security guard who witnessed the violence at the Beach Suites.  The lamentable personal reasons which preceeded the violence was tangential to the action at issue.  It was the prosecution who failed to keep the judge and jury focused on the reason for the trial.

    • Anonymous says:

      The prosecution spoke first and did that, when McField derailed it they asked for the jury to be discharged.  Defence counsel also has a duty not to mislead.

    • Anonymous says:

      The time has come to allow the prosecution to close last.

  4. Michel Lemay says:

    I would like to congratulate Mr. Seymour on his acquital. Many man would have reacted in a similar way or worse. Be UDP or PPM has nothing to do with this. Going thrue such public humilation is enough of an embarassement and then have have your clothes washed in public is enough of a punishment. Too much of that is going on these days. I am certain Mr. Seymour that this will only make you a better person

    • Doobles says:

      "I am certain Mr. Seymour that this will only make you a better person" – well there is something to be said for setting your sights very low.

    • Anonymous says:

      I belive you must mean many Caymanian men in Cayman. Or maybe just many third world man.  Most men from a developed country would just think he reacted with complete disregard for his? woman and incredibly poor planning on his part.  But then look at what he does for a living.

      • Anonymous says:

        Ha ha ha !

        Now there's a culture gap for you!

        Most 1st world, and by that you must mean European, men are not jealous, do not lie to their women, do not follow them when they're with their 'insignificant others', and do not abuse them at times, either ?

        I guess it must be just Caribbean men who have these terrible habits in their treatment of their women (I hope you get the sarcasm intended here).

        Come to England, where I live and I will show living examples of Seymour's behaviour and worse.

        For a person in such a responsible position, I cannot agree with his actions but where jealousy is concerned…

        There are no stereotypical boundaries and women can be even worse…

        Consider the possibilities if the roles had been reversed !!!

         

        • Anonymous says:

          You are so right, one only have to read the British tabloid, and see the behaviour of the European men and women. killing women, children, stabbing babies, three at a time, wiping out the whole family and burying them in the back gardens.

          All over jealousy

          Walking up to different ethnicity and pushing  a knife in their chest while waiting on a school bus. and i could go on.

          go to The dailymail.co.uk

          • Anonymous says:

            And they get convicted and defence counsel is stopped from passing off a defence that does not exist at law.

            • Anonymous says:

               Yea, like the defence for the Stephen Lawrence's murder case in 1996. Gary Dobson, Luke Knight and Neil Ascourt were tried for murdering Stephen, ( he was then 18 years old, an A student, while he and his friend waited peacefully at a bus stop in South London, they stabed him twice, The jury was directed to acquit the defendants.

  5. Anonymous says:

    this whole episode sums up what is wrong with cayman

  6. Anonymous says:

    This John Seymour don't have one grain of sense, here is a man chasing after a woman who don't want him.

    • Anonymous says:

      People act in the heat of the moment, but…..he thought the plan out before acting.  It wasn't like he happened to drive by and seen this…this is what you voted into your government….lol lol…and UDP supported this behavior…sorry I hope all of you learn your lesson in 2012!!!!

       

  7. Anonymous says:

    Cheeeze  Louise!  Let the law take its course.

    But there is more than soap-oprah news to think about.

    Eg – just exactly what is "One-Person/One-Vote"? Since there is so much uncertainty on it, let's have a real national (non political) debate of the pros and cons.

    Actually, I propose a national referendum on ALL the current issues:

    Natl Referenda, Natl Elections (not district sections), Environmental degradation, East End Dock, Oil Refinery, MinWage, Gambling, Extended liquor hours; etc etc.

    BUT – in the meanwhile, please remember that the state of ignorance "enjoyed" by so many of your people can largely be linked to two causes:

    Imposed comforting blankets of ignorance/misinformation, by others with unterior motives (and greed); and, Passive, unchallenged minds who don't look past the obvious BS, educate themselves, and form their own stances and positions on whatever the issues at hand – instead of swallowing the force-fed crap over  so many generations.

    So then, my "peeps", THINK…then act. Sensibly & positively

    Even your statements each 4 years (national elections) is 99% based on emotion and rhetoric vs. informed decisions. That's why things will hardly change…

    Imagine – the 2011-12 school year still finds our education system and high schools WITHOUT web communication… in a time when more than half of a child's learning Should be at home, independently, online! Not to mention the way it Could improve communications between parents & schools.

    And – Prisons (including juvie facilities) is one of the highest priority capital projects.

    And – The largest sector of employees in the islands is TEACHERS, followed by LAW ENFORCEMENT!  The former is simply feeding the latter, by blindly continuing with low expectations, drastically reduced discipline levels; and pathetically low focus on knowledge & learning!

    And – the "church" is impotent in addressing the declining  social/cultural /mores of the nation. No wonder the many buildings are bigger but emptier!

    And – the ongoing vulgar, immoral sexual revolution which is the Silent, Ignored Cayman epidemic, where ANYTHING Goes!!

    SO..Combine these issues with a commercialist/capitalist economy AND culture, where people are simply consumers, rather than active producers, and we simply now have generations of (from grandparents to children) lazy, dull, unchallenged and entitled people.

    Yes, there are exceptions, but even they are not living up to half their full potential, and those who are, are focused on self & greed, and not on uplifting others.

    Paradise is almost lost – thanks to Cayman welcoming the worse values form every corner of the globe, instead of insisting on the best – or better yet, setting our OWN standards high – as the benchmark for others to follow (ohhh – remember the good old days of smart, good-hearted Caymanians)

    Hmmm…There IS a bright side of the story… maybe my Number will play tonight, so I can go spree with my crew, and create a few more mamy mammas by the weekend holiday!

    Cheeeze!

    • Anonymous says:

      Ok..I agree with most! what's more, if we do have a referendum, let's re-do the Constutitional glitches such as allowing the premier to chair the LAs Buiness Commitee,and mandating 3 more MLAs that we can't afford.Rght??

      If only there were a neutral people's platform for discussion and resolution-then action!

    • Frequent Flyer says:

      Cheeze Louise, VERY good points!!

      You should have posted this as a Viewpoint instead!

       

      My favourite part;

      "please remember that the state of ignorance "enjoyed" by so many of your people can largely be linked to two causes:

      Imposed comforting blankets of ignorance/misinformation, by others with ulterior motives (and greed); and, Passive, unchallenged minds who don't look past the obvious BS, educate themselves, and form their own stances and positions on whatever the issues at hand – instead of swallowing the force-fed crap over  so many generations."

      TRUE DAT!!

  8. Anonymous says:

    I think that I'm done reading the feedback on CNS' new stories. It seems that 90% of it is written by angry PPM supporters with nothing positive to contribute. All I find in the comments section is bashing of the Premier and the UDP government and tearing my country down with mean spirited and hateful words. I didn't vote for the UDP or the PPM in the last election, but instead voted for 4 independent candidates, neither of which were elected. However, as a Caymanian, the UDP is currently my government and I have to at least give them a chance to try and get us out of the mess created both by the worldwide economic downturn and the spending of the PPM. No, I certainly don't agree with everything that the UDP or the Premier are doing, but then, who is going to please everyone all the time? As for Mr. Seymour, I was not there to see what transpired, and neither were any of you. Had I been a member of the jury, I would have found it really difficult to send a father of 2 children to prison for allegedly uttering a few words in the heat of the moment, even if I believed that he had uttered them. Remember that there was no one else to back up the claim of the security guard and it would set a dangerous precedent to allow someone to be convicted in a case where there was no one to back up a claim of what that person allegedly said. I think that I'll log back in later and give myself a "thumbs up" because I know that I won't be getting one from anyone who reads this!

  9. Anonymous says:

    This entire situation was a real disgrace and all I can say is that I hope the voters in BT do not forget this for the next election.

    XXXXX

    Also, I think it should be appealed on the basis of politican interference! No where else in a civilized so called democracy would the Premier have entered a courtroom and sat down – this amounted to juror intimidation as far as I'm concerned. But … what more can we expect from the UDP? Honestly?

    • Anonymous says:

      This verdict should definitely be appealed. Anywhere else in the Western world a defence lawyer would be struck off for delivering such a bile-ridden, inaccurate closing statement. As for political interference – the Premier turning up at court – that's about as close to intimidation of the Jury as you can get.

      I have no political affiliation, but Bush has just gone too far this time. It is absolutely disgraceful. Is there not a mechanism whereby he can be impeached?

    • Anonymous says:

      Another PPM brain washer, BT you all have enough sense to see when someone is trying to mislead you. I would advise you to  read the transcrip of case for yourselves…we are sensiable people, stop the misleading. 

      Ha ha ha you failed again by trying to bring down John John. Did'nt you read Mr. Mcfield's closing statement? how he put it to the court…the charge  was frevilious, it had no base or substance. XXXXXX, I dont blame his colleagues for showing up and giving him moral support, you and I would have done the same.

      There is  too much hate in this country, some of  you are being used, and not even given the opportunity to hear the truth, you are lied to just to put down the UDP. What is so ironic about this, you are living good under their administration…enjoy the good life, it could be worst, banks and businesses could have closed down.

       

    • Anonymous says:

      It's amasing that what is wrong in your eyes, with over one hundred thumb downs along with yourself, are not seen that way by the law,  justice was served…my friend…. accept it..you have no choice.

      Can you enlighten us where and how did the political interfarence took place? and tell us where it is wrong for anyone to sit in on a court case, especially those that hold a public office, you just can't handle the fact that John John got acquited, and some of his UDP collegues were present to celebrate his victory, and give moral support.

      I bet  you would be happy if they had acted out the old Caymanian way, crab -in- the- barrel….. tear him down! this is exactly your style.

      God always take care of his people, he saw the way you all hated John John, just because of political differences, and He pulled him out of the mess…sorry you never got your way, try harder next time.

      Peace be with you!

      • Anonymous says:

        "accept it… you have no choice"  I just love the way you think. maybe someday the sheep will look up.

        Put down the god card, God takes care of EVERYBODY my friend.  That's EVERYBODY.  He doesn't have 'his people'.  You are projecting. 

         

         

    • Lachlan MacTavish says:

      Please clarify. Are you saying that during the court proceedings Mr. Bush entered the court room and sat down.

      If this is correct, then this is one more obvious reason why this man should not be trying to run the Government.

  10. O'Really says:

    The Constitution contains the following ( redacted for brevity):

    Tenure of office of elected members


    63. The seat of an elected member of the Legislative Assembly shall become vacant—

    (g)… if any circumstances arise that, if he or she were not a member of the Assembly, would cause him or her to be disqualified for election to it by virtue of any provision of section 62(1).

    Disqualifications for elected membership

    62(1) No person shall be qualified to be elected as a member of the Legislative Assembly who


    (e) … is serving or has served a sentence of imprisonment (by whatever name called) exceeding twelve months imposed on him or her by a court in any country or substituted by competent authority for some other sentence imposed on him or her by such a court, or is under such a sentence of imprisonment the execution of which has been suspended, or has been convicted by any court in any country of an offence involving dishonesty;
     

    Had Mr. Seymour been found guilty, he may well have received a sentence exceeding 12 months. Had he been found guilty, it must surely have been for an offence involving dishonesty. The consequences would have been a bye-election, as provided in the Constitution. Only Bodden Town voters can determine whether they would return another UDP candidate, but in the current climate, I would guess that is no certainty

    In light of this possible consequence, I have to wonder if the presence of UDP ministers and MLA's in the gallery and Mr. McField's reference to the Premier in his closing address when he stated "… I'm sure, without a doubt, if the leader of his party had that power, Mr. Seymour would not be sitting here as a defendant" are acts of support for Mr. Seymour or acts of self-preservation for the UDP.

  11. UDP Truthalizer says:

    I am a handy app that translates UDP Doublespeak on CNS.  There is a new update available for UDP Truthalizer.

    Updates include:

    1) We have updated our translation systems to replace the words "plan" or "scheme" in UDP talk to "lie" for ordinary English speakers.

    2) We have introduced a new "Chewbacca defence" font when reporting closing arguments of defence counsel in cases involving UDP MLA's.  This font is needed because these speeches are incapable of translation into coherent English.

    3) We are altering the words "parking space" to "fire services parking or disabled parking for you ordinary folks but I can park where I want because it is my country".

    4) "Security guard" will be replaced by "Potential UDP Informant".

    5) We are still working on an English translation for the concept of "the Sunday school for 25 year olds".

  12. Sunneversets says:

    If you listen very closely you can hear the sound of the British coming . . .

  13. Anonymous says:

    Is thre any truth in the sundays schools being tougher than the high schools are keeping hildren back a year for poor performace, hence why john john left at the tender age of 25?

    Is that why Big Mac is still attending

  14. Anon says:

    I have read the closing argument of the defense above and my view is that this was an excellent argument that took into account what this case was really about. Congrats to Mr. McField on a job  well done! And if you were a bit indignant at times that was  reasonable considering what occured in this case.

    As far as the Cabinet members being in attendance,  that can be conscrued as both good and bad. Good in that they showed loyalty to their party member, and bad that some people might see this as a show of force to influence the jury. They are however Caymanians and have as much right to be in the Court room as any other member of the public!

    Mr. Seymour, please try and move on with your life. Nobody is worth what you have suffered through!

    I am a casually observing, and not a UDP or PPM supporter.

     

     

     

     

    • Anonymous says:

      Interesting observation.  The speech was xenophobic, sexist and degrading of other cultures and denegrating your legal system.  In any other country Mr McField would be stuck off or disbarred.  Wasn’t a judge recently taken off the bench for inappropriate coduct in court -she also had her supporters?

      But as for Mr McField and his supporters, actions speak louder than words – line up outside of the British High Commission on Tuesday and hand in your British passports. 

      Wow the silence is deafening!!!

      • Anonymous says:

        Poster at 05/14/2011 – 16:02.

        Here is a great opportunity to start that speech writing class and teach the natives how to speak and be politically correct.

        And you can check for British Passports at the same time. But I doubt very much that this case would have been brought before the courts in Britain.

        • Anonymous says:

          You're right, because the politician would have resigned before a court case became a possibility…

          • Anonymous says:

            Whether the politician resigns or not should have nothing to do with whether he is criminally prosecuted if he has committed a crime.

      • Anonymous says:

        NO!!!!! we want it both ways!!!

    • Anonymous says:

      I bet that you especially liked the bit about the leader stepping in and the foreigners taking your women.  I look forward to the unveiling of the statue of Steve McField right up there next to Jim Bodden whose views he also says he represents.

      It wasn't that long ago that your parliament was taking a vote on whether to criminally charge a journalist for expressing a legal point of view.  Let's stop messing around and make the law that says that politicians can't be prosecuted.  Big Mac already regrets the Freedom of Information Law because the island is too small.

      • Anonymous says:

        What a bunch of ……. foreigners taking your woman….they aren't holding a gun to their heads are they?? THere you go again, blaming everyone but yourselves.  There is a reason the woman are leaving their Caymanian men. 

        • Anonymous says:

          women are leaving their men all over the world. And men are leaving their women … all over the world. And have been for a long long time. 

          XXXXX

        • Anonymous says:

          'A' reason the women are leaving their Caymanian men? Hmm, I agree with your comment completely, but I can think of several reasons. As long as Caymanian men (or any men for that matter) treat 'their' women (welcome to the 1940's) like possessions, they don't deserve them anyway… here's a tip Caymanian men, get  your misogynistic (Google it boys…) assess off that little speck you live on and see how the rest of the human race has evolved.

          A british man.

           

           

      • Anonymous says:

        Does this mean that Caymanian men have to sendback their foreign wifes.  Or doe it only go one way.

    • Anonymous says:

      and what was this case really about sir?

    • Backstroke!! says:

      14:56 I agree with you, whether you be PPM or UDP ,which if anyone have any honor they would'nt admit to supporting either of the parties.

      But truth is the attorney defended him and his collegues were in attendance to support him.   Why is it that you can go in support of family or friends and not get castigated but as a politician you are obstructing the law. How vain can we be.

      The problem is that we need to move on BUT with out the two current parties. thumbs up or thumbs down, do so with courage and honesty, not with blinders on.

      • Anonymous says:

        Please think about what you just wrote.  Would you want gang members to 'show their support' for on of their own by marching in force into a trial?!  What these law abusing mla's did was much more in line with that, than a family member giving their support.  A half a good person as a politician would have offered support for the process of the law and not put a disruptive power-mob in the court room!

        I have seen and heard of a lot of small unethical things happening here, but this is by far the deepest, scariest, most obvious!

        Are you reading this mr Adam?  Please reflect… please

    • Anonymous says:

      This was supposed to be about an alleged abuse of power with an implicit threat and not at all the sanctity of marriage.  However, the counsel for the defendant had to detract attention to the more favorable xenophobic rhetoric.  It is what any good lawyer would have done if his "scheming" client was less than believable.  In truth I think the defense did a marvelous job of reading the jury. 

  15. Anonymous says:

    Oh PALEEEEEEEZ….XXXX He parked in the Fire Lane at the hotel for God's sake people.  Isn't that a prime example of XXXXX utter ignorance and blatant disregard for rules and regulations???  Either way it deems him unfit and unworthy to represent me XXXXX  In closing I have to say as a Caymanian I support changing the jury pool to include legally resident persons of these islands to be selected for this purpose.  Note I said "legally resident persons" which to me means all their Immigration Fees are paid in full for their residency, not simply that it has been granted, (which unfortunately is another big problem!!!!!!)           

    • Anonymous says:

      And you have never broken any rules? XXXX

      Mcfield and the jury did a surperb job, my hat off to them.

  16. Naya boy says:

    As the old James brown songs says its a Man’s world and Cry me you all voted this group in like one poster said and the other crowd of cowboys are just a clone of this one. Cayman had choices in the last election and chose materialistic desires over good old common sense and we are paying for it everyday in more ways than one now, so hush unnah freaking mouth. A nation of Sheep shall be ruled by Pigs.

  17. Anonymous says:

    THANKS FOR RELEASING THE TRANSCRIPT. THE LINK IS ABOVE.  Caymanians read it all,  if nothing else read page 14 line 16 – “if the leader of his party had that power, Mr Seymour would not be sitting here as a defendant.  I am sure of that”. 

    XXXXX

    Then read Page 17 line 19 down to page 18 line14.

    Then recall all the Ministers who publicly supported those submissions. SHAME!

     

  18. Lord Dont Panic CQ says:

    Ah yes a classic Chewbacca defence I beleive

    chewbacca-defense

    • Anonymous says:

      I didn't realise that cameras were in the court room when Steve gave his speech.

  19. Anonymous says:

    To the writers of Run-down please ensure that Steve's summing up is in Run Down 2012 – it's funny beyond belief.

  20. The Beaver says:

    The Cayman Islands does not suffer from a shortage of courtrooms but rather from a lack of accountability.  The Beaver

  21. Public Interest says:

    Can he do thing decent thing now and resign?  He is clearly not the kind of person who should be an MLA as this whole debacle showed.

    The worrying thing was the "this was not a lie, it was a "scheme"" exchange – in the context of telling his wife an untrue story about his injury in a car accident for ulterior motives and involving other people in perpetrating that lie.  Is that really the moral compass of a legislator?

    I may not have gone to Sunday School until I was 25 but I know I don't want a liar as my MLA, or "a schemer" if one wants to speak in Seymourese.

    • Anonymous says:

      Mr. McField's closing statements should have helped you figure this one out by now…

      Its the moral compass of Cayman's legislators and has been for many years now.

      When Mr. McField refers to Jim Bodden and how things were with him, he confirms what some of us have suspected for a very long time now with enough past and present evidence to back up our belief…

      That Cayman's police, contrary to the laws that are in place, do and have always taken orders from local political leaders.

      If and when the Governor opens his mouth, as Stuart Jack did in ordering 2 commissions of inquiry and 1 corruption investigation, he is castigated by powerful elements as interfering in local affairs and over-stepping his authority but when he remains silent on major issues…

      Its his fault because he is supposed to be the man in charge.

      This case shows now who actually is in charge and how they do and have always done things, under the table and behind the scenes.

      At least now, the cat is truly out of the bag.

      If my theories are correct, this case could have been brought about by political pressure in the first place.

      To prove the charge of trying to pervert the course of justice, there would have had to be much more involvement than a few words uttered in the heat of the moment.

      Seymour would had to have threatened the security guard with some sort of retaliation or offered him some sort of bribe for his silence, for this charge to have had any merit at all.

      The jury did come back with the right verdict, no doubt.

      This entire incident has set a very bad example of what the future could bring to Cayman.

  22. Anonymous says:

    When I first heard that Mr Seymour was being charged for perverting the course of justice, I thought he had done something really draconian like try to bribe the police or attempted to pay to have his file disappear or something of the sort.  However then to hear that it was for him making an utterance to the guard after a fight "you didn't see anything".  This to my mind was not premeditated and given the circumstances – his wife embarassing him, etc., this was nothing that the police could not use their discretion and let slide.  In fact the attending police officer could simply have cautioned Mr Seymour and say to him – look I know the situation is difficult one for you personally, but you have to control yourself; leave the premises and please no further disturbances as you could be arrested, etc, and head back to the police station and try to work on solving some of the unsolved murders on the books.

    Instead it appears that they took statements and tried to create a case – making a mountain out of mole hill, having taken notice of what the security guard said Mr Seymour said to him.  Supposed it was Mr Yapp who had for whatever reason had been the one making the comment to the security guard – would he have been prosecuted. One would then have thought that the AG's office would have been pragmatic and realise that even if you could attempt to argue that Mr Seymour broke the law, there was no premeditation etc and send the file back to the police on the basis that they are not convinced that a crime took place and it would be difficult to get a conviction.  Instead, the AG department took it and the prosecutor appeared to have thrown his full gusto behind trying to win the case.  What this suggests is that both the police and the AG's chambers are overstaffed to be spending time developing such a frivilous case and in the process wasting the courts' and jurors' time.

    XXXX Furthermore because of fear and distrust of the system and the bad-mindedness of the Cayman society in general, senior police or senior personnel in the AG's chambers with common sense who might be inclined to intervene and avoid a decent man being dragged into court and his personal life being played in the media, would be loathe to get involved as such could easily result in another Tempura.  

    Further, it is understood that a second case relating to the actual assault has also been brought by the Crown against Mr Seymour, notwithstanding it is understood that Mr Yapp had no interest in pursuing the matter… ludicrous.   

    • Anonymous says:

      People like you are part of the problem.  No wonder there are such abuses of power in the current administration.  As for "his wife embarrassing him" it's time to come of the caves and realize it takes one persons desire to end a relationship.  Women are not possessions and your backward thinking is part of the reason women are often abused in society.

      • Anonymous says:

        I am a woman, and I beleive that if a married woman choses to fool around on her husband then she has to understand that there are consequences as a result of her actions. If she is not willing to risk facing thoses consequences then she had better just not do it. 

        We sometime foolishly place ourselves (men and women) in harms way and then we want to blame everyone else when we have to pay our dues.

        Married Ladies, if you are planning on having an affair – DON'T!  Get that divorce first and then go your merry way, skipping all the way to your new BoBo.  Stay safe!

        • Anonymous says:

          I'm a woman too!  I'm a woman too!

        • Anonymous says:

          and where do you draw the line on these 'consequences', 'madam'?

        • Anonymous says:

          Do you really think divorce makes it safe? Not when you're dealing with the "my possession" "bully" "coward" mentality. You need to educate yourself.  Do some reading on facts and a reality check will take you out of the dark ages. Men are responsible for their misconduct – no other person's fault.  Don't encourage them intheir "unaccountable" mentality!  They're not tots.

      • Island lover says:

        This MLA is not a "decent man" as you say and his own shceming comments should have him removed from office for being unfit to serve.

        His defense lawyer set the advancement of women back a century, the politicians in the court room was an embarrasment, and I agree that this is actually comical.  The Cayman courts are more like South Park than a justice system.

        http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103454/the-chewbacca-defense

    • Anonymous says:

      If the case wasn't brought to court then you would've heard that its because he's a politician and he's being held above the law. Now the case was tried the talk is that it was a waste of time especially because he was acquitted. You really can't please everyone.

  23. Anonymous says:

    I"m XXXX so  happy that John John got justice in the Cayman courts….my hat off to the jurors…thank you Steve! men in the courts need more men like you to defend us from the evils of our  Judiciary system. 

    I'm especially ashamed of any men species, that contributed to turning this into a political football….what  a bunch of lunatics. 

    It's very rear to see justice  served within the Cayman courts, especially when it has to do with a man  and his estranged wife…..and i hope you men never have to encounter the same travesty…i would never wish this on any man….sorry you all did'nt get to rejoice.

    We are our brother's keeper…do not forget that. God be with you all.

     

  24. Anonymous says:

    The circus has been great all week!   Until next time, no more clowning around.

  25. Anonymous says:

    All you people bitchin' and crying about Steve's performance.  He did what he needed to do to win the case.

    He did nothing illegal.  

    He planted the seeds of doubt and spun up a whirlwind of sandstorm that made it impossible for the man to be found guilty.  

    You think John John and Steve worried about what anyone thinks about the comments including the judge?  All he had to worry about was not saying anything in contempt of the court or which would cause a mistrial.

    It's funny.  Some of you look at some of the most successful and wealthy people in this country with the deepest admiration.  Do you have any idea how devious, ruthless and cut-throat they are- yet they are held up on a pedestal and praised for being 'shrewd', or 'clever'.  Yet Steve is considered dastardly.  

    Kind of hypocritical if you ask me.  

  26. Anonymous says:

    Ha ha stories like this make me laugh and look forward to the end of the year when I can take my big bag of money and leave this godforsaken island for good and return to civilization.

     

  27. Anonymous says:

    time for marches and petitions tothe uk……..s.o.s

  28. Anonymous says:

    Thank you for even waking up to write that beautiful piece!

  29. Anonymous says:

    The biggest story here is that the leadership of the country was sitting in the court room in a criminal case againtst their political ally. That may not be illegal but it would result in a political furor beyond all belief in First World countries. Shouldn't have pressed the case, though, if the "wife" wasn't going to testify. Total waste of time.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Not at all surprised with this verdict, I sure hope that the Cayman public quickly forgives and forgets this scandelous soap opera like predicament our beloved MLA had gotten himself involved with, as that would help when he is campaining for elections in the very near future.

    I for one will smile and remember that I too am not without sin, so will not cast any stones, for I remember that ALL including myself will be judged fairly by God for his/her sins whom NO MAN or jury from this earth will be able to influence.

    I do hope that the jury and Mr.Seymour, along with Mr.Mcfield all sleep well tonite…..   

    God Bless the Cayman Islands and God Bless our Elected Representitives.

     

  31. Anonymous says:

    … but the weather is beautiful.

  32. Anonymous says:

    Steve McField has sunk any chance he ever had to become an elected member of the LA.

    His offensive comments about "sacred vessels" and their relationship to the men in their lives is beyond belief.

    Anyone who voted for this MLA must be feeling a bit disappointed to say the least.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Just like Charles Clifford after the Commission of Enquiry revealed him to be a conniving self centred politician wannabe, Seymour will never recover from this. He has won the battle but will never be re-elected and he can blame Steve McField's tawdry performance for that.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Someone should demand that the closing speech of Mr McField be published so that all Caymanians can see what he and the government think of us.  One of the things he said while members of parliament was sittin in court was the if McKeever had the power he would have interfered with justice and stopped the trial.  These was Steve's and Dwayne's words.  I forgot the Leader was watching from the back of the court with his friends.

    • Anonymous says:

      ABSOLUTELY.  McKeeva Bush has no use for laws.  He wants to be able to do WHATEVER he wants to do.  While the system does not yet allow for a Dictator, that is certainly the mindset of those in power.

      By the way, Mike Adam and Mark Scotland…. shame on you.

       

      • Anonymous says:

        Mike Adam used to have a lot of respect from a lot of folk. Alas, he has nailed himself to a sinking ship. A waste, but better the true colours be shown. See ya.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Now Steve got time to call in to Rooster Talk show every morning now again…LOL!

  36. Anonymous says:

    Dont stop the Carnival!!

  37. Anonymous says:

    I am happy for John Seymour.  Furthermore, this case did not belong in Grand Court, it should have been dealt with in summary court by a Judge. This was a wasteof court time and money. Legal needs to stop pursuing cases with weak evidence and focus on more serious cases that are being put on the back burner to accomodate these domestic type cases.

    • caymanphantom says:

      The only reason it was in the Grand Court was because Dwayne and Steve wanted it there.  For some reason they liked their chances before a Caymanian jury deciding under the watchful eye of the parade of ministers.  Great strategy but women of the Caymans, be under no illusion the defence was run on the basis that we are property of men.

      I hear that when a politician "lies" it is really a scheme and not sin.  Sisters, tell our men that we are voting with them but when we are secretly voting – vote for someone who really thinks that we are equal.

      Legal don't waste your time.  Drop the assault charge.  When will you accept that Cayman politicians will never be convicted.

       

      • Anonymous says:

        You finally got your @ ss whipped, it's about time, you want equality, earn it, and stop dragging us men in front of the evils of the courts. You are willing to be man's property when the money is flowing. I love Steve's strategy,and you never told a lie…right!

    • Anonymous says:

      phew, now we can all breathe easyagain, with the threat of politicians being forced to 'not lie' lifted. That was a close one. (not really)

      I at first thought that all the udp was there to intimidate the jury, but now I think they were interested because the outcome could affect all of them so much.

      anyway, let's all go to the beach!

    • BORN FREE says:

      XXXX The best part of the trial was when Mr. Seymour admitted sending his wife a text message with an untruthful story (a lie) about being hit down by a car & being in hospital, but he told the court that he had not lied (even though he admitted it was not true)! Only a politician or a lawyer could come up with that one, AMAZING but very funny!

      • Lefty says:

        Reply to Born Free – Mr. Born Free, but he went to "Sunday School" until he was 25!

  38. Jacky boatside from oldbush says:

    Its our time young Caymanians to stand against this onslaught of political interference and foreign influence running this place chase those crazy baldheads out a de town they trying to run us down and eating up all our corn.Well done Steve Johnny Cochran Mcfield well played old boy. After all this ain’t about Justice is all about Justus Caymanians we got to stick together against this outside tyranny trying to run this place. all you sellout Caymanians go weh! Bigga to my boy Hatcha & Butcha

  39. The Queen says:

    "Jury Quits MLA" – To all ya dogs wanting to see this old dog fail, guess what?!  He still is MLA!  🙂

  40. Sachamo says:

    I am very happy for John John, having your personal life play out in public like this is enough punishment. My advice to you sir, plenty more fish in the water..move on.

  41. My 1 cents worth says:

    While I am not prepared to deliberate on the merits or lack thereof on this case- a JURY has acquitted this man so there should be no argument about political influences.

    Mr. McField laid done some very compelling arguments and rebutted the prosecutions case as only a good lawyer would. Congrats Steve.

    XXXX

     

  42. whodatis says:

    Good ol' Caymanian Common Sense!  Happy for ya "BoBo" I mean Dwayne!

    • Anonymous says:

      brain dead

    • Anonymous says:

      If dwayne could not keep his missus happy, why is that our fault? He should be ashamed of himself. lmao

    • Anonymous says:

      The sad thing is that he claims that Caymanian Common sense is different to the rest of the world's.   Do you really want to hold that award?

    • Anonymous says:

      Not this Caymanian.  I don't advocate violence and this is really good ol' Caymanian common sense — peaceable.

  43. Anonymous says:

    The extraordinary comments made by the defense help perpetuate that we are a mysogonistic, xenophobic, and ignorant people who feel entitled blame others for their failures in relationships, work and business.  Our forefathers (and Mothers) would be ashamed of you and tell you to stop whining.

  44. Anonymous says:

    Notwithstanding the fact that the jury acquitted Mr Seymour, Steve McField's performance in court while summing up was the worst I have seen since the days of Karl Brandon nearly four decades ago.

    • Anonymous says:

      did he cry?  he always seems so hurt, such a victim

    • Anonymous says:

      That's a bit unfair………to Brandon.

    • Anonymous says:

      Steve seems to have done an excellent job, that's why his client is free.  At the end of the day it's all about whether the defendant is found guilty or not! 

  45. Anonymous says:

    It's a hard pill to swallow when another man has an affair with one man's wife. In all honesty, it's a wonder that something worse did not come of this  whole affair than Seymour supposedly saying " ya neva saw me".

    I for one am happy to hear that he has been acquitted. XXXX

    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly……did not expect anything but just that……….!?

    • Anonymous says:

      They were separated and I believe still are if not divorced.  Do you think she should "obey him" until death do them part?

      • Anonymous says:

        They are not divorced. Your post says a lot about your morals. Apparently you believe that fidelity is about "obedience".

    • Anonymous says:

      if all husbands who have affairs were banished, what a clean-up!!

  46. Anonymous says:

    …………. Is anyone surprised ……….

  47. Anonymous says:

    Surely with the amount of politicoin the gallery the Jury must have felt an enormous pressure to return a not guilty verdict, even if they were simply their to support a friend or colleague. It must be very close to undue influence/pressure/intimidation of the jury?  

    I'm sure they will all argue that they have a right to be there, and maybe so, and that there is nothing in law preventing them from a public display of support or attendance, except maybe their own conscience and respect for the law and due process!

    At the very least it must been seen as a bad use of their time to be in a court room over an ugly domestic dispute? And by ugly I include Mr McField's comments about women, shameful.

     

    • Anonymous says:

      … especially if any of the jurors are govt. employees who know full well what will happen to their jobs if they deliver the wrong verdict.

    • Anonymous says:

      I totally agree, MOB style!

    • Anonymous says:

      You couldnt make this up!!

    • Anonymous says:

      ~For all those posting negative comments: I pray that you don't find yourself in Seymour's shoes and have a spouse involved in infidelity. It is one of the most heart breaking/humiliating experiences ever. 

      It's no wonder the man reacted the way he did, after all, in these high tension circumstances one never knows what one will do until you find yourself in the situation.

      Matters ofthe heart are potentially deadly on occassion.  Had it been me I too would have tried to stay out or prison on top of everything else.

      Glad he has been acquitted!

      • Anonymous says:

        I just hope that if I am in that situation, that I am an MLA, so i can act however my emotions dictate.

      • Anonymous says:

        I understand how emotional this can be and do not believe Mr. Yapp should have had an affair with a married woman even if she was separated.   However you have to behave like a man.  If you want a confrontation then don't bring a friend to help you out XXXX.  I think the security guard was the only admirable person in this whole case.

        • Anonymous says:

          I have had several conversations with a number of Caymanian men who are the pillars of our community including our older generation as well, around this whole embarassing mess, and not one of them has said that they would have acted any differently than Seymour did.  In fact one even said that a good cow cod would have come in handy that evening (karate vs. cow cod) .  If a spouse wants to fool around, then wait until its legal: get that divorce decree first . Can't have your cake and eat it too. Now that's being honest  for you.,

          • Anonymous says:

            XXXXX

            But lets ignore the actual charge and focus on the infidelity as Mr. McField wishes everyone to do.  Do your comments apply to both sexes or only to women that are separated from their husbands and in the process of seeking divorce? Tell me have any of your pillars ever had an affai…maybe on that business trip to Honduras, Panama, Bahamas, Cuba, or Dominican Republic?

             

  48. The Truth is Out There says:

    Is anyone really surprised by this? 

  49. Anonymous says:

    Does anyone know if the verdict was a majority verdict or a unanimous verdict ? 

    CNS Note:  It was unanimous. Juries are usually asked to return a unanimous verdict in the first instance. It is only at the descretion of the judge if there are special circumstances that a majority verdict can be entertained.

  50. Anonymous says:

    Shame and disgrace!

  51. Anonymous says:

    CNS, are MLA civil servants?

    • Anonymous says:

      of course not…

    • My 1 cents worth says:

      What a dumb and rhetorical question. Are MLA's hired by the government or are they voted in to office by way of an election?

      The answer is the latter! You, the author of this question, really need to assimilate yourself with how government functions.

      • Anonymous says:

        You should take a ha'penny change when you decide to answer rhetorical questions.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Good!

  53. Anonymous says:

    Not surprised by this verdict at all.

    The more revealing information coming out of this trial is in Steve McField's closing statements and the government ministers presence in court.

    McFiled has confirmed what we've suspected all along; the Governor in Cayman is only a figurehead and…

    in the past, the Cayman police did take direct orders from the lead politicians and…

    probably still do.

    What could have beenmore intimidating for the jury than having the entire slate of government ministers in the courtroom.

    This was a weak case to start with as there was no evidence that any threats were made to the security officer and what was said, was said in the heat of the moment.

    XXXX

    Its no wonder the reports of Operation Tempura and Cealt have been hidden by both the Caymanian and UK Governments.

  54. Anonymous says:

    And the circus continues…