Connect with us

News

Quick GUILTY verdict; Man to be Sentenced for Gun and Ammunition Possession

Published

on

Wilkie Arthur

Freelance Court Reporter

 

 

#TurksandCaicos, November 14, 2023 – Wednesday November 8th was the final day of a four-week-long unlicensed firearm and ammunition trial being held at the Grand Turk Supreme Court.

On trial for the unregistered gun and 12 rounds of ammunition was JEAN ETIENNE DOR aka FIRE of Five Cays, Providenciales.

Magnetic Media was in court for the jury decision in the matter, the accused having been on remand for over a year.  A five-member jury; three women and two men with one of the males, speaking on behalf of the jury as the foreman, delivered their conclusion after only two hours of deliberation.

Before being sent out for deliberation by the learned trial, Judge the Hon Mr. Justice Chris Selochan took around three hours with one break in between, to sum up the entire four week trial to the jury, reminding them repeatedly of what was the case against the accused and what was his defense in response to the Crown’s case.

The judge outlined to the jury, what was the law in relation to unregistered firearms and ammunition possession.  He explained the burden of proof rests solely on the prosecution in criminal cases but he told the jury, that, there is a bit of burden that rest on the defendant as it relates to when one is charged with illegal possession of unregistered weapons.

Judge Selochan explained to the jury how they are to approach consideration of the evidence presented in the case against the accused.

The Judge took the jury back to the date of the police findings on  April 25th, 2022, when a team of officers arrived at the home of Jean ETIENNE DOR armed with a warrant.  Although the warrant was in the wrong name (not in the name of the accused), a search of the premises was conducted and found was a firearm in or on top of a barrel covered by a blanket in a room not occupied by the accused.

The wrong named warrant was raised as an issue during the trial by the senior defense counsel, Lara Maroof Misick.

The judge went on to tell the jury of certain things the accused said to the Police when and after the firearm was found. Even though, these various, different utterances were challenged and denied by the defendant, when it was his turn to give evidence in his own defence on the stand.

The judge reminded the jury, in his lengthy summing up, that they have to treat the case of the defense, with the same weight and importance as the prosecution’s case.

He went on telling them that it’s a matter for them how they regard the account of events as reported by the Police Force at the time of the search and arrest and what the accused man testified in the witness box.

The judge reminded the five member jury, when counsel for the defendant Mrs. Maroof Misick asked the officer(s) for notes, pertaining to their investigation stages, the officer(s) did not have any notes for some important areas, activities and alleged utterances of their investigation.  The jury heard that what was important in that fact, as laid out by the defence attorney Maroof-Misick, is those notes – if they were signed by Jean Dor – could have been supplied to them, as members of the jury for review during the trial.  Without that information, the judge said it was left for the jury to decide who they believe.

The police had said, the defendant told them he had someone living in that room where the firearm was found. He gave them a name that was mentioned in court. He said the person had recently left.

When testifying, the female officer who found the gun did admit to having had to remove clothing before reaching the blanket and under or in the blanket she found the gun; the gun was not in plain sight.

According to the Crown’s case, ETIENNE DOR had told police he was supposed to turn the gun in to a pastor.  The judge continued and explained, the Crown is therefore saying Mr. Dor had knowledge of the gun in that room, which he said was, until recently occupied by a different man.

The Defendant’s version of events to the jury may have been more believable had the defendant’s DNA not been found in such a high ratio on the firearm, after it was forensically tested.  During the trial, it was submitted that the DNA on the green and black gun came back with a strong, positive match for Jean Etienne Dor.

Still, during the judge’s summation the jury was reminded that the defense had an explanation for the DNA presence on the gun; that it could have been transferred there.

The DNA expert, when he testified did explained how transfers can and do occur as was possible in the instant case against the accused.  The police did admit that certain testing and packaging of the firearm and ammunition was done in the open, in the presence of the accused.  This suggests that his DNA could have been transferred on the firearm through communication while the gun was already in Police possession.

Evidence during trial also revealed that Dor’s was not the only DNA found on the firearm; other persons DNA was detected on the gun as well.

The police also said when the accused was asked about the gun, he said how his mother has a shop and plenty people round here robbing.  He said he has bills, he works at the airport for some 14 years.  He also said, I can’t explain it, it’s a long story.  He initially had Chal Missick as his attorney when some of these many utterances were said.

The judge told the jury that throughout the investigation and the trial the defendant had a right to remain silent and nothing negative could have been taken from that because that would have been his right.

In the end, and after a mere two hours, the jury announced it had a decision and found the evidence as presented by the DPP’s office was believable; they found Jean Dor guilty as charged.

Sentencing in this matter is fixed for November 27th, 2023.

Senior Public prosecutor Ms. Tassja Mitchell represented the office of DPP in this trial.  The defendant is facing seven years in prison for the firearm and the ammunition conviction.

Bahamas News

Mother’s Pride Headlines Bahamian Takeover at Sixers-Heat Clash in Miami

Published

on

The Bahamas, March 30, 2026 – The voice of a proud mother captured the spirit of a nation Monday night, as Bendra Rolle shared heartfelt reflections on the overwhelming Bahamian support for her son, VJ Edgecombe, during the Philadelphia 76ers matchup against the Miami Heat in Miami.

“The patriotic support and scenery at my son, VJ Edgecombe’s NBA game… was overwhelming,” Rolle said in a statement issued following the game. “The arena in Miami was lit. Bimini and the Bahamas showed up and showed out.”

Her words come amid what has already been widely described as a remarkable showing of national pride, with Bahamians traveling in large numbers to South Florida to witness the young guard’s continued rise. For Rolle, however, the moment extended far beyond basketball.

“Beyond VJ’s basketball talents, I’m so moved by his magnetic personality and personal journey to inspire and excite an entire nation—our beloved Bahamas,” she said. “I thank God for VJ’s humility and for his hunger for greatness. He never forgets how far God has brought us.”

While the Sixers did not secure the win on the night, Edgecombe delivered a solid individual performance, finishing with 13 points and five assists. He made an early impact on the game, showing confidence and poise before foul trouble disrupted his rhythm, but still managed to leave his mark in meaningful minutes.

The game itself evolved into a cultural showcase, with Bahamian flags waving throughout the arena and chants ringing out in support of Edgecombe. Much of that presence was bolstered by a coordinated travel push from Bahamasair, which helped facilitate fan travel and added to the electric atmosphere in Miami.

Rolle said the emotional weight of the moment was deeply felt by her family, as they witnessed firsthand the unity and pride of the Bahamian people.

“Thanks and love for the tears and overwhelming joy on Monday, Bahamas,” she expressed. “The Bahamian flags were love, loud, and proud. On my own behalf, VJ, and the entire family, I am ever grateful for the indescribable experience.”

Her closing words underscored what many have described as the true victory of the night—not the final score, but the powerful display of national pride and support surrounding one of The Bahamas’ rising stars.

Continue Reading

News

50 Years of Ministerial Government: Cabinet Moves to Mark Milestone Rooted in 1976 Constitution

Published

on

Turks and Caicos, March 30, 2026 – The Turks and Caicos Islands is preparing to mark a major political milestone, with Cabinet approving the establishment of a National Commemorative Committee to celebrate 50 years of ministerial government, a system first introduced under the 1976 Constitution.

The decision, confirmed in the February 10 Post Cabinet statement, signals a year of reflection on a governance model that fundamentally reshaped how the country is run — shifting from direct colonial administration toward locally led political leadership.

That shift was formalized in the Turks and Caicos Islands Constitution Order 1976, which laid the legal foundation for ministerial government and introduced a structured Executive and Legislative system.

At its core, the 1976 Constitution established an Executive Council, bringing together:

  • a Governor,
  • a Chief Minister elected by members of the Legislative Council,
  • and Ministers appointed to assist in governing the Islands.

A Very Different Government Back Then

If today’s Cabinet feels crowded, the 1976 version would have seemed almost unbelievable. There were just three Ministers serving alongside the Chief Minister — a tight, compact leadership team responsible for the affairs of an entire country. No sprawling list of ministries, no long roster of portfolios — just a handful of individuals carrying the weight of governance.

Becoming a Minister wasn’t a direct vote of the people either. You first had to win a seat in the Legislative Council, and from there, the Chief Minister would recommend who should serve. The Governor then made the appointments. In other words, political trust and alignment mattered just as much as public support — and ultimate authority still rested above the local leadership.

And as for job security? There wasn’t much of it. Ministers served without fixed terms and could be removed if they lost their seat, resigned, or if the Governor revoked their appointment. Even the Chief Minister could be ousted through a vote of no confidence. Add to that the basic requirements — being at least 21, a British subject, and meeting residency rules — and it’s clear that ministerial government in 1976 was not only smaller, but far more tightly controlled.

This marked the first time elected representatives were formally given defined roles in the administration of national affairs.

Under the Constitution, the Governor retained overarching authority, but was required in many instances to act on the advice of the Executive Council, particularly in shaping policy and overseeing government operations.

The Chief Minister, meanwhile, was positioned as the central political leader, responsible for directing government business and advising on the appointment of Ministers.

Importantly, the Constitution also allowed for the assignment of responsibilities to Ministers, giving them oversight of specific areas of government — a structure that remains at the heart of today’s Cabinet system.

Section 13 of the Order made clear that Ministers could be assigned responsibility for the administration of departments or government business, embedding accountability and functional governance into the system.

The Legislative Council, established alongside the Executive, provided the law-making body, with elected and appointed members participating in debates, passing legislation, and representing the interests of the Islands.

Together, these provisions created the framework for what is now recognized as ministerial government — a hybrid system balancing local political leadership with constitutional oversight by the Governor.

The explanatory note of the 1976 Order describes it as introducing “new provisions for the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands,” including the creation of a Legislative Council with elected members and Ministers appointed on the advice of the Chief Minister.

Fifty years on, that structure has evolved through subsequent constitutional changes, but its foundation remains rooted in the 1976 framework.

Cabinet’s decision to establish a commemorative committee suggests that the anniversary will not only celebrate political progress, but also invite reflection on how effectively the system has delivered on its promise of representation, accountability, and governance.

As the Islands approach this Golden Jubilee, attention is likely to turn not only to the achievements of ministerial government, but also to the ongoing question of how the system continues to serve a modern and rapidly developing Turks and Caicos Islands.

Developed by Deandrea Hamilton • with ChatGPT (AI) • edited by Magnetic Media.

Continue Reading

News

Government Moves to Amend Destination Management Fee Law

Published

on

Turks and Caicos, March 30, 2026 – The Turks and Caicos Islands Government has signaled changes to its tourism funding framework, with Cabinet approving draft amendments to the Destination Management Fee Act 2023.

The decision was confirmed in the Post Cabinet statement following the February 5 meeting, chaired by Governor Dileeni Daniel-Selvaratnam, where members agreed to move forward with revisions to the law governing the collection and administration of the fee.

The Destination Management Fee, introduced in 2023, is applied to travelers entering the country and is embedded within the cost of travel. The charge was designed to support tourism-related development, including marketing, infrastructure, and sustainability initiatives.

At the time of its introduction, the fee was linked to the establishment of a Destination Management and Marketing Organisation (DMMO), which was expected to coordinate tourism strategy and enhance the visitor experience.

However, recent developments have shifted that landscape.

The DMMO has since been discontinued, raising new questions about how funds generated through the fee are being managed and what structure will now guide tourism development efforts.

The Cabinet note does not outline what specific changes are being proposed under the amended legislation.

It also does not indicate whether adjustments will be made to:

  • who pays the fee,
  • how it is collected, or
  • how the revenue is allocated and overseen.

The move to amend the law comes amid broader government efforts to strengthen revenue collection and compliance, including updates provided to Cabinet on the work of the Drag-Net Steering Committee — a multi-agency initiative focused on improving government revenue systems.

The lack of detail surrounding the amendments leaves several key questions unanswered, particularly given the fee’s direct impact on both visitors and residents and its role in supporting the country’s tourism economy.

Any changes to the Act would require further legislative steps, including presentation to the House of Assembly, before taking effect.

For now, the Cabinet’s approval signals that the government is moving to revise a policy that is already in force — but without yet disclosing how those revisions will alter the current system.

As tourism remains the backbone of the Turks and Caicos Islands economy, clarity on the future of the Destination Management Fee — and the framework it supports — is expected to be closely watched in the weeks ahead.

Developed by Deandrea Hamilton • with ChatGPT (AI) • edited by Magnetic Media.

Photo Credit: TCIAA

Continue Reading

FIND US ON FACEBOOK

TRENDING