Three charged with robbery at Sando mall in court

One man was grant­ed $300,000 bail while his two al­leged ac­com­plices were de­nied bail on charges aris­ing out of the South Park Mall rob­bery last week.

At­i­ba Sealy, 29, of Princes Town, Jerell Alex­is, 20, of Pleas­antville and Kirsten Charles, 22, al­so of Pleas­antville, ap­peared in the San Fer­nan­do Mag­is­trates’ Court charged with five counts of armed rob­bery.

Sealy faced two ad­di­tion­al charges of pos­ses­sion of a firearm and am­mu­ni­tion.

The charges al­leged that to­geth­er with an­oth­er per­son they robbed a cus­tomer and five em­ploy­ees at Is­land Beer Bar lo­cat­ed at South Park Mall, Tarou­ba on Jan­u­ary 8.

The vic­tims— two men and four women, were robbed of cel­lu­lar phones. The rob­bers al­so stole cash to­talling more than $8,000, US$10, a coach wal­let and oth­er per­son­al items.

Po­lice al­leged Sealy had a firearm and two rounds of .38 am­mu­ni­tion in his pos­ses­sion. They were not asked to plead to the charges. Sealy, who is un­em­ployed and Alex­is, a self-em­ployed elec­tri­cian, were un­rep­re­sent­ed.

Ob­ject­ing to bail for Sealy, court pros­e­cu­tor Cley­on Seedan cit­ed the se­ri­ous na­ture of the of­fences. He al­so said Sealy was on bail for firearm and am­mu­ni­tion charges when he al­leged­ly com­mit­ted these of­fences.

Mag­is­trate Ali­cia Chankar not­ed that there were al­so two war­rants for Sealy for miss­ing court in No­vem­ber 2018. Sealy claimed he has a med­ical re­port to show that he was ill on that day.

Alex­is, the court heard, had two pre­vi­ous con­vic­tions for sim­i­lar type of­fences and was re­leased from prison on Sep­tem­ber 14, 2018.

“I was ac­cused of be­ing in this rob­bery be­cause of that con­vic­tion,” said Alex­is.

Giv­en the na­ture of the of­fences and that they had pre­vi­ous mat­ters for sim­i­lar of­fences, the mag­is­trate de­nied them bail.

Charles’ at­tor­ney Cedric Nep­tune said his client, a fast food out­let work­er, was a first time of­fend­er. The pros­e­cu­tor did not ob­ject to bail but asked the mag­is­trate to con­sid­er the se­ri­ous­ness of the of­fences.

The mag­is­trate said the on­ly thing work­ing in Charles’ favour was that he had a clean record. Charles was grant­ed ap­proval bail and or­dered to re­port twice a week at the San Fer­nan­do CID.

The oth­er two were ad­vised of their right to ap­ply to a Judge in Cham­bers for bail. The mat­ter was ad­journed to Feb­ru­ary 11.

 - by Sascha Wilson

Favourite count: 
Favourite count ids: