Stolen phone costs robber almost $3,000

An unemployed 19-year-old who committed a daring daylight robbery while disembarking a route taxi must now compensate his victim.

Christopher Seth Japeth Bynoe, of Fordes Road, Clapham, Christ Church, admitted to robbing Natasha Graham of a cellular phone and a case on January 21 this year.

Bynoe returned before Magistrate Kristie Cuffy-Sargeant Tuesday for sentencing after spending a month on remand.

He was ordered to pay Graham $2,830 no later than June 2.

If he fails to pay the money, he will spend eight months at HMP Dodds.

2 Responses to Stolen phone costs robber almost $3,000

  1. Hal Austin March 2, 2017 at 4:35 am

    Wow! For stealing a cellular phone, he was remanded for a month, then fined nearly $3000, including compensation.
    This magistrate needs to see someone who can sort out her lust for disproportionate punishment. It is a naked abuse of office.
    Of course the thief must be punished. But for stealing a mobile phone the month’s remand was more than enough. It was in effect a sentence.
    What is not said is if the young man is employed. If he was before being remanded, it is almost certain that he has lost – or was at risk of losing his job.
    If he is unemployed, where is he going to get the $3000 fine – by stealing, burglary, selling drugs?

    Reply
  2. Hal Austin March 2, 2017 at 4:43 am

    Decisions by this authoritarian magistrate are seriously in need of review.
    For stealing a mobile phone, this young man was remanded for a month, an effective sentence, now is fined nearly $3000, including compensation.
    This is disproportionate. The remand was enough for the theft. What is not said is if the young man was (is) employed? If he was employed he is almost certainly not now, or at least ran a risk of losing his job.
    And if he is not employed, then how I he going to raise the money to pay the fine? Theft, burglary, drug dealing?
    Of course he should have been punished fore the offence, but the remand was enough along with an apology in open court.
    This magistrate has a serious problem, bordering on a dislike of herself.
    For Heaven’s sake, she is only a lawyer, not a rocket scientist.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *