Advertisement 87
Advertisement 211
Grandeisha Cain leaves the Serious Offences Court on Friday, Dec. 27, 2024.
Grandeisha Cain leaves the Serious Offences Court on Friday, Dec. 27, 2024.

A woman who allegedly posed in her underwear while holding a prohibited weapon has been charged.

Police are said to have brought the charge against Grandeisha Cain, of Glen, after an investigation found a photograph of her posing with the AR-15 rifle.

Cain appeared before the Serious Offences Court on Friday, where she pleaded not guilty to a charge that on Dec. 3, at Glen, she had in her possession one black AR-15 automatic rifle, a prohibited weapon, without authorisation of the minister.

Police have said that they seized the weapon at the home of a man who was among four people inside a car in which they found a Glock pistol around 11:45 p.m. on Dec. 18.

The four men have been granted bail in connection with that charge and one of them, Vashon Thomas, 20, has also been charged with possession of the AR-15 rifle and over 171 rounds of ammunition.

Advertisement 21

Cain was granted EC$20,000 bail with one surety and ordered to report to the Calliaqua Police Station on Wednesdays.

She is to surrender her travel documents and the court ordered that stop notices be posted.

The matter was adjourned to Jan. 7, 2025, for an update.

2 replies on “Woman who posed in underwear with prohibited weapon charged”

  1. Allan Herman Palmer says:

    Are these people serious? They are charging a woman for have in her possession a prohibited weapon because she was in a photograph with what appeared to be a prohibited weapon. How are these idiots going to prove that the weapon she had was indeed real? how are they going to prove that it was not an imitation fire arm or a pellet gun.

  2. Are these people serious? They are charging a woman for have in her possession a prohibited weapon because she was in a photograph with what appeared to be a prohibited weapon. How are these idiots going to prove that the weapon she had was indeed real? How are they going to prove that it was not an imitation firearm? Or a pellet gun. How are they going to proof it was not s photo-shop generated production? How are they going to prove the alleged photo was taken in S.V.G? The Burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that she actually had a gun, in the Jurisdiction of S.V.G. in her possession they have to qualify with a reasonable doubt and provide evidence to rule out all of the above possibilities.

Comments closed.