Man accused of robbing tourists remanded

Prosecutor Station Sergeant Neville Watson today successfully argued for a 22-year-old man who allegedly committed two offences that could have serious implications for the country’s bread and butter industry to be remanded to prison.

Amal Sudheer Jordan, who was listed on the charge sheet as having no fixed place of abode, denied robbing several tourists of their possessions on two different occasions when he appeared in the District ‘A’ Magistrates’ Court Wednesday.

Jordan is accused of robbing Max Kessel of a digital camera, a camera bag, a haversack and BDS$180 in cash, as well as an iPhone, a bag, a speaker, a pair of pants and a pencil eraser and book belonging to Constantijn William, valued at a total $2,438.10, on February 12.

He is also charged with stealing a bag, a cellular phone, a pair of sunglasses, a wallet and US$200 belonging to Sam Corbin, as well as a bag, two cellular phones a wallet and money belonging to Predrag Vojvodic, with a total value of $4,890.07, on January 29.

“[These] two matters fall under the Theft Act and [were] perpetrated against visitors to this island. It touches and concerns the tourism industry in a serious way, Sir,” the police prosecutor told Magistrate Douglas Frederick.

Watson also pointed out that Jordan had no fixed place to stay, which could make the process of issuing summons for him to attend court ineffective. He also urged the magistrate to consider nature and seriousness of the offences Jordan allegedly committed.

“It is alleged that the accused brandished a weapon, causing the parties to run and sustain injuries. [The prosecution] is asking the court to err on the side of protecting the society,” the Station Sergeant said, adding that it was the Crown’s fear that the same allegations would arise against Jordan again if he was granted bail.

“Remand him into custody as he is not a fit and proper candidate for bail, Sir,” Watson added.

In his mitigation to get his client released on bail, Jordan’s attorney Romario Straker told the magistrate that his client lived at 5th Avenue, Brandons, St Michael with his father.

The surety who was hoping to post bail on Jordan’s behalf, said she had known him for over a year and verified that the accused had indeed being living at the address given by his lawyer.

Straker also argued that his client had no previous convictions and the offences had allegedly occurred between one and two months ago.

“It is now March and no [other] alleged offences have been committed,” the lawyer said.

Straker also attempted to discredit the prosecutor’s argument that a weapon was allegedly brandished by his client.

He stated that Jordan was not charged with any offence under the Offences Against the Persons Act and, as such, that ground put forward for denying his client bail was “prejudicial” and a mere allegation.

He added the Jordan was a fit and proper candidate for bail and would submit to any conditions imposed by the court, if released.

However, the magistrate pointed that while Jordan was a “first timer” to the law courts, he had made his first appearance on two charges involving tourists.

Frederick said Jordan needed to be remanded into custody at this time but he would keep “a serious monitor” on the case. The magistrate then advised the prosecutor to get the file ready as a matter of urgency.

“It cannot be business as usual on this one,” the magistrate warned.

Jordan returns to court on April 12.

7 Responses to Man accused of robbing tourists remanded

  1. ricr March 16, 2017 at 8:57 am

    “However, the magistrate pointed that while Jordan was a “first timer” to the law courts, he had made his first appearance on two charges involving tourists”
    Are there different laws depending on who crimes are committed against? If the people that were robbed were local, would he have gotten bail? SMH….should not matter if there are “tourist” or not, decision should be based upon protecting society as a whole !!!

    Reply
  2. Donild Trimp March 16, 2017 at 12:17 pm

    Don’t agree with the Magistrate’s statement at all.

    A crime is a crime whether it is committed against a tourist or a resident of Barbados.

    The tourist could also be Barbadian residing overseas and returning home for a visit.

    Wonder if the Magistrate was thinking of non Barbadian “Caucasian” tourists because I do not understand the connection between “his first appearance on two charges involving tourists”
    and not granting bail.

    Once again the logic of an “Educated fool”.

    Reply
  3. James Franks March 16, 2017 at 3:35 pm

    Agreed, there’s no fool like an old fool.

    Reply
  4. L King March 16, 2017 at 6:25 pm

    @Donald Trump The word Caucasian doesn’t mean white full stop – look it up

    Reply
  5. Pat S March 16, 2017 at 6:30 pm

    Crimes against locals do not receive the worldwide publicity that crimes against tourists do. I think that this is the same in every country. A murder of a UK citizen in Goa is currently receiving a lot of attention in the UK National press and on National TV whereas two murders of locals in UK only reported in local newspaper.

    Reply
  6. Sharon Bradford March 23, 2017 at 8:07 am

    My friend and I were over there last year and we were robbed and my friend was injured by a machete. The person in this picture looks vey much like the one that robbed me his accomplice robbed and injured my friend. It will not stop us from returning for another visit but we will be very wary next time. Such a shame as we have many friends that are locals and we both love Bim :(. I am still in contact with the police regarding our assault and won’t rest until the culprits are caught.

    Reply
  7. Robert March 27, 2017 at 12:20 pm

    Man did not get bail because he has no fixed place of abode not because he robbed tourist.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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