Advertisement 87
Advertisement 323
Bally Alexander, outside the Serious Offences Court on Jan. 2, 2023.
Bally Alexander, outside the Serious Offences Court on Jan. 2, 2023.
Advertisement 219

A Lowmans Leeward man who police met with a loaded unlicensed firearm in his crotch told them he would come out of prison “fresh” after serving what he speculated would be a five year sentence.

However, the man, Bally Alexander, 25, would not have to serve quite a full five years, having been ordered to serve concurrent sentences of four years, two months for the firearm and eight months for the ammunition.

On Friday, after his trial began at the Serious Offences Court, Alexander told the court that he wanted the charge to be put to him again.

He then pleaded guilty to charges that on Jan. 2, 2023, at Lowmans Leeward, he had in his possession one Ruger P95 .9mm pistol, serial number 317-73706 and that he had six rounds of 9mm ammunition without a license issued under the Firearms Act.

Earlier, as police armourer Station Sergeant of Police Julian Cain was testifying in Alexander’s trial, the defendant told the court that he was “guilty for the gun” but claimed that the weapon in court was not the one he had.

Advertisement 21

He asked about the whereabouts of a laser, which he said that police had also found.

iWitness News understands that police found a laser light for the firearm in Alexander’s house but the prosecutor decided not to charge him for it.

In Light of Alexander’s claim that the firearm in court was not the one he had, Chief Magistrate Rechanne Browne, who was presiding, told him that the trial had to take place.

However, Alexander later told the court that he was guilty and that the firearm in evidence was in fact the one he had.

The facts of the matter are that on Jan, 2, about 12:30 p.m. a party of Rapid Response Unit officers, headed by Sergeant 403 John, executed a search at Alexander’s home in respect of firearms and ammunition.

Alexander was met at home in the yard and his girlfriend was on the porch.

As the officers arrived and told Alexander of their duties, he attempted to hurry into the house.

PC73 Jack pursued and held on to him and requested a search of his person.

They took Alexander into the bathroom of the house and in the presence of John, Jack felt something hard in Alexander’s groin area.

They also observed he was wearing two boxer shorts.

The firearm was found inside the boxer shorts.

When cautioned, Alexander responded, “officer, you done catch me. Ah my gun, you meet it pon me in my crotch. Just lock me up and carry me court for me to do me five years ah jail and come back fresh.”

In handing down her sentence, the chief magistrate established a starting point of65% of the maximum seven-year sentence — 4.5 years.

She said the aggravating factors were that the firearm was in Alexander’s possession for a period of time and was extremely well-concealed.

Browne said the defendant had attempted to flee and evade detention.

The chief magistrate said that the prevalence of firearm offences cannot be overstated.

She noted the time of day, and that Alexander was outside, though in the area of his home.

“Then, to compound things, this firearm was loaded and there was one in the breach so this situation could have gone wrong so easily because the firearm was in a loaded situation to unbeknownst police officers,” the chief magistrate said.

She added 12 months to the sentence.

The chief magistrate further said that aggravating for Alexander was that he had previous convictions but mitigating was his youth. The factors balanced each other off and no further adjustments were made to the sentence at that stage.

She noted that he did not plead guilty at the earliest opportunity and, therefore, awarded him a one-quarter discount on his sentence instead of the maximum one-third.

The magistrate told Alexander that while the four years and two months in prison was not quite what he anticipated, he still has a right to appeal.

Alexander was left to defend himself after his lawyer, Michael Wyllie, asked to be removed from the court as the trial was about to begin.

Wyllie arrived at the court before the sitting began and when Alexander’s matter was called, the prosecutor told the court that he was ready to proceed.

Wyllie said nothing at this state. However, when the matter was recalled and the trial was about to begin, Wyllie asked whether the trial was going to proceed.

When told yes, he said he had not received disclosure.

However, the chief magistrate told him that on the last occasion, Alexander had indicated that he had the documents at the prisons.

The magistrate told him it was his responsibility to get them from his client.

The lawyer made an untoward comment about the justice system and lawyer Ronald Marks who was at the Bar table commented that Wyllie had not gone to the prisons to collect the documents and was impugning the justice system.

The chief magistrate firmly rejected Wyllie’s comments. 

At the beginning of the trial, Alexander asked the court, “So, you going ahead without counsel?”

“Everything that was material was already disclosed,” the chief magistrate responded.