After a jury unanimously found ex police officer Elvis Kelsey Ebanks guilty of 2 counts of bribery and 2 counts of breach of trust, Justice Charles Quin last Thu 24^th handed down a custodial sentence of 3 years on 2 counts and 18 months on the other 2 counts, all to run concurrently, meaning Ebanks will spend 3 years at HM prison Northward.

Ebanks was accused of extracting a $500 bribe from a Filipino national, Elmer Ferreras, in exchange for not investigating how he came into possession of a phone that belonged to a third party.

Prosecuting counsel told the court the incident took place in November 2012 shortly after the owner of the missing phone discovered it was in the possession of Ferreras. Police Constable Ebanks investigated the report, and Ferreras handed the phone over and it was returned to its original owner. The owner then said he did not wish to proceed with the matter.

The court heard that Ebanks drove away with Ferreras in his car and attempted to intimidate him into giving him money in exchange for not going further with the investigation. He told Ferreras he could face a jail sentence of at least ten years. Ferreras is alleged to have given Ebanks $140 cash and arranged to meet again.

Ferreras immediately complained to the RCIPS.

In a recorded call by the police it was learnt Ebanks arranged to meet Ferreras at the Countryside Village shopping plaza in Newlands where he was to bring $500 in cash and hand it to Ebanks.

When they met it was recorded on CCTV and after the money was handed over RCIPS officers stopped Ebanks from leaving and he was arrested.

Ebanks denied the allegations and claimed at a police interview the money he reportedly took from the complainant was a loan.

The jury did not believe Ebanks and found him guilty on May 15^th this year.

The Crown submitted that Bribery attracted a maximum sentence of 14 years, whilst the Breach of Trust charges attracted a maximum sentence of five years.

The Defence submitted various letters testifying to the good character of Ebanks with one from former RCIPS Commissioner Buel Braggs who said, the Defendant is “incredibly remorseful for what has transpired and now realises that he acted in an unprofessional manner in accepting financial assistance from the Complainant.” Mr. Braggs also stated: “Elvis Jr has agreed with me that this was a foolish mistake on his part and [he] must be accountable for the consequences of his actions.”

Amongst other submissions, including Ebanks maintaining the $500 he had received from Ferreras was a loan, Defence provided case histories of sentences for police officers convicted of similar offences and suggested a starting point should be below 2 years imprisonment and in all the circumstances, one year would be appropriate.

The Judge in his Analysis said:

“The Defendant [Ebanks] did not inform the victim that the owner of the Blackberry did not wish to press charges. Instead the Defendant told Mr. Ferreras that he could still be arrested and prosecuted for the theft of the phone and, consequently, could go to prison for 10 years. One must recall that the victim had only been on the island with a work permit as a janitor for only a few weeks. He earned $350 per fortnight from which he had to pay for rent, food and utilities.

“The Defendant asked for money in exchange for not proceeding to arrest and prosecute Mr.Ferreras for the theft of the phone. The victim gave the Defendant all

the money he had at that time on the to”‘ November 2014 – except for the Filipino

currency, which the Defendant refused. The CI$115.00 the victim banded to the Defendant was money be had saved and set aside to send home to his family. In order to placate the Defendant the victim even tried to give the Defendant his Filipino currency, but the Defendant returned this to the victim. Not content with taking all the money the victim had on the 10^th November, the Defendant asked the victim to give him more money. When Mr. Ferreras maintained he had no money, he offered the Defendant a further Cl$50.00, to which the Defendant responded that that would not even pay for his gasoline. The Defendant told the victim to get the money by borrowing it and then he said he would call Mr.Ferreras on the following Wednesday to make the arrangements to collect the money. The Defendant called Mr. Ferreras on the day and at the time he promised and made the necessary arrangements to collect the Cl$500.00 from Mr.Ferreras on that day.

“It is clear from reading the SIR and the references that the Defendant is still denying that he extracted a bribe. His actions could also be properly described as extortion. The Defendant’s evidence was that the victim was lending him Cl$500.00 as a favour. Furthermore, the Defendant’s evidence was that he was going to repay the victim the money in January and would add an additional CI$100.00 to the repayment sum as a way of saying thanks. Accordingly, the Defendant still maintains he was borrowing $500.00 from the victim and repaying the victim CI$600.00.

“The   Defendant’s account is entirely implausible – particularly when, as a Caymanian police officer, he could have obtained loans from any of the five local retail banks and the Cayman Islands Civil Service Credit Union at a much more favourable rate of interest than the one he claims he agreed to pay Mr. Ferreras.

“Accordingly, despite his many references, there is no evidence of any genuine remorse or contrition on the part of the Defendant for the four offences for which the jury found him guilty. This is an aggravating factor which the Court must take into consideration when deciding the appropriate sentence.”

The Judge also said although the amounts of CI$115 and US$31 were small he had to consider that both sums were a substantial part of Ferreras’ monthly earnings.

Justice Quin said he had taken into account the offence “did not involve thwarting the prosecution of someone to be charged. I also take into account that the Defendant is a person of good character with no previous convictions. It is also evident from the references received that he is a good family man and a regular church member. These convictions will have a devastating effect on his career and his family,

“However, the Defendant’s conduct and behaviour in threatening to arrest and prosecute the victim for a theft for which the owner did not wish to press charges was egregious, It is difficult to identify any mitigating factors in this case, The vulnerable victim was demonstrably terrified and clearly thought that he could go to prison in this foreign land for a very long period of time, The Court commends Mr. Ferreras for his courage in reporting these serious crimes and giving evidence in, what was for him, a strange and foreign forum through the assistance of an invaluable interpreter.

“The Defendant’s conduct not only undermines the good name and reputation of the RCIPS but it also actually damages the good name of the Cayman Islands. The Courts and this country cannot tolerate any form of bribery or corruption.”

The judge also mentioned that the legislators of the Ant-corruption Law viewed the offence of bribery very serious and had set a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment.

Justice Quin then sent Ebanks to spend 3 years in imprisonment and ordered Ebanks to “repay to the victim, or his closest family member resident on these islands, the sums of CI$115.00 and US$31.00 within seven (7) days -with 30 days in default. These funds are to be paid to the Court Funds Office.”

See also iNews Cayman today’s Editorial “Corrupt police officers will be prosecuted to the fullest”.

LATEST: Elvis Ebanks has been released on bail pending his appeal