Teen admits setting cell fire
(CNS): A 17-year-old boy from West Bay admitted setting fire to cells in both West Bay and George Town lock-ups last year while being held there on remand without charge when he was only 16 years old. The teenager pleaded guilty to arson and being reckless with regard to the property he damaged and the possible endangerment to life but he denied doing so with intent, which the crown accepted. The court heard that the juvenile was being held by police without charge at the time he set the fires, which he lit in an attempt to attract the attention of the guards, who he said were mistreating him.
With the court awaiting a social enquiry report after hearing the circumstances of the case, on Thursday morning Justice Alex Henderson granted the teen bail with curfew conditions until his sentencing for the two counts of arson.
When the judge heard about the circumstance that led to the youngster setting the fires and that he had also been admitted to the Cayman Islands hospital critical care unit after the George Town blaze, the judge made some pointed comments about human rights.
He queried why a juvenile of 16 had been held without charge for two days at the West Bay police station cells and why he was then held for a further five days again without being charged with any crime in police cells in George Town before he set a fire there. Justice Henderson wondered aloud what kind of position the European Court of Human Rights would take on such circumstances, given its position regarding anyone being held in custody without being charged with an offence, let alone a 16 year old.
The case comes in the wake of a damning report by the UK’s prison inspectorate that looked at the police custody cells in George Town and West Bay and found them seriously wanting. The inspectors were here just a few weeks after the teenager had been held in what were described by the inspectors as “appalling conditions” that were “barely fit for human habitation.”
The court heard that the teenager, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had been arrested by police on suspicion of burglary. He had been held for two days in the cells in West Bay and claimed he was being badly treated by officers and being ignored. The arbitrary and discretionary treatment of prisoners was well documented in the inspectorates report as well as the difficulty detainees had in attracting the attention of the guards in the cells.
After several failed attempts to get attention from the guards so the teen could get some water, and frustrated by the circumstances, he succeeded in gaining their attention when he set the fire using a lighter, which was reportedly hidden in some plastic piping in the cell. The officers managed to remove the youngster from his cell and no one was hurt.
Following the incident he was transferred to George Town, where the court heard he was kept for a further five days, but again without being charged. During the first four days the youngster was held in the main cells with a guard permanently on duty there. However, as a result of various changes in the suspects being held at the jail, the teen was segregated and moved into an isolated inner cell, where again he was unable to attract attention to ask for food or water.
The teen then set fire to his new cell. However, this time the blaze was more serious and by the time officers arrived they were unable to pull the youngster from the cell because of the amount of smoke. The teenager was eventually rescued by fire-fighters. Officers suffered from smoke inhalation but the teenager received the worst injuries and was in critical care for some time after the fire.
The youngster was eventually charged with burglary and has since served relevant sentences regarding those offences. The teen was, however, still in custody on Thursday morning when he came to court on remand for the arson offences.
After hearing the facts of the crown's case and the reasons why the young man set the fires, Justice Henderson granted the teen bail until March, when he will return to be sentenced. He was ordered to live with his mother in West Bay and because the juvenile said he had a job he could go back to if released, the judge imposed a curfew from 5pm in the evening to 7am the next morning to allow him to work.
See related story here
Category: Crime
Only in Cayman can you be a thief, start two fires indoors, blame the cops, and the judge believes you and cuts you a break. Poor poor little thief…… pathetic.
Jail. And lots of it.
It seems that every aspect of accountability within the Cayman Islands Government is non-existant ! What are these "experts" being paid for? Every cat, dog and their entire family can come here, show up with a piece of paper stating any old qualifications (any background checks on where these pieces of papers were issued or printed to check for authentication?), they are put into position of trust, paid alot of money (seems the only reason for being here) and continue to get paid while failing to properly do their jobs and be accountable for all the crap that goes on. The only time you see a civil servant smiling is on Government's pay day. If you are hired to do a job, not because you work for the Government that you can sit back, swivel in your chair, swish around a few documents now and then and continue to be employed. Please Caymanians, make sure you vote this coming election, we need a complete re-vampt of Government and all its departments, there are alot of educated, trainable and suitable Caymanians here who are competent and if I have to add, very honest and hard working.
The former HRC issued several reports warning government in relation to its treatment of juvenile offenders:
they also tried, in vain, to warn the cayman public of several important gaps in the Constitution, but again nobody listened.
Theres plenty more abuses going on here
That’s against human rights to deny any prisoner of food & water!
Braca
Some one's posterior from the Police and Social Services should be roasted, human rights not with standing.
Well done RCIPS with your preventative measures – I thought that one of their jobs was to ensure that items such as knives, sharpened objects and lighters are removed from detainees? Chances are this wouldn't have happened if the youth didn't have access to a lighter.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Police Officers of all people know that you should not deny food & water toa young offender and then expect him to behave rationally, follow instructions and manage difficult circumstances.
Yes, persons who are convicted of crimes to society should pay their debts but there is some reasonable expectation for the provision of the basic human needs: food , water, shelter, clothing and order.
We cannot expect to rehabilitate our children if we do not lead by example.
I have never seen a case where bad treatment of a child turned that child into a productive citizen in society. It has left many a man and woman broken.
Let us ALL take care of our children. Foolish behavior and mistakes as a teenager should not forever determine our destiny but rather teach lessons so has to redirect our destiny for a better life.
give him a chance judge! he was just trying to get some service, but he had to use smoke signals.
Wow!
Um, so he set two fires? One has to wonder how the young man yet again managed to come into position of conveniently having something handy to ignite the second fire at GT?
As for the police procedural issues, let alone the human rights issues, this is disgusting behaviour from our police who also should not be 'bailed out' for their offences. If the police here really do follow English policing and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as revised (PACE) – as I keep getting told is the case but clearly it isn't – then why was a juvenile placed in a cell anyway? What reason was recorded for this decision? Why was no other suitable secure accommodation available? Was he offered two light meals and one main meal every 24 hours? Were drinks provided with each meal and upon reasonable request at intervals between meals? Which magistrate signed a warrant allowing you to detain this boy for 7 days when the maximum possible detention period in the UK is 96 hours (4 Days)? Did you visit and check on him every hour? I really hope you at least kept a responsible adult appraised throughout the entire scenario.
Again, can I encourage everyone, government officials, police and public alike, to download and familiarise themselves with all parts of PACE (as revised):
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/police/powers/pace-codes/
and in particular reference to this case, Code C (2012).
It is in everyone's interest (both officials and public) to know their rights. If PACE applies here its a joke. If it doesn't, it ought to be… and soon.
Mr Baines you need to fix this mate.