A 67-year-old attorney, who will be sentenced on November 9, has asked the High Court to impose a non-custodial sentence even as the acting Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) wants the court to impose a stiff sentence.
“I am both embarrassed and ashamed to be appearing before this court in this capacity and position. I deeply regret the action taken by me. I accept the verdict of the jury and like I said, I sincerely apologise for what has happened,” said attorney Ernest Winston Jackman, who in May this year was found guilty of stealing BDS$678 414.75 (One BDS$=US$0.50 cents) from the company, HEJ Limited between June 23, 2006 and March 5, 2007.
Jackman was also convicted of engaging in money laundering by disposing of the sum between June 23, 2006 and October 18, 2011.
Acting DPP, Krystal Delaney, urged that the High Court use a sentence of between eight and nine years as a starting sentence regarding the theft and 10 years for the money laundering conviction. She said credit should be given for the time he has spent in prison which up to July 28 was 96 days.
“There was a significant breach of trust, the custodial threshold has been crossed and a suspended sentence is not appropriate in the circumstances. In this case an immediate custodial sentence is not only merited but necessary,” Delaney told the Supreme Court.
She told Madam Justice Pamela Beckles that among the aggravating circumstances is that a significant sum of money had been stolen.
“It was stolen from an elderly complainant. By the time he gave evidence in this case he was 85 years old. In his victim impact statement he talks about the fact that this money was his retirement plan and he therefore had to make alternate arrangements for his retirement when it was not forthcoming.
“We all know that the relationship between a client and an attorney is one that is built on trust and in this case there was a breach of that trust when the convicted man chose to use Mr Huggins’ money as his own personal piggy bank,” the prosecutor said, adding that while the convicted lawyer had repaid a significant portion of the money, that was only done as a result of a previous court judgment.
“The court needs . . . to send a message that these sorts of offences will not be tolerated. The sentences imposed should reflect the court’s abhorrence of these sorts of offences and should be reflected in specific and general terms,” the acting DPP said.
But Jackman told Justice Beckles that it was a transaction that had broken down and was “not deliberate on my part to deprive Mr Huggins of his property.
“I have done wrong – I do not, cannot, will not even for one moment pretend otherwise. My action has been and continues to be a source of shame and embarrassment for me . . . . My embarrassment and shame extend to my family . . . I deeply regret the pain that I have caused them.”
He said that he had made “great efforts” to repay the money and was still “desirous” of doing so.
“To date I have paid the sum of BDS$392 000 with the balance remaining unpaid. It is my desire to pay the balance of the money belonging to the complainant. I have always intended to do so and will take action to try and have that done.
“While it is not possible to be able to do so from where I am in prison, I am requesting to be allowed the scope and opportunity to do so. The complainant had stated that he would like to be paid the balance of the money due . . .and I am desirous of doing so.
“I am asking that the court impose a non-custodial sentence in the circumstances. I again sincerely apologise to the court, to the complainant and to my family. I am asking the clemency of the court in this matter,” he added.