Shemaiah Ryan, who has been slapped with 48 charges in connection with a bank fraud scheme, remains behind bars, having been unable to post his $2.4 million bail.
Ryan, also known as “Banker,” of Bent Street, Wortmanville, Georgetown, is facing the 48 charges, which include 25 counts of simple larceny under the Criminal Law (Offences) Act, amounting to $4.8 million.
The 23-year-old man also faces 23 counts of conspiracy to commit computer-related fraud under the Cyber Crime Act, totalling $31.6 million.
According to investigators, Ryan allegedly conspired with others to create a fake national identification card in the name of Carl Peterkin, a joint account holder who, along with his wife Bernadette, reported never requesting Automated Teller Machine (ATM) or online banking services.
Using the fraudulent ID, Ryan reportedly obtained an ATM card and set up internet banking at a Camp Street, Georgetown bank branch.
Over the course of September 2022, he allegedly transferred nearly $31.6 million to two individuals – Chelsea and Donna Edwards – who later handed the funds over to him.
He allegedly told the Edwards family he was a contractor unable to personally collect his payments due to his work in Berbice. Additionally, Ryan made 27 ATM withdrawals, totalling $4.8 million, all captured on Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV).
Ryan has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Bail was set at $50,000 per count, amounting to $2.4 million, which he has so far been unable to pay.
The matter was last heard on Friday last, before Acting Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty, where the prosecution requested additional time to secure outstanding bank statements deemed essential for disclosure.
The court heard that these documents are necessary for the case to proceed. However, defence attorney Domnick Bess expressed frustration with the repeated delays, stating that during the previous court hearing, the prosecution had also claimed the matter was still under investigation.
He argued that the investigation has been ongoing for a considerable time and that the prosecution had been given “more than enough time” to produce the required disclosures.
Bess further requested a peremptory date, a legal measure that sets a final deadline beyond which no further extensions can be granted. But Magistrate McGusty denied the request, noting that the matter was first brought before the court on April 4, 2025, and it was premature to impose such a restriction at this stage.
The case was adjourned to June 6, 2025, for disclosure and continuation.
