(CNS): Sandra Hill, the owner of Cayman Marl Road, has accused police and prosecutors of victimisation after learning she is facing more criminal charges in the wake of her civil court battle with John Felder, a former long-time Cayman resident and business owner. Hill is set to be charged with blackmail and obstructing the course of justice, which, she told CNS, is based on an email she sent to Felder during a defamation case following directions from the judge in that matter.

Hill believes the charges are another attempt by the authorities in their persistent victimisation of her fuelled by a catalogue of conflicts she has had with law enforcement stretching back well over a decade.

Speaking to CNS, Hill said she is being charged over what she described as a “without prejudice” correspondence she sent to Felder in 2021, via his attorneys, after he sued her over things she had written on her website and said on her online show about the former car dealer and his failing businesses, a case she eventually went on to win. Felder was ordered to pay Hill’s costs, a debt that remains outstanding.

But last month, Hill was told by the police that Felder had filed a complaint against her after judgment against him was made. The director of public prosecutions has concluded that charges should be laid based on the complaint, which Hill believes is absurd as the email was part of the effort she made at the direction of the judge to settle the case.

Hill said she had told Felder’s attorneys that if they withdrew the defamation allegations, she would be willing to stop writing further stories about Felder’s alleged poor business practices and bankruptcies, despite the mounting documentary evidence she held.

In refusing her offer, his attorneys made no allegations of bribery but focused instead on the original default judgment they had obtained for Felder after Hill failed to file a defence to the suit by the deadline. The judgment was later overturned in Hill’s favour. But in response to Hill’s offer, the lawyers said that further stories would have breached the initial default order.

Hill said this was inaccurate because by that time she had all of the evidence she needed to substantiate the allegations she had already published against Felder, as well as new ones. “We would not have been repeating any defamatory comments but instead revealing the evidence to refute the defamatory allegations,” she said.

By the time Felder complained to the police, the civil case had gone against him. The original default judgment was thrown out, and another judge found that Hill was the victim in the case because she could have suffered far-reaching negative repercussions to her own business and ability to publish. Hill accused Felder of trying to use the RCIPS to achieve what he had failed to get from the civil action.

But she said she was not all that surprised that the DPP’s office had pursued this complaint and was continuing what she maintains is their relentless pursuit of her in what will be the eighth courtroom battle Hill has engaged in with the authorities.

CNS contacted both the RCIPS and the DPP about Hill’s allegations and followed up on our initial correspondence. However, there has been no response to our questions about this accusation of victimisation, and the police have not confirmed the charges against Hill. She said that she has yet to receive the necessary paperwork relating to these charges or a summons for court.

Hill (née Catron) first went toe to toe with the crown in Summary Court in 2010 over charges of dog theft in relation to a stray animal she had rescued. She represented herself and the charges were dismissed. Charges that she damaged a commercial unit when she removed shelves after moving out at the end of a lease were also dismissed in the same year.

In 2016, again representing herself, she won a judicial review case over an unlawful search warrant in relation to allegations of abuse of an ICT network, one of three times the DPP’s office charged her with this offence. One was withdrawn ahead of trial, another resulted in no conviction being recorded and a third, in which she was convicted in 2020, is pending an appeal.

In 2016 charges of fraud in relation to the controversial Nation Building Fund were also dismissed. Despite a catalogue of concerns and complaints over the abuse of that fund, Hill remains the only person ever charged in relation to it. As a result, this has fuelled Hill’s ongoing concerns that she is being intentionally harassed, not just because of her successful courtroom battles, but over objections to how she uses her popular site and social media platforms.

Hill is well known for her efforts to push the boundaries on free speech, especially some of Cayman’s more restrictive practices when it comes to what happens in the courtroom and what can and cannot be published.

Hill also claims that in yet another matter, the police have threatened her with charges unless she removes stories posted on the site relating to a controversial case in the Grand Court.

Hill and other media, including CNS, reported on the prosecution of Evita Dixon, a former legal executive with the Office of Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), who was charged with a breach of trust. Dixon, who denied the charges and was acquitted by a jury, had implied that the prosecution of her might have been fuelled by improper motives. Dixon had alleged that the office was a toxic environment where black and Caymanian staff members were discriminated against during the period when Patrick Moran was the director.

Hill told CNS she would not be silenced by the DPP’s threats. After the alleged visit, about which she accuses the DPP’s office of doing no less than what they are now charging her for, she said she had refused to remove the related news reports.

“I refused and told them that no one should be brokering such a deal in a covert effort to silence the media. If I am being charged, then their officers should also be charged,” she said, insisting her offer to Felder was a legitimate part of a defamation negotiation to end a costly and distracting legal battle.

Since the visit from the police in relation to the Dixon case, Hill said she has made a report to the police commissioner. In the meantime, she said she plans to drum up attention for what she believes is the victimisation she is experiencing by the authorities here with human rights groups at home and abroad to fight for free speech in a country “hell-bent on criminalising it”.

---