Carter J
```html 1 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLAND 2 CRIMINAL DIVISION 3 INDICTMENT No. 26/2022 4 5 6 7 HIS MAJESTY THE KING 8 9 10 -v- 11 12 RENATO ROLANDO HARRIS 13 14 Appearances： 15 Ms. Sarah Lewis，Crown Counsel for the Prosecution 16 Mr. Keith Myers and Mr. Richard Barton for the Defendant 17 18 Before： 19 Hon Mrs. Justice Marlene Carter (Actg.) 20 21 Date of conviction： 22 9 December 2022 23 Date of Sentence 24 Hearing： 25 31 January 2023 26 Sentence Delivered： 27 15 February 2023 28 29 HEADNOTE 30 31 Criminal Law-Sentence-Rape-Sustained attack 32 33 SENTENCE JUDGMENT 34 35 1. Section 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2014 Revision) deals with the “Anonymity of 36 complainants in rape etc. cases and states： 37 38 “31.(1) After a person is accused of a rape [etc.] offence，no matter likely to lead 40 members of the public to identify a woman as the woman against whom the 41 offence is alleged to have been committed shall be published in a written 42 ion availablebe broadcast， 43 publicat to the publicauthorised by 44 a directrt.” 45 2. The woman against whom the offence has been committed will be referred to as “the 46 complainant” to protect her identity. 47 48 49 230215 His Majesty the King v Harris (Renato Rolando) IND 26/22-Sentence Judgment 1 ```
The Facts ## 3. The defendant was found guilty of two offences of rape contrary to section 127 of the Penal Code (2019 Revision) after a judge alone trial on 09 December 2022. The following are the facts of the case taken largely from the Crown's written sentence submissions with which Counsel for the defendant has indicated to the Court that the defendant takes no issue. ### 4. On the evening of Friday 13 July 2018, the complainant, went out with friends in the Seven Mile area to celebrate finishing an examination. The complainant and her friends went to Barolos Wine Bar on the West Bay Road where they socialised and consumed alcohol before moving venues and driving to OBar, a bar in Seven Mile Plaza. There was some confusion upon arrival resulting in the complainant, who believed that her friends were behind her, arriving in OBar to find that she was alone. There she ran into the Defendant, whom she had met some months previously and knew to be a DJ at Margaritaville. ### 5. Since that initial meeting they had exchanged numbers and the defendant would message the complainant to invite her to events that he would DJ at, and at times, they had frequented the same events. There was no suggestion on either side of a romantic relationship. ### 6. The complainant stayed in the company of the defendant. The defendant bought her at least two alcoholic drinks during the time that they were together at OBar. The complainant had already been consuming alcohol that evening and described herself as feeling drunk at this point (estimating her drunkenness to be 7/10). Feeling the effects of the alcohol that she consumed, the complainant suggested to the defendant that she wanted something to eat. The defendant drove them both to Burger Shack where he bought her a burger. ### 7. It was between 2 and 3am at this point, and the complainant was under the impression that they were going to go to Hell in West Bay. She was therefore surprised when Mr Harris turned the car towards George Town. This happened shortly after the pair had kissed. The complainant questioned Mr Harris about it, and he said that something with his son had come up. The complainant did not press him about it as she was starting to feel very drunk. ### 8. The complainant remembers going into the house however, she did not remember anything more beyond this point as she blacked out. --- **230215 His Majesty the King v Harris (Renato Rolando) IND 26/22 – Sentence Judgment**
The next morning the complainant awoke in unfamiliar surroundings. She realized that she was in a strange bed and was naked. The defendant was lying next to her and was also naked. The complainant described that she felt something wet between her legs and, in her words, "freaked out" realizing that Mr Harris had had sexual intercourse with her whilst she was unconscious. She asked Mr Harris if he had ejaculated inside her. When he confirmed that he had, she pleaded with him to take her home so she could get the morning after pill. Mr Harris reacted by saying words to the effect of "Calm down! Why are you having this reaction?" The complainant tried to scramble up to find her belongings, but Mr Harris pushed her down on the bed, got on top of her and, whilst the complainant cried and screamed "get off me!" Mr Harris forced himself onto the complainant for a second time, penetrating her vagina with his penis. She described herself as feeling like a cockroach, on her back flailing under him. She continued crying telling him to get off her and he didn’t. Eventually the ordeal stopped, and the complainant rolled towards the wall and cried. The complainant pleaded with the defendant to take her to a pharmacy and drop her home. Mr Harris drove her to a pharmacy and purchased the morning-after pill and then dropped the complainant home. At home she took the pill, however several weeks later, she took a pregnancy test which confirmed that she was pregnant. In August 2018 the complainant left the Cayman Islands to return home. She terminated the pregnancy. In October 2018 the complainant made a report of the incident to the Royal Cayman Islands Police. The defendant was interviewed under caution on 03 December 2018 and subsequently charged with the present offences. The applicable sentencing guidelines Pursuant to Section 127 of the Penal Code (2022 Revision) the maximum sentence for rape is life imprisonment. The Cayman Sentencing Guidelines (the 'issued in case April 2020') set out the approach to sentencing in cases involving sexual offences. The guidelines have been taken into account and themselves refer to the judgment of the Court of Appeal in R v Dilbert. [2010 (1) CILR 10] 230215 His Majesty the King v Harris (Renato Rolando) IND 26/22 – Sentence Judgment
```html 16. In Dilbert the CA held: 17. As per the Guidelines, the Crown submits that the offending of this defendant falls within that of category 2 Harm, culpability A. The Crown points to several factors to support such a finding of harm: 18. Crown Counsel noted that if the court were to find that the defendant's offending fell within category 1 Harm, "If the offending amounts to a campaign of rape or repeated offences, or one or more category 2 factors are deemed to be extreme in nature or cause extreme impact," the ``` ```latex \begin{enumerate} \item In Dilbert the CA held: \item As per the Guidelines, the Crown submits that the offending of this defendant falls within that of category 2 Harm, culpability A. The Crown points to several factors to support such a finding of harm: \item Crown Counsel noted that if the court were to find that the defendant's offending fell within category 1 Harm, "If the offending amounts to a campaign of rape or repeated offences, or one or more category 2 factors are deemed to be extreme in nature or cause extreme impact," the \end{enumerate} ```
```html 1 starting point would be 25 years with a range 20-30 years for an accompanying culpability A offence, and 20 years with a range of 15-24 years) for a culpability B offence. 19. The Crown further submits the following are aggravating factors for the court's consideration: (i) Intoxicated victim provided with more alcohol by defendant to facilitate first rape/ advantage taken of victim's unconscious state to facilitate first rape; (ii) Second rape perpetrated by force; (iii) Repeated rapes in the course of one attack = sustained incident. (iv) Rapes resulted in pregnancy (v) Victim suffered psychological harm：diagnosed with Acute Stress Disorder，considered self-harm，became a recluse，failed exams，ruined medical career path. 20. The Crown noted that there is in this case an absence of aggravating features such as breaking into the victim's home，pre-planning and other injuries caused. The defendant has no relevant previous convictions for similar offending. 21. The Crown submits that "the appropriate sentence in totality，considering the aggravating and mitigating factors and the categorisation in the Guidelines，is one of 18-20 years." The Victim Impact Report ("VIR") 22. The Crown submitted a VIR prepared by the Department of Community Rehabilitation for the court's consideration on sentence. 23. The complainant related the impact of the offence. In the immediate period after the incident 'I experienced pain in my virginal area. This pain lasted for approximately a week. I felt very physically gross. I felt 'he was on me' for several weeks post the incident despite me scrubbing myself." 34 experienced，the that she hcks 33 “nant] also hiad 35 [The complai ghlighted ennanic attend 36 as a result. She also disclosed that she was suicidal." ```
``` # Transcript of the Document
"It was coming up to the end of Semester exams but I could not go to class, I could not study because it was easier to sleep because when I wake up I would wake crying and would go to bed crying. It was easier to sleep and hope that the nightmares would not come. Up to about eight months post the incident I was still having nightmares."
"I was referred to the Cayman Red Cross and this agency assisted me with accessing services. I started counselling at the Counselling Centre and after returning to my home country I continued counselling, attending twice per week."
"Another significant emotional impact of the offence was the resulting pregnancy...I was already drained by the depression and anxiety and this was compounded by the early pregnancy symptoms so I could not get out of bed, could not eat due to being nauseous. All of this happening while I still had to try focusing on school and my studies."
"...it has significantly changed me and how I view people. It changed clubbing and night life for me. I can no longer be in that space. Now I see things for what they are and what happens in that space. I am not saying everyone in that space is a bad person but they do turn a blind eye to things."
"I went quiet on my social media because persons in his social network 'stalked me'. Seeing some of the posts on certain social media outlet and some of the comments and seeing that he is still very much embraced post-conviction, I would not feel safe in the Cayman Islands."
"In speaking to the ongoing impact [the complainant] spoke of her dashed dreams of becoming an OB/GYN. The complainant related this latter to her inability to continue with her studies as a direct result of these offences."
"Counsel for the defendant submitted that the offence falls within the Category 2, Culpability B on the basis that the offence involved severe psychological harm and the Victim having become pregnant as a result of the offence." 230215 His Majesty the King v Harris (Renato Rolando) IND 26/22 – Sentence Judgment ```
```html 1 2 25. Counsel for the defendant did not agree with the Crown that this was an offence which merited 3 a finding of culpability A. Counsel argued that the court should find that there was a distinction 4 between a victim who had already been drinking prior to her interaction with the defendant as 5 in this case and a situation where the defendant himself supplies the victim with alcohol with 6 the intention of committing the offence. Counsel noted that this was the only factor that could 7 lead to the offence being at category A and instead submitted that it was at Category B, there 8 being none of the factors in Category A present. Counsel for the defendant submitted that the 9 starting point for a Category 2B offence was 15 years custody with a sentencing range of 10- 10 19 years custody. 11 12 Mitigating Factors 13 14 15 26. In mitigation, Counsel for the defendant noted that the defendant was now forty (40) years of age. 16 He is the father of four children ranging in ages from 4 to 16 years. The defendant is the primary 17 care giver for his eldest child who has been living with his mother, since the defendant was 18 convicted for the instant offences. Counsel stated that the defendant maintains a healthy 19 relationship with his parents and his children. The Court was invited to consider how this 20 conviction and sentence will continue to affect Mr Harris’s family and employability for the 21 remainder of his life. 22 23 27. The court was also invited to consider character letters written by members of the local 24 community on the defendant’s behalf. The letters speak to the defendant’s involvement as a 25 close 26 friend, husband and father and describes him as kind, generous, polite, and hardworking. 27 28 Social Inquiry Report (“SIR”) 29 30 28. The Department of Community Rehabilitation also produced for the court’s consideration a 31 Social Inquiry Report in respect of the defendant. As always, this court is grateful to the 32 Department for their continued assistance to the court. 33 34 The SIR staefendant wasp in Jamaica 36 as a Disc Joc1405 until 2was nt for 35 environmenty childhood19 ym an Isl an is employ 36 was 37 38 39 40. The defendant has never been diagnosed with any mental, psychological, or learning disorder nor, it appears from the report, does he engage in the use of illegal or illicit drugs. While the defendant 230215 His Majesty the King v Harris (Renato Rolando) IND 26/22 - Sentence Judgment 7 ```
```html 1 does not have any conviction for a previous relevant offence the defendant does have convictions 2 for offences of Cruelty to a Child and Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm. These previous 3 convictions, together with the defendant's non-compliance with previous imposed orders of the 4 Court, a Community Service Order in 2015 and a Probation Order in 2016, caused the defendant 5 to be assessed as being at high risk in the component of Pro-Criminal attitude and Orientation. 6 However, the defendant's overall risk of re-offending was assessed as medium. 7 8 31. The defendant was assessed at high risk of sexual reoffending based on the Risk Matrix 2000 9 Assessment what the SIR describes as "a static risk assessment used to predict risk of sexual 10 reoffending." 11 12 32. The SIR reveals that the defendant "did not express any sort of remorse or empathy towards the 13 victim. In fact, he voiced great discord about the victim as he believes that he is in fact the victim 14 in the case after being falsely accused and convicted of such a serious offence." 15 16 33. The probation officer noted that the defendant: 17 18 19 He stated: "she destroyed my life, she targeted me and preyed upon me." He also shared that 20 the victim "had always wanted to get with him." 21 22 23 24 34. It is noteworthy that the defendant further stated to the Probation Officer that the complainant 25 26 27 28 29 was "known to be a party animal." This was not a suggestion raised at trial where the defendant's 30 31 32 33 34 evidence was that he was only aware of the complainant in a peripheral way. This was not a 35 36 37 38 39 suggestion that was ever put to the complainant. 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747
```html 1 37. Those sentiments remain relevant. In this case there is the clear use of force to commit one of the offences. 38. The complainant has described to this court the effect of this offending: “it has significantly changed me and how I view people. It also made me hyper aware that you really cannot trust anyone...” The complainant described feelings of panic, anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts. She had had to embark on counselling to assist her in dealing with the ongoing mental and psychological effects of the offences. 39. The sentence of this court cannot right the wrong that has been perpetrated on the complainant. The court’s sentence must both punish the defendant and deters other would be offenders from subjecting anyone, especially young women, to behaviour of this sort. 40. After consideration of the facts and Guidelines I am satisfied that this is a Category 2 Harm offence. The psychological harm to the complainant as outlined in the VIR, and the fact of the pregnancy as a consequence of the offence merit such a finding. As to culpability, the only factor which could cause this court to find that the offence rests at Category A culpability is if the court were to agree with the Crown that there was evidence of the use of alcohol on the victim to facilitate the offence This was not the premise upon which the Crown put its case. Although the evidence at trial was that the defendant bought the complainant at least two drinks while at Obar, the evidence was not of the defendant plying the complainant with alcohol to support a finding of the use of the alcohol on the victim to facilitate the offence. This is an offence at Culpability B. None of the factors at Category A are present. The starting point for sentence is 15 years imprisonment with a range of 10-19 years. 41. Some of the aggravating factors as outlined by the Crown have already been considered in determining the starting point and sentence range as above and are not double counted here. However, the following aggravating factors remain relevant: 30 (i) Advantage taken of victim’s unconscious state to facilitate first rape; 31 (ii) Second rape perpetrated by force; 32 (iii) Repeated rapes in the course of one attack = sustained incident. 35 ating factors do mitigating 34 42. Tuguating fact 36 for the offence. The starting point is increased to 17 years imprisonment. ``` ```latex \begin{table} \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|} \hline 1 & 37. & Those sentiments remain relevant. In this case there is the clear use of force to commit one of the offences. \\ \hline
& The complainant has described to this court the effect of this offending: “it has significantly changed me and how I view people. It also made me hyper aware that you really cannot trust anyone...” The complainant described feelings of panic, anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts. She had had to embark on counselling to assist her in dealing with the ongoing mental and psychological effects of the offences. \\ \hline
& The sentence of this court cannot right the wrong that has been perpetrated on the complainant. The court’s sentence must both punish the defendant and deters other would be offenders from subjecting anyone, especially young women, to behaviour of this sort. \\ \hline
& After consideration of the facts and Guidelines I am satisfied that this is a Category 2 Harm offence. The psychological harm to the complainant as outlined in the VIR, and the fact of the pregnancy as a consequence of the offence merit such a finding. As to culpability, the only factor which could cause this court to find that the offence rests at Category A culpability is if the court were to agree with the Crown that there was evidence of the use of alcohol on the victim to facilitate the offence This was not the premise upon which the Crown put its case. Although the evidence at trial was that the defendant bought the complainant at least two drinks while at Obar, the evidence was not of the defendant plying the complainant with alcohol to support a finding of the use of the alcohol on the victim to facilitate the offence. This is an offence at Culpability B. None of the factors at Category A are present. The starting point for sentence is 15 years imprisonment with a range of 10-19 years. \\ \hline
& Some of the aggravating factors as outlined by the Crown have already been considered in determining the starting point and sentence range as above and are not double counted here. However, the following aggravating factors remain relevant: \\ \hline 30 & (i) Advantage taken of victim’s unconscious state to facilitate first rape; \\ \hline 31 & (ii) Second rape perpetrated by force; \\ \hline 32 & (iii) Repeated rapes in the course of one attack = sustained incident. \\ \hline 35 & ating factors do mitigating \\ \hline 34 & 42. Tuguating fact \\ \hline 36 & for the offence. The starting point is increased to 17 years imprisonment. \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} ```
```html 1 43. I have considered the other submissions of counsel on mitigation and specifically the matters set 2 out at paragraphs 26 and 27 above. For personal mitigation the court will discount this sentence 3 by 6 months. 4 5 44. The sentence of this court on count 1 of the indictment is 161/2 years imprisonment. The sentence 6 on Count 2 is also 161/2 years imprisonment. These sentences will run concurrently. Any 7 previous time that the defendant has spent in custody as a result of this offence is to be deducted 8 from this sentence. 9 10 Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) 11 12 13 45. The Crown has applied for the imposition of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for a period of not 14 less than 5 years. 15 16 46. I consider that a SHPO is necessary in the circumstances of this case and that the conditions for 17 the imposition of this order are satisfied as per Section 45A of the Penal Code (2022 Revision). 18 The circumstances of this offence and the effect of the offending on the victim are the court’s 19 primary considerations. 20 21 47. The SHPO is imposed for a period of 4 years from the date of the defendant’s release from custody 22 upon the following conditions: 23 24 (i) You are prohibited from contacting the complainant directly, indirectly or by any means 25 whatsoever. 26 27 (ii) You shall notify an officer of the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service, at George Town 28 Police Station, at the rank of Sergeant or above of your residence and associated 29 telephone numbers in writing within 48 hours of your release from imprisonment. 30 31 (iii) You shall notify an officer of the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service at the rank of 32 Sergeant or above, at George Town Police Station, of any change to your residence, 33 tel er and email ng within 48 I 55 shall notify of the Royal al C ervice at th 34 ephone numcontacts in w any change. 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722
```html 1 concerning persons and place you intend to visit together with the location and name of 2 the premises in which you intend to stay. 3 4 N.B. Where the offender has made a notification but has been advised that the 5 information notified is inaccurate or incomplete, he must report in person to George 6 Town Police Station and make a fresh notice to any officer of the Royal Cayman Islands 7 Police Service, at the rank of Sergeant or above, of his intentions in writing no later than 8 24 hours before his departure. 9 10 (v) You shall notify an officer of the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service at the rank of 11 Sergeant or above, at George Town Police Station, in writing of any change to, or 12 applications to change any identity documents providing the reasons for wanting to make 13 such change to your identity. 14 15 16 17 18 19 Hon. Mrs. Justice Marlene I. Carter Judge of the Grand Court (Actg.)