RED EYE OR DI LAW?

DI SENDER IS ASKING;-

Met, have you heard of this Federal case with Andrew Hamilton? Ex-Jamaian police and the GOJ going after all his assets in Jamaica that is in his mother and five kids name, along with asset in two shell companies in JA.

He hasn’t been sentence yet and GOJ going hard to confiscate everything. Is this the new way of doing things?

$429m remains frozen – Court denies application to release confessed criminal’s possessions
Published: Friday | October 25, 2013 24 Comments

Livern Barrett, Gleaner Writer

The Jamaican Government has secured a major legal victory in its bid to go after multimillion-dollar assets believed to be owned by a Jamaican who has pleaded guilty to drug trafficking, money laundering and gunrunning charges in the United States.

This comes after Supreme Court Judge Bryan Sykes dismissed an application filed on behalf of confessed drug dealer Andrew Hamilton and eight other respondents, including his 83-year-old mother and children, that sought to remove the restraint placed on several multimillion-dollar assets he is alleged to have purchased with the proceeds from his criminal undertakings.

Attorneys acting on behalf of Hamilton, his relatives, and two companies he incorporated locally were seeking to have the restraint – the second filed by the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) since August 2012 – lifted on the grounds that it was an abuse of the court process.

“It is vital that bad money – or money derived from unlawful activity – be kept out of the financial system because of the severe distorting effects it can have on both the macro and micro economy,” Sykes declared in dismissing Hamilton’s application.

Head of the Financial Investigations Division, Justin Felice, told The Gleaner last night that Hamilton is to be sentenced in a California federal court next February.

QUESTIONABLE ASSETS

The chain of events was set in motion in August 2012, when the ARA, believing that Hamilton’s assets were derived from his criminal activities, applied to the court to place a hold on several parcels of real estate and motor vehicles, as well as to freeze a number of accounts that were being held at various financial institutions.

The ARA informed the court then that it was conducting an investigation into the source of Hamilton’s assets, with a view to have them forfeited to the State.

This application and a second one filed in June this year were supported by two affidavits from Ronald Rose, an investigator for the ARA.

In his affidavit to support the first application, Rose noted that between 2002 and 2009, Hamilton, a former postal employee and a former member of the Jamaica Constabulary Force, was able to acquire property amounting to a cumulative value of $429.5 million.

According to Rose, the convicted drug dealer was also a director and shareholder in Andrew Hamilton Construction Limited (AHCL) and Andrehan Seafoods Company Limited (ASCL).

“Despite the lack of evidence of any lawful economic activity, AHCL was able to import equipment, vehicles and parts valued at J$42,445,385 within the period April to September 2008,” the ARA investigator noted.

“ASCL, without any known lawful economic activity, was able to import a fishing vessel that cost J$19,000,000,” he continued.

He said both companies listed the address of their registered offices as 33 Moreton Park Road in St Andrew, which investigators found was locked up and unoccupied when they visited.

According to Rose’s affidavit, Hamilton’s five children – all born between 1994 and 2006 – were listed as the owners of 10 parcels of real estate, three of which have already been sold.

“The most likely source of income to purchase these properties would be Mr Andrew Hamilton, who is now a confessed drug trafficker,” Rose said.

Sykes, in delivering his ruling, noted that the respondents have failed to comply with an August 2012 order from another High Court judge, Justice Lennox Campbell, to disclose the full particulars and location of all assets owned by them or on their behalf.

“This does not necessarily mean that the respondents are engaged in money laundering or the holding of property derived from criminal activity. The order [by Campbell] is designed to assist the investigative process,” Sykes underscored.

livern.barrett@gleanerjm.com

7 thoughts on “RED EYE OR DI LAW?

  1. HIM A LIVING FOOL BECAUSE MOTHER NEVER WORK A DAY IN ARE LIFE SUH HOW U FI PUT ILL GOTTEN GAINS IN ARE HER NAME A THE FIRST PLACE DEM LOO AT FAMILY MEMBERS AND CLOSE FRIENDS. A BETTER HIM NEVER HELP A SCHOOL OR COMMUNITY UP LIFT IT.WANT ALL LOSE ALL. EVERY POLICE MAN A THEIF A JAMAICA A THAT DEM GO IN A THE FORCE FOR JUST LIKE THE POLITICAN DEM GO IN POOR COME OUT RICH

  2. Bwoy it sticky. Every hustler weh have intention fi better demselg or dem family back home better tek heed cause once law ketch up wid yuh everything disappear. Government ever vex when money pass thru aanddem nuh get fi tax it. Hope dis nuh put him 85 yr old mom out pon d streets

  3. Government Of Jamaica are hard up for cash, so they see this as easy pickens. I guess they are doing a preemptive strike before the USA send in their forfeiture request. Can’t blame them, we Jamaicans should benefit from our fellow Jamaican crime, since will have deal with these criminals when they are eventually deported back home.

    1. Dwl @we Jamaicans should benefit from our fellow Jamaican’s crimes…”we” nah see a red cent a dat money once di government snatch it up…so don’t u worry your pretty little head about that.

  4. yes that should teach people that putting stuff in people name wont save you nowadays,the government getting smarter and illegal gains will never last.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top