Quin J
IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS CRIMINAL SIDE INDICTMENT NO: 45/11 THE QUEEN V. LAVERNE OLIVINE GOULD Appearances: Ms. Trisha Hutchinson for the Crown Mr. Ben Tonner of Samson and McGrath for the Defendant Before: The Hon. Mr. Justice Charles Quin Heard: 21st October 2011 SENTENCE RULING
On the 26th August 2011 the Defendant pleaded guilty to wounding with intent contrary to s.194 of the Penal Code (2010 Revision).
The particulars of the offence are that the Defendant, on Sunday the 1st of May 2011 at 16A Finch Drive, West Bay, Grand Cayman, unlawfully and maliciously wounded Lina Clearstain Ebanks with intent to cause her grievous bodily harm. Facts
Sometime after 11 p.m. on the 30th April 2011 Lina Clearstain Ebanks ("the Complainant") fell asleep on the sofa in the hallway between her bedroom and her daughter's bedroom at 16A Finch Drive, West Bay, Grand Cayman. The Complainant fell asleep at around 1 a.m. on Sunday the 1st May 2011. She recalls waking up sometime after that but went back to sleep for approximately another half hour. She had been asleep on her back and when she again woke up she felt something cold on her neck. She opened her eyes and saw the Defendant, her daughter, in front of her, with her left hand on top of her. The Complainant said the Defendant was holding her down by her ribcage. Then the Complainant realised that the Defendant had a knife held to her neck. The Complainant said that the Defendant was using both hands to saw the knife at her neck in an attempt to cut her neck.
The Complainant’s first reaction was to push the Defendant away, and then to jump up and try to grab the Defendant. A struggle ensued and eventually the Complainant got hold of the knife and ran through the front door, carrying the knife with her.
The Complainant said the Defendant was shouting “I hate you, I hate you” so she, the Complainant, ran out the front door carrying the knife with her to her granddaughter’s house.
The police attended the scene shortly after the attack and found that the Defendant was still inside 16A Finch Drive. The Defendant had locked herself into her bedroom and was refusing to open the door. Eventually the Defendant came out of her room and the police took her to the West Bay Police station where the Defendant was arrested and charged.
The Complainant received a deep wound to the left side of her neck, which required sutures. The Complainant also suffered minor cuts to her hands and arm, a cut on her right ear, and a long deep cut in her right hand from her palm to her thumb. This latter wound required surgery. The Court understands that the Defendant’s initial attack on her mother caused the wound to her mother’s neck. The Court further understands that the other injuries to the mother’s hand, arm and ear all occurred during the struggle when the Complainant was wresting the knife from the Defendant.
Counsel on behalf of the Defendant informed the Court that only a few days after her arrest, the Defendant wrote a letter setting out her unqualified culpability and remorse. Defence counsel said that the offence was totally out of character for the Defendant and very hard to explain. He said the Defendant has been a good daughter and a good mother to her child. Defence counsel raises the possibility that the Defendant was the victim of harassment from another individual who had a strong dislike for the Defendant’s mother.
In summary, Defence counsel submits that credit should be given for the Defendant’s guilty plea and her early acknowledgment of her guilt. Defence counsel points to the fact that the Complainant, fortunately, did not receive any permanent injuries. He also highlights the fact that the Defendant’s mother has stated that she forgives her daughter. The Defendant has no previous convictions and also, up to now, has a very good work record.
The Court has been greatly assisted by a Social Inquiry Report (SIR) dated the 26th September 2011, prepared by Sophia Wilson-Leslie ("Mrs. Wilson"). The SIR confirms that the Defendant was reared singlehandedly by her mother, the Complainant. It is a fact that the Defendant had some significant medical problems and suffered a total loss of hearing at the age of six. However, despite this handicap, the Defendant was a happy child, and was able to co-exist with her teachers, peers and family members very well. Although the Defendant’s mother and father had separated, after which the Defendant continued to live with her mother, the evidence is that her father loves the Defendant dearly and has always maintained his support for her.
It appears that the Defendant lived with the father of her 4-year old son, Devon, for about 7 years at the father’s parents’ house. However, this seems to be a troubled relationship as Devon’s father and the Defendant were constantly quarrelling, and he would hit her.
The Complainant disapproved of this man because he abused her daughter, the Defendant, and he refused to seek employment. The evidence from the very helpful SIR is that the father of the Defendant’s child does not assist with the care and maintenance of their son, even though the Defendant still loves him.
The SIR seemed to indicate that the Defendant had a number of challenges namely current unemployment, financial challenges as well as this abusive and unstable relationship with her boyfriend. The SIR does not rule out that the Defendant’s attack on the Complainant, her mother, could have been provoked by the Defendant’s boyfriend, who clearly had a strong dislike for the Complainant.
It is noted that the Defendant had her bag packed and suffered from a sense of fear that the child’s father could harm her or the child.
The SIR confirms that the Defendant is deeply remorseful, although the SIR does recommend that she could benefit from her exposure to two psycho-educational programmes namely, “Healthy Relationship’ and ‘Anger Management.’
The Complainant has forgiven the Defendant for this assault. The Complainant confirms that the Defendant has always been a good child. The Complainant describes her daughter as being a “well behaved, respectful and humble individual”. The Complainant states in her letter to the Court dated the 5th July 2011, that she begs the Court not to send the Defendant to prison. The Complainant is of the view that the Defendant knows that she did wrong, and that her remorse is genuine. There is a strong suggestion that the Defendant was under the influence of her boyfriend and the Complainant feels that if the Defendant were to find employment and start her life again without the boyfriend, she would be able to care for herself and her son. Conclusion
I have been referred to a number of cases involving stabbing wounds before this Court and the Court of Appeal. It has to be said that this is not the normal wounding case that comes before this Court.
The Defendant has never been in any kind of trouble prior to this incident, and has no previous convictions. From my review of the above-mentioned SIR, and from all that has been said, nobody regards the Defendant as an aggressive person who is a danger to those around her.
As the English Court of Appeal stated in the Attorney General’s Reference Number 17 of [2002] EWCA Crim 1292: “Sentencing decisions have to reflect the specific facts and circumstances of each case, and guidelines are not to be tramlines.”
The Defendant’s attack was a very clumsy attempt to injure and hurt her mother. I accept that the majority of injuries the Complainant received occurred during the struggle that ensued after the Defendant’s initial attack. It is very difficult to understand what made the Defendant commit this assault on her mother. I note from Dr McGill’s psychiatric report dated the 8th July 2011 that she confirms that the Defendant was not suffering from any major psychiatric disorder, nor did she exhibit any bizarre tendencies. Dr. McGill does confirm that the Defendant suffers from neuro-sensory deafness and communication with the Defendant is limited because of the simplicity of sign language. There is some evidence that the Defendant was under the influence of her boyfriend, and that may have resulted in the aberration of her judgment because she resented her mother’s dislike for her boyfriend, and the fact that her mother tried to limit their relationship.
The Defendant’s former teacher and interpreter, Ms. Ferryman, says that she has never known the Defendant to be an indisciplined person. Ms. Ferryman says she was shocked when she learned of the Defendant’s involvement in such a violent crime. Finally, Ms. Ferryman says that she will help to find employment for the Defendant when she comes out of prison. I also note that the SIR confirms that, whilst the Defendant has been in prison, the prison officers have found her to be “helpful, kind, loving and respectful.”
In conclusion, I have to find that this is not an ordinary case. Sometimes we have exceptional cases that do not fall within the normal sentencing guidelines. I do find that the circumstances of this case are exceptional circumstances. What is clear is that the Defendant was a person of good character who has shown genuine remorse. She accepted her culpability at a very early stage. She is a 32-year old woman who clearly loves her mother, the Complainant, and her son, Devon. It is apparent from the SIR that both her mother and Devon want her to come home. Although Courts cannot act upon the victim’s recommendations I do find that the Complainant has forgiven the Defendant, and I do take into account the Complainant’s wishes for the Defendant to return home.
The Court has to impose a term of imprisonment to reflect the gravity of the offence to which the Defendant has pleaded guilty. I do note that the Defendant has been in custody for six months since her arrest and I take that period of incarceration into account. I therefore sentence the Defendant to two years’ imprisonment. However, in light of the exceptional circumstances surrounding this case, I suspend the sentence for two years.
In addition I do order that the Defendant stay in regular contact with Mrs. Wilson-Leslie or her nominee, and further, that the Defendant undergo the psycho-educational programmes recommended by Mrs. Wilson-Leslie.
In conclusion I reiterate the suggestions and recommendations made by Ms. K. Bramwell of the Probation Services that the Defendant must exhibit good behaviour towards the Complainant and be firmly reminded that she and her son’s father must respect and abide by the conditions of the fit-person order for its duration, or until any changes are made by the relevant agency or the Courts. Dated this the 28th October 2011 Honourable Mr. Justice Charles Quin Judge of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands