DJ Gregory Outerbridge jailed for 12 years for possession of gun and ammunition
A DJ caught with a loaded revolver and cannabis with intent to supply was jailed yesterday for 12 years.
Gregory Roger Livingstone Outerbridge, 41, who also admitted possessing drug equipment, was ordered to forfeit cash totalling $3,686.
Questioned by Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe on how he would better himself behind bars, Outerbridge told the court that he felt “terrible” for bringing pain on his three children.
Alan Richards, the prosecutor, said that Outerbridge was in a car stopped by police shortly before 10pm on May 26, 2022 on Horseshoe Road in Southampton.
Officers, who were authorised to search vehicles in the area, approached the car and spoke with the woman driver and Outerbridge, who was the passenger and scheduled to DJ at a party at the beach.
But police became suspicious after the car came back from the beach and the driver asked an officer if the vehicle would get searched again after returning from another venue.
The officer said it might or might not, and the car headed on to South Road.
The driver’s comment was overheard by the supervising officer, who instructed police to stop the vehicle if it returned, which it did at 10pm.
The driver became irritated with police over getting stopped again, while Outerbridge told them that they were “only gone a few minutes” to visit Southampton Rangers Club.
They were ordered to get out of the car, and a search uncovered a pouch in the trunk concealed under a yoga mat.
A Taurus revolver was seized, and the two were arrested.
Police also found a bag between the car seats containing what appeared to be cannabis and $140 in cash.
Shortly before 3am, police searched Outerbridge’s home at Jacob’s Point Road in St George’s, where a metal safe yielded $3,686 in US and Bermuda cash.
They also seized suspected cannabis and a digital scale.
The revolver and other items from the pouch were examined on May 28 and found with five bullets in the chamber, with a sixth bullet wrapped in plastic.
Genetic analysis found Outerbridge’s DNA on the cylinder, trigger and barrel of the gun, to within a one in 500 million probability.
Cannabis from the car weighed 61.67 grams, while a further 102.2 grams from the apartment was valued at more than $5,000 on the street.
Mr Richards called for a minimum sentence of 12 years on each count of possessing a prohibited weapon and possessing ammunition without a licence, to run concurrently.
The Crown also asked for 12 months’ imprisonment for possession of cannabis in an increased penalty zone, a further 12 months for possession of cannabis with intent to supply and one month for possession of drug equipment, again to run concurrently.
Charles Richardson, for the defence, said Outerbridge had pleaded guilty from the outset.
He requested that the 12 months for cannabis be suspended for a year, and that Outerbridge’s time in custody get taken into account.
Outerbridge apologised to his family and children, saying that he was “a highly involved parent” with children aged 18 and 11 as well as a one-year-old.
Mr Justice Wolffe asked him how it felt to know that his oldest son would not be able to get guidance from his father.
Outerbridge replied: “Terrible.”
Mr Justice Wolffe asked: “What would you tell your son?”
Outerbridge said: “Avoid putting himself in situations that would push him to make the wrong choices — and be mindful of the company you keep.”
The judge told him that applying himself to education while incarcerated would improve his chances for parole and help him to provide for his children upon release.
Outerbridge was jailed for 12 years concurrently for possession of the gun — the mandatory minimum sentence — and the ammunition.
He was sentenced to a year for the cannabis charge in an increased penalty zone, eight months for the additional cannabis charge and one month’s imprisonment for the drug equipment, all to run concurrently.
But Mr Justice Wolffe suspended those sentences for one year, leaving Outerbridge with a term of 12 years in Westgate.
• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.