Justice Carlisle Greaves has made it clear that the High Court “must be taken seriously” when it comes to sentencing as he imposed a $15 000 fine on a gunman, $5 000 of which had to be paid forthwith.
Christopher Philaman Andrew Scott, formerly of Scotts Terrace, Grazettes, St Michael who previously pleaded guilty to having a .25 Colt semi-automatic pistol on July 6, 2014 now has three months to pay the balance of the money if he wants to avoid spending four years in prison.
Before the fine was handed down Senior State Counsel Neville Watson and Scott’s attorney Arthur Holder addressed the No. 3 Supreme Court on sentencing.
Watson pointed out that the pre-sentencing report submitted on Scott had placed him at a medium risk of reoffending. He stated that the custodial threshold had been crossed but given the treatment of first-time offenders before the court a substantial fine would be a fitting sentence for Scott’s crime.
Watson said aggravating in the convicted man’s case was the fact that he was in possession of an unlicenced firearm which was in good working order; and his deliberate intention to possess it.
Going in Scott’s favour, the prosecutor said, was the fact that the weapon was recovered and there was no evidence that it was used.
He then submitted that a fine of $15 000 be imposed, $5 000 of which should be paid immediately, with the balance payable in four months.
But Scott’s attorney countered and urged the court to impose a $10 000 fine instead.
“There should generally be a minimum standard when it comes to these fines,” Justice Greaves said. “In this court that fine is around $15 000 for possession of a firearm and it increases depending on the type of firearm . . . .”
The judge made it clear that this was a 2014 offence and as such the convicted man “should have accumulated the means in which to pay . . . These matters must be treated seriously.”
He added: “The courts must be taken seriously when it comes to issues of sentencing.”
