“My art is an expression of my religious convictions and I do not understand why I’m being prosecuted for it.”

The above was said by Cayman Brac resident artist Ronald Gregory Kynes (64) in Cayman’s Summary Court last Friday (6) at a case management hearing before his trial for possession of an obscene publication.

The publication was in fact artwork – statues – executed by Kynes that he placed on his own property that many residents deemed to be obscene.

Kynes, I believe, is enjoying himself. He knows very well why he’s being prosecuted. And he wants it.

He asked the court to have his trial moved to the higher Grand Court because it was “a constitutional issue” he explained – freedom of expression. He handed a letter to Magistrate Kirsty-Ann Gunn putting that request in writing.

“I am a Roman Catholic”, he said and his statues represent “my thoughts, my feeling, my emotions.”

Under the heading “Enforcement of Rights and Freedoms,” of the Cayman Islands Constitution Section 26 says, “Any person may apply to the Grand Court to claim that government has breached or threatened his or her rights and freedoms under the Bill of Rights and the Grand Court shall determine such application fairly and within a reasonable time.”

Now the Magistrate has to make the decision. And it is a difficult one.

Magistrate Kirsty-Ann Gunn reminded Kynes that he had the right to apply for legal advice concerning this stand-alone issue and previously had offered him a “duty counsel”.

Kynes said he had met with him and was “not impressed”. He wanted to represent himself, something, maybe arguably, he can do very well.

This whole affair is like witnessing a powder keg that is waiting to explode. The big difference here is that the people who do not want this to happen are the very ones who are getting closer to lighting the touch paper.

Instead of the Brac residents deciding to drop their obscenity complaints the prosecutor gave the Magistrate even more.

She has ordered an on site visit so she can see for herself. Although the original artistic works were damaged by vandals and no culprits found.

On the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy they ask this?

“What is erotic art? Do all paintings with a sexual theme qualify as erotic? How to distinguish between erotica and erotic art? In what way are aesthetic experiences related to, or different from, erotic experiences and are they at all compatible? Both people and works of art can be sensually appealing, but is the beauty in each case substantially the same? How helpful is the distinction between the nude and the naked? Can we draw a strict line between erotic art and pornography? We tend to think of art as complex and of pornography as one-dimensional, but how compelling is that differentiation? Pornography is often considered harmful, objectifying, and exploitative, but to what extent is erotic art immune to moral criticism of this sort?”

It is a very, very long read, but interesting, and does not come to a definitive conclusion.

Kynes is very aware of this and even if he is found ‘guilty’ he will be the winner as it will not end there.