Mitchell Celestine, a 75-year-old man from the community of Bense did not waste the court’s time and pleaded guilty to a charge of “importation of firearm without a license when he appeared before Magistrate Michael Laudat.
According to the facts of the case, Celestine and Anna Matthew (his daughter-in-law) went to the Woodbridge Bay Port in Roseau on April 6, 2022, to clear a few barrels. On arrival at Shed #4, he informed the customs officer that he had a firearm in one of the barrels and handed the officer his firearms license. The firearm he said was sent to him by his son since the firearm he had was “jamming.”
It was at that point that he was told that he needed a firearms importation license to bring in a firearm even if he was the holder of a firearms license.
The police were called and Celestine and Matthew were both arrested. In court, Matthew pleaded not guilty and the prosecution withdrew the charge against her.
In his mitigating plea, Kondwani Williams (lawyer) that his client was suffering from hypertension and glaucoma had no previous infractions with the law, and had “suffered a serious fall from grace at that stage of his life.”
“He had a lapse in memory or ignorance through sheer inadvertent thinking…the Customs Officers were paralyzed by surprise as this senior citizen audaciously declared to them that the barrel contained a firearm prior to its examination,” Williams said.
Celestine, he told the court was the license holder of a “glogg pistol” that he had from the USVI in 2011 on his return to the island and had no recollection of the procedures he had adopted in getting the firearm to Dominica.
“The situation is unfortunate and embarrassing having convinced himself that being in possession of his firearms license afforded him the right to import a firearm into Dominica,” his lawyer told the court.
Williams told the court that his client had pleaded guilty and not wasted the court’s time and had also fully cooperated with the police. Although he asked the court not to give his client any “preferential treatment because of his age” he stated that the situation was so different that given the circumstances and facts of the case he was asking the court for a “reprimand or a suspended sentence for one year.”
“This week is Holy Week and so I’m asking the court to be extremely lenient, (emphasis) while offenses of firearms are prevalent in this country, this defendant is contrite, embarrassed, disoriented, and perplexed at the situation,” he stated.
Attorney at Law Wayne Norde was also on record representing Celestine and in dealing with the Sentencing guidelines told the court that after hearing the facts of the case the “excellent moving speech” in mitigation by his Learned Friend (Williams) he recommends a starting point of $4,000.00 and after the guilty plea and other deductions then there will be nothing left to pay.
But Magistrate Laudat informed him that it was “not in the public’s interest to stick to the sentencing guidelines and the court was concerned about the prevalence of gun-related crime whereby persons acquired, stole, or purchased firearms.
He then gave a starting point of $8,250.00 with a 55% discount, he further reduced it by 45% and hence fined him $4,500.00 or 3 years in jail. He was to pay a forthwith fine of $1,500.00 or in default one year in jail (that was paid). The balance of $3,000.00 was to be paid by September 30, 2022, in default 2 years in jail. The firearm was forfeited to the State.