Four charged over Par-la-Ville hotel plan

Make text smaller Make text larger

  • Graeme Outerbridge, centre, arrives at Magistrates’ Court for a previous appearance on the Par-la-Ville Road hotel project, with his lawyer, Saul Froomkin, and sister-in-law, Ruth-Anne Outerbridge (File photograph by Akil Simmons)

    Graeme Outerbridge, centre, arrives at Magistrates’ Court for a previous appearance on the Par-la-Ville Road hotel project, with his lawyer, Saul Froomkin, and sister-in-law, Ruth-Anne Outerbridge (File photograph by Akil Simmons)


A businessman, his wife and two leading figures from the Corporation of Hamilton were charged today in connection with the Par-la-Ville Road hotel plan.

Michael MacLean, who planned to create the hotel, appeared in Magistrates’ Court along with his wife, Yasmin, former Hamilton mayor Graeme Outerbridge and corporation secretary Ed Benevides.

Mr Outerbridge, who served as mayor from 2012 to 2015, was charged with corruptly agreeing to obtain property for the benefit of the MacLeans on or about October 24, 2014, by authorising the release of $15,449,858 from an escrow account at the Bank of New York into their local account.

Mr Benevides faced the same charge during his term as chief operating officer and secretary of the Corporation.

Mr MacLean, Mr Outerbridge and Mr Benevides were accused of dishonestly obtaining the money in the account, belonging to MIF, while the MacLeans were accused of stealing $13,749,858 belonging to MIF between October 31, 2014 and November 7, 2014.

The MacLeans were further charged with using stolen money between the same dates in 2014, knowing that it “in whole or in part directly or indirectly” represented the proceeds of criminal conduct.

The defendants were not required to enter pleas because the charges are indictable and must be heard in Supreme Court.

They were released on $250,000 bail each. The matter was adjourned to the September arraignment session.

It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. This is to prevent any statements being published that may jeopardise the outcome of that case.

  • Take Our Poll

    • "What are your views on stop-and-search in today's Bermuda?"
    • Inconvenient but necessary
    • 69%
    • Wholly unproductive
    • 10%
    • Unfair targeting of young black males
    • 21%
    • Total Votes: 4697
    • Poll Archive

    Today's Obituaries

    eMoo Posts