Police have arrested another suspect in the Nov. 17 Rockland Trust Bank heist.
“Ramone Andre Clayton, 21, of Jamaica, was arrested on Dec. 9, 2022, in Connecticut and charged with one count of being an accessory after the fact to armed bank robbery,” a press release from the office of U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins states. Clayton is expected in federal court “at a later date,” according to the release.
Clayton is the third person charged in relation to the bank robbery. Two other men, Miquel A. Jones and Omar O. Johnson, both Jamaican nationals, have been arrested and arraigned on charges related to the robbery.
On Nov. 17, two Rockland Trust employees were rushed by men wearing dark clothing, white Halloween masks, and carrying handguns. They tied up the bank employees, put duct tape over their mouths, and fled the scene in an SUV stolen from one of the bank employees, police said.
Clayton was captured on Steamship Authority surveillance video, according to the release.
“According to surveillance video obtained from the Steamship Authority ferry terminal in Vineyard Haven,” the release states, “it is alleged that less than 40 minutes after the robbery — at approximately 8:58 am on Nov. 17, 2022 — Clayton was captured arriving in a silver sedan to a parking lot nearby the ferry terminal, parking the vehicle, purchasing ferry tickets, and boarding a ferry at 9:21 am. Approximately 30 minutes later, at 9:53 am, [Omar] Johnson is allegedly captured arriving to the same parking lot and getting into the driver’s seat of the silver sedan Clayton had previously arrived in and parked before boarding a ferry. It is further alleged that Johnson is later captured driving the silver sedan to the vehicle reservation clerk booth, purchasing a vehicle ferry ticket, and boarding a freight ferry in the silver sedan at 12:24 pm.”
Monday’s press release also mentions that during a search of a farm used by a landscaping company where Jones was employed, “a glove, paper money band, zip tie, and multiple rubber bands — items consistent with the bank robbery — were recovered. During the search, investigators observed an area that appeared to have had a recent fire, and found burned pieces of nylon, white metal plastic consistent with a white mask, burned walkie-talkie pieces, an antenna, batteries, and pieces of metal consistent with a duffle bag zipper. Within a few feet of the burned area, two semiautomatic handguns loaded with 9mm ammunition were discovered buried inches under the ground. These items, including the handguns, were consistent with items possessed by the robbers during the robbery of the Rockland Trust bank.”
The charges were announced by U.S. Attorney Rachael S. Rollins; Joseph R. Bonavolonta, special agent in charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Boston Division; Cape & Islands District Attorney Michael O’Keefe; Col. Christopher Mason, superintendent of the Massachusetts State Police; Tisbury Police Chief Chris Habekost; West Tisbury Police Chief Matt Mincone; Edgartown Police Chief Bruce McNamee; Chilmark Police Chief Jonathan Klaren; Oak Bluffs Police Chief Jonathan Searle; Aquinnah Police Chief Randhi P. Belain; Canterbury (N.H.) Police Chief Michael Labrecque; and New Haven (Conn.) Police Chief Karl Jacobson, the release states. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Meghan Chambers Cleary and Kenneth G. Shine of Rollins’ major crimes unit are prosecuting the case.
I’m just not seeing any praise. 3 armed men with loaded 9 mm handguns roaming around our community taking their time boarding a ferry and the police afraid to question anyone for fear of racial profiling.
Mark– I will try again to get my point across.
First, we have many people who are “2 A” advocates and think everyone should have a gun, and god can sort it all out later if things go wrong.
That’s the constitution, and even gun control advocates are not in favor of “terminating” it .
So let’s assume that the bank tellers told the police that the robbers were black, and had what they thought were Jamaican accents.
What would you have the police do ?
The constitution, in addition to the second amendment, also has the fourth:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
So, would you have been in favor of “terminating” that amendment, and have the police “question” black people attempting to leave the island that morning ? If when the police asked a young black man if he had robbed the bank and he responded “no mahn” with a Jamaican accent, would that be enough to take him to the station for further interrogation ? What if they refused to answer ( fifth amendment ) ?
You can blow your dog whistle about “racial profiling” all you want, but the fourth amendment right to unreasonable search and seizure applies to everyone– even Jamaicans.
— especially ones’ that are here legally.
Racist motivation behind the arrest. Unfairly apprehended, spied upon and circumstantial evidence with all the stuff they found like money and guns and clothes. They were unsuccessful so leave them alone. Make this a sort of affirmative action robbery and let it pass.
We still have not heard how they got the guns.
There are plenty of people with loaded handguns roaming around our community.
And a lot of people are fine with that.
I’m glad no one was hurt.
Don,
Are those “people with loaded handguns roaming around our community” breaking into banks and tying people up to rob them? Are fellow islanders with concealed carry harming anyone?
The robbers are seasonal Islanders.
They carried concealed.
The caused no physical harm.
Joseph- you question has a tautological answer , given that 3 people who were roaming around in our community did just that.
And what is the definition of an “Islander” ?
I’m sure that some people who come here for 5 months a year, every year, for years, consider themselves to be some sort of “islander”.
And are people who are not islanders not allowed to carry weapons on the island ?
As far as I know, it has not been reported how these guns were obtained. One thing for sure, if they were obtained illegally, it would have been harder for them to get them if there were not more guns than people in this country.
Don,
There’s more than one type of physical injury associated with such crimes and methods of restraint. No one was shot, but do we actually know that no one was hurt? I’ve read nothing so far to back up that assertion. If I’ve missed something, which is possible, point me towards it.
I would say the opposite is more accurate, considering the facts thus far. Binding and gagging are acts of battery. Forms of violence. I expect that further specifics will be revealed in court, if there are any. Until then, the insistence from multiple islanders that no one was hurt, physically or otherwise, is baseless and dismissive.
Criminals who resort to life-threatening tactics are not known for their gentle touch and kind approach. I won’t be assuming this unfolded in a harmless, painless way unless the folks who were targeted—who had to live through it—state as much. (Not to imply that they owe me answers.)
On the other hand, there’s one assumption I will make: those who carry loaded guns for lawless personal gain are willing to use them whenever they deem necessary. This case is no exception. They’ll get no credit from me for the lack of fatalities. All that indicates, in my opinion, is that they felt their disguises sufficed.
Thank goodness no one was killed, of course, but battery is a horrible experience in its own right, even when it doesn’t turn deadly. Especially when someone is trying to convince you, by deed if not by word, that they WILL, in fact, murder you.
Katie– I agree that psychological trauma is a serious issue that can be difficult to cope with. I will not downplay it.
Your assertion that “the insistence from multiple islanders that no one was hurt, physically or otherwise, is baseless and dismissive.”
No one has said they were not “otherwise” hurt. Quite the contrary, I see multiple islanders acknowledging the psychological trauma suffered by the victims. Myself included.
So having said that, let me rephrase my comment.
I am glad we are not offering “thoughts and prayers” for the deceased and their families.
Don,
Thank you for clarifying your comment. Under the last article, I was talking about the potential for psychological trauma. I’m glad we agree that this is a real and important concern.
Under this article, though, I was trying to suggest that physical harm is not necessarily limited to gunshots—especially not when someone has been tied up and gagged. Those are forms of force. We can’t rule out physical harm without further details. The case is ongoing.
I don’t know what kind of shape the employees were in afterwards. Hopefully, they were fine. But I haven’t seen confirmation of that yet. I don’t feel people from the outside looking in can know as much. And even if no lasting wounds/marks/injuries were incurred, it’s a physical violation to be forced into restraints. Into cooperating.
“No one has said they were not “otherwise” hurt.”
Albert Hess strongly implied exactly that, and in the most obnoxious way possible—through mockery. Here is his reply to my assertion that armed crimes can be traumatizing.
“Those poor poor bank employees. Just think about the horror that our KIA/MIA Patriots have suffered and what these bank robbers put the bank employees through.”
That’s from the last article. When looked at out of context, perhaps it seems he’s being genuine. When read within the context of his many other thoughts on the topic, this was, to me, clearly bitter sarcasm. I guess in his mind, trauma sustained through a single event is not valid because those who have been to war may suffer multiple times over. I see no logic in that.
Also, I wasn’t limiting my thoughts to what’s been said in the Times. I’ve heard some pretty dismissive stuff floating around elsewhere. Par for the course. But it bothers me greatly.
“I see multiple islanders acknowledging the psychological trauma suffered by the victims.”
Yes, most islanders have been decent and expressed concern. The majority are supportive. Luckily, that’s often the case when someone in our community is harmed.
My remarks were about anyone who has taken the opposite approach, not the island as a whole. It only takes a few pointed or cutting comments to add insult to injury after a harrowing ordeal.
Katie– I couldn’t agree with you more about psychological scars. One of the things that always impressed me about John McCain was how he managed to overcome his traumatic experience as a POW. My father survived the sinking of a submarine, and being in a forced labor camp at the hands of some rather ruthless Japanese guards and policies.
I worked with troubled teenagers for a few years, and know that abuse and psychological trauma can have lifelong effects. When I came face to face with the reality of that trauma I saw on teenagers, I was fortunate enough to still have my farther to talk to about how he overcame his trauma.
He said that he simply forgave his captors.
I do get it.
Thank you for raising awareness about it.
Mr. Keller,
I surely hope there are many Vineyarders with LTCs, who are properly trained and armed, “roaming around” the island. It makes for a safer place to live.
Mr.Budris– let me point out that Mr. Acker was the first to express his concerns about armed people “roaming around” our community.
I’m not particularly concerned about that myself. I have no problem with psychologically stable people having a LTC.
It’s somewhat irrelevant as to how well they are “trained” in cases where a deliberate crime is committed with a gun. Yes, they can shoot straight, and I imagine that if they know and follow the laws about safe storage and handling, that significantly reduces the possibility of accidents. That’s a good thing. It’s disturbing to hear that about 75 % of mass shootings were done with legally obtained weapons.
One thing I appreciate about Ma. is that they at least try to weed out the mentally unstable. The high death rate by guns in this country is the result of lax regulations that allow clearly disturbed people access to weapons of war. That’s where I have a problem with radical 2 A er’s.
I’m not sure if a high percentage of people “roaming around”, (as Mr. Acker characterizes them) are making us safer. Maybe– I won’t say you are wrong. I am curious though, as to how these guys obtained the guns.
A fair question, I think.
Mr. Keller,
“I am curious though, as to how these guys obtained the guns.
A fair question, I think.” Absolutely a fair question, and one I hope is answered and fast. On that we are complete synch.
Thanks, Don. I share your thoughts here. Trauma stemming from military service has not been given the full attention it deserves, but hopefully the tides are turning. Anyone who has had to cope with it has my utmost respect and is deserving of whatever services they need.
Also, to clarify a comment I made farther down the thread:
When I said “some of you” don’t seem to feel being tied up counts as physical harm, I meant that in a general sense. Not to assume you were personally going to take such a stance. I noticed this morning that I’d chosen my words poorly.
That death threats have become so common is something I struggle to wrap my head around in general, let alone when they’re accompanied by the means to actually carry them out. Can only hope the right people are tried fairly and brought to justice.
No one was hurt?? Maybe not physically but I cannot imagine being bound and held at gunpoint. This was a shocking and terrible crime.
This was a run of the mill low level crime, there was no blood.
If it had occured in any small city in the state it may not have made the front page.
Albert, it sounds like you’ve become desensitized to how crime is assessed in reality. Too much Law & Order? Matlock?
Blood is not required to prove harm, and fatalities are not the norm by which everything else should be judged. The basis of a free society includes the concept of safety. The baseline should be that we are all at liberty to work and tend to our lives without risk of being assaulted. Without having force used on us against our will.
Any crime that violates that basic concept is important. You don’t get to dismiss all harm that falls short of murder or bloodshed.
Armed federal crimes are never “low level” affairs. Hence all the work that’s gone into this case. Look at the potential penalties if you need further convincing. You saying something to rile folks up doesn’t make it true. Let’s all be grateful for that.
Rape is more common than bank robbery the world over. It happens every single day, and to far too many people. In relation to frequency of occurrence, it rarely makes headlines. Does that somehow diminish the impact on victims? Does that make it any less serious? Any less violent? Should we downplay it?
Never. (Although some do.)
Yet if we apply your logic, we’d have to write most sexual assaults off as no big deal. (Again, some do.)
It’s okay to sit a discussion out once in a while, especially when innocent people are involved. It speaks volumes when someone is more concerned with defending alleged criminals than those on the receiving end, especially when the evidence is this plentiful and strong.
With all due respect, Katie, it is my opinion that Albert is in no way “defending ” the alleged criminals.
It’s ok to have an opinion, and strong feeling about something, but please don’t claim that people are doing or saying something they are not.
Thanks.
Actually, Albert is making factual claims that he can’t back up and that are more than mere matters of opinion.
He can’t say no one was physically hurt when people were bound and gagged. Is that not physical enough for some of you? It keeps getting glossed over like it’s nothing.
He can’t say that this was a low-level crime when every statute and charge indicates otherwise.
Or rather, he can make such claims—on the internet, you can achieve almost anything—but not without being challenged on their accuracy.
If ignoring the truth isn’t intended as a defense of those responsible, why do it? What’s the goal? The motive behind this repeated approach?
If he wasn’t defending the robbers, why did he describe their methods as successful?
At first, I thought that must be more sarcasm, of the absurdist variety.
Based on his continued input on the subject, I realized nope, I was wrong.
Yes, it’s my take that he’s mocked the victims’ potential trauma but sheds criminals in a better light than the facts would so far indicate. He is free to do that, and I’m free to call a toaster a toaster and state that, from my perspective, it’s wildly disrespectful towards people who were put through a violent ordeal.
Whether these particular suspects are the guilty parties or whether we learn it was someone else, one thing is for certain: somebody physically violated the autonomy and rights of the bank’s employees.
Shouldn’t that take precedence?
I am skeptical of anyone who wants to change the subject from or downplay a crime accomplished by force.
These three foreigners conspired together to commit multiple felonies. All this “circumstantial” evidence, video, witnesses, burned items, illegal guns, armed threats, stolen cars, cash, etc. are sufficient and clear documentation for the Feds to process these three criminals to the fullest extent of the law. The organization and depth of these these crimes indicates that these are not first time offenders. The police should continue this investigation to obtain to identify additional illegal activities.
I was being sarcastic. Of course they are crooks and should go to jail big time.
Thanks for clarification.
andy– they have not been convicted yet.
They are crooks even though not convicted just as OJ is and was a crook for the killing. Hanging on some legal theory reserved for judge and jury is silly. Ordinary citizens can call someone a crook whether tried or not. If I break into your house I am a crook.
So Trump is a crook?
And I can call Kyle Rittenhouse a murderer. You seemed a bit upset when I said that, and pointed out that he was found innocent.
I guess it only works some of the time for you. The people who stormed the Capital were not insurrectionist, or violent, right ? The FBI is lying about it all , right.
trump and his family are honest and transparent in their financial dealings, right ? “Not guilty” you say before you even know half the story.
But then, 3 Jamaicans are “crooks”, the mostly peaceful protestors in the 2020 riots were all looters and arsonist, and the Biden family is the most corrupt political family ever, right ? “Guilty” you say, before you even know half the story.
Would you prefer that the United States “terminate” the clauses in the constitution about trials and juries ?
It seems to be working in Iran these days. They are executing their “insurrectionist” by the hundreds.
Would you be calling Those people foreigners if they were three White guys from Prince Edward Island?
Vocabulary is a a tell.
Roy– Has there been an official statement from law enforcement that the guns were acquired illegally ? It is likely they were , but I have not seen any official statement to that regard. If you have seen some sort of police statement to that effect, please let us know.
Any info you could share about that , Mr. Brennan ?
What we know has been reported. The case is still under investigation.
Thanks George– I’m sure you will publish it as soon as you know.
I would just like to point out to those who might be less attuned to what racism looks like that the times will let you publish racist comments if the are phrased “just so”. Pointing out the racism of a comment or a commenter however, often means your comment does not get published.
HUH? There’s no doubt what the race of these criminals is. Does it matter ?
John –Read Harrison’s comment .
He is speaking about the decisions of the moderator, not the racial makeup of the alleged robbers — different subject.
Just today for me.
Thank you.
I would like to point out that the Times is privately owned.
They are the deciders.
Thank you and congratulations to all of the dedicated members of law enforcement both on and off island as well as the court systems, FBI etc who worked overtime to solve this case. I know this had to be a terrifying experience for the workers at the bank and could result in their no longer having the sense of safety and security we all have here as residents of this special place. Our thoughts and prayers are with them all.
I would focus on the victims right now and make sure their employer understands there probably will be lifetime mental health affects from this crime. In the short term the Martha’s Vineyard community without stating will have the backs of these victims and support them in any way needed.