AI-Summary – News For Tomorrow
Sandra Hill, owner of Cayman Marl Road, faces three new harassment charges related to her morning talk show, bringing her total to ten over 15 years. These charges stem from her criticism of a civil servant working for McKeeva Bush during the 2025 election, alleging potential misuse of public funds. Hill defends her commentary as public-interest journalism addressing democratic accountability. She criticizes the charges as vague and politically motivated, similar to a previous case dismissed on appeal. Hill’s history includes multiple charges, most of which were dismissed or resulted in acquittal, alongside a successful judicial review of an illegal search warrant.
News summary provided by Gemini AI.
(CNS): Sandra Hill, the owner of Cayman Marl Road, is facing three new charges of harassment regarding her popular morning talk show. This is the tenth time Hill has faced charges, most of them related to her work over the past 15 years.
This time, the charges are based on criticisms and questions she raised about a civil servant who was working as McKeeva Bush’s assistant during the 2025 election campaign and appeared to be conducting both personal and political work for him, raising the potential for abuse of public funds.
Hill maintains that the commentary on the woman in question and the veteran politician, who lost his seat in April after four decades as a representative for West Bay, was classic political speech and public-interest journalism. She said it was “dealing with the actions of a senior political figure and the use of state resources, matters that go to the heart of democratic accountability”.
In the charging document (posted below), the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) fails to identify the complainant, does not name either Bush or the civil servant, and provides no meaningful particulars as to which statements are alleged to constitute harassment.
Instead, it relies on generic wording that Hill had displayed material that was “threatening, abusive or insulting” without specifying how, why, or to whom. Hill said the poorly drafted indictment is a hallmark of how the authorities treat her and is indicative of years of unprofessional and careless prosecutorial conduct.
“What makes the current prosecution especially controversial is its timing,” Hill said. The charges are very similar to those brought against her in the case that was thrown out by the appeal court earlier this year.
Hill’s battles with the authorities began in 2010, when she was accused of dog theft, a case that was thrown out by a magistrate. In 2013, she was charged with using an ICT network to annoy. No conviction was recorded, no compensation was ordered, and she was discharged.
In 2015, she faced eight counts of uttering a false document. She was found not guilty on all counts, as the judge instructed the jury to discharge her at the no-case submission stage. In 2020, she was charged with misuse of an ICT network and causing harassment, alarm or distress. One count resulted in a conviction, and the other was left on file.
Later that same year, further harassment and ICT-related charges were brought in connection with the same factual background. Hill successfully challenged that case and won in the Court of Appeal, where her conviction was quashed. In 2023, she was charged with blackmail and attempting to obstruct the course of justice. That case is listed for trial in February 2026.
Hill will make her first appearance for these latest charges on 10 February.
In 2013, Hill secured a successful judicial review challenging an illegal search warrant, which became a landmark case.
See the latest indictment against Hill below:
