An Outdated Legal System In Need Of Leadership

Attorney General and Home Affairs Minister Adriel Brathwaite

The arrest of the venerable lawyer Leroy Lynch on a 2.2 million fraud charge  on the weekend, has sent ripples through the legal fraternity and wider society. Why would Mr. Lynch, who has represented First Caribbean International Bank, and before that CIBC for many years, sought to perpetrate fraud has proved to be incomprehensible to BU. It will be interesting to observe the Director of Public Prosecutor’s argument.

The Lynch issue has served yet again to catapult the legal profession into the public eye. The recently appointed President of the Barbados Bar Association (Bar) Andrew Pilgrim, and his early struggle to transmit an unequivocal position on behalf of the Bar regarding the decision to amend the law to accommodate the appointment of incoming Chief Justice Marston Gibson, is symptomatic of something greater. Last week retired jurist and former Attorney General Sir Frederick Smith was surprisingly censored on a talk show when he attempted to speak about the cabals which exist inside the Bar.

BU’s investigation has turned up that they are those who operate within the realm of the judicature whose power structures have suddenly become threatened by the imminent arrival by someone outside the inner circle.  Now that the government has shown it is determined to appoint Marston Gibson, some members of the Bar might be seen as  using intimidatory tactics to signal to Gibson his life will be very uncomfortable sitting on the Bench should he accept the job. In a nutshell the appointment of Marston Gibson will disrupt a pecking order which is sure to irritate the fraternity of men in wigs who gather in the back rooms to toss back glasses of Sherry from time to time before handing down their decisions.

Many may become distracted with the the issues being generated by the appointment of incoming Chief Justice Marston Gibson but a clog in the wheel to dispensing justice in Barbados has been the inefficiency of the Court Registry. The leadership of the Registry has demonstrated over time to be highly incompetent. Could it be there is a fear  Gibson will actually expect the leadership of the Court Registry to ‘up their game’?

Unlike the private sector where incompetent and non performing employees can be dismissed using basic performance management tools, not so seasoned civil servants. The problem at the Court Registry seems to be directly related to the Public Services Union and the fact that the now 15 year old Civil Service Reforms have not taken effect. There is the widely known fact at large in Barbados, it is very difficult to dismiss civil servants for incompetence. The decision to shift them other areas of the Civil Service is widely practiced but then you cannot appoint new people to fill their jobs. In such a situation how can new employees at the Registry shine if  advancement is tied to seniority and not ability? The consequence of it all is a lot of incompetent people who have seniority will advance instead of those who have the aptitude and commitment. This is a worrying characteristic of the public service, public sector reform not withstanding.

Incoming Chief Justice Gibson has to accept he will have to work with the judges he finds. Although there is provision for incompetent judges to be removed under the Constitution by a Royal Commission. Those incompetent judges are having to face  the fact that the chances of such Royal Commissions being set up is increased should there be sufficient grounds. By appointing someone outside the “old boy” network as CJ, the chances of Royal Commissions being activated are greatly increased.  The fraternity would be under threat!

Another consideration why the government needs to find the right persons to bring leadership to the Court System is the debilitating effect it is having on the financial sector. We understand investors are not enamoured about having to get legal work done in Barbados. The inability of successive governments through its agent,  the Civil Service, to implement Civil Service Reforms has been at the source of the problem.

With a general election in the offing does anyone believe the government will attempt to make the deep-rooted changes necessary to unmasked the outdated system we have?

We are surely caught between a rock and a hard place. Does the government have the gumption to put Barbados first? Regrettably we all know the answer.

0 thoughts on “An Outdated Legal System In Need Of Leadership

  1. I really hate it when people speak so authoritatively on the Public Service without the necessary knowledge. Seniority is not and never has been the basis for promotion in the Public Service. Up to December 31, 2007, merit was the basis for career advancement in accordance with the Service Commissions Public Service Regulations 1978. Unfortunately, lazy administrators refused and or neglected to write reports on their staff which might be able to show that the most senior person is not necessarily the most competent and suitable for promotion.
    In the absence of those reports, when vacancies arise the only thing left to assess the candidates was seniority. Instead of requiring that public service managers do their duty: the Arthur Administration took advice from some of those same managers and changed the law effective December 31, 2007.
    The result was the new Public Service Act which has created havoc in the Public Service. The persons who administer recruitment and promotion in the service have misinterpreted and apply the law to use one-off interviews as the basis for promotion. As a result, very competent and suitable candidates are overlooked for predetermined candidates, who either have political connections, family ties to senior managers or lodge membership.
    Sometimes they go as far as changing the qualifications to exclude suitable candidates or to make the preferred choise suitable. For example, the 2001 Qualification Order required the Chief Marshal have “At least four subjects at CXC General Proficiency level, including English Language; and not less than three years’ experience in the grade of Deputy Marshal. Approved qualifications in Public Administration and Para-legal Studies”. The preferred candidate did not have any qualifications in Public Administration so the Minister changed the qualification to replace “and” with “or”. The qualification now reads, “Approved qualifications in Public Administration OR Para-legal Studies”
    What do you expect when politicians and senior public service managers use every device to populate the Public Service with friends and family instead of the most suitable candidates.

  2. @David

    Who speaks for the Bar Association? There is a new President but there are several discordant voices judging from the article. It seems that everyone has an opinion and theirs is the only one that counts. The Nation should not let members of the Association hide under the umbrella of anonymity about a subject like this, why can’t they go on the record?

    They had several months to debate the issue and at the end they can’t even get consensus.
    Now on the eve of the legislation they are running all around without any clear direction like a headless chicken.

    And you expect changes from the Bar Association? These people couldn’t organize a one car funeral.

  3. If there’s nothing else he’s ashamed of, at least he is of his hair!! wha does he look like?!!!! LOL!!

  4. Pretty posy dough. Maybe it bears some relevance to him reforming the law, but I caan c it!! LOL!!

  5. I am curious as to what evidence is out there that the proposed new Chief Justice Gibson is coming to “shake up things” for the better of the legal profession and administration of justice. The previous Prime Minister was a lawyer as is the current PM. The Government seems to be adamant that Gibson should be appointed, but how do we know he is coming to sort out the current “old boy” legal network, or that he isn’t coming to create another one, this time with different operatives, with their own agenda?

  6. @Micah | March 15, 2011 at 4:03 AM |

    Clearly, from all the attempts to block Marston Gibson, one must conclude that BU’s view that certain people are worried that Marston Gibson will shake things up and resurrect the justice system, is correct. I have never seen so many lawyers, judges and senior registry staff jump on a bandwagon in a vain effort to cover their asses in my life. They all know Mr Gibson and therefore one must assume that they have a pretty good idea of what to expect once he takes over.

    Imagine their horror at the obscene idea of actually having to do their jobs properly and to deliver justice in a timely manner. What a scandal!!! Imagine having to actually give value for the expensive cars and police drivers and being addressed as My Lord or My Lady and the money they are paid (with pensions) out of the public purse? Shocking!!!! Don’t the people realise the great lengths and sacrifices they have gone to, to kill off the justice system and to turn Barbados into a banana republic??!! It wasn’t easy, you know. People like Errol Barrow had helped to set up a justice system and it was hell to kill it off. And after all, they are doing us a tremendous favour by graciously allowing themselves to be paid out of our purse (with perquisites) for presiding over the demise of the Justice System. Don’t the people realise what we OWE them????!!!! I have never heard anything so extraordinary as the concept that the people expect them to give value for money!!!! To do what they are paid for would completely expose Barbados as NOT being a banana republic and, horror of horrors, might actually induce foreign investment, rather than driving it to other countries. Well, clearly they must FUTILELY strain every nerve so that Mr Gibson is NEVER allowed to facilitate THAT!!!!!

  7. Sir Frederick Smith is accustomed to being censured. With great delight I recall one of his keynote addresses to the Barbados Bar when he said that it appeared to him that judges in Barbados think they have a constitutional right to be stupid. When asked how he could say such a thing, he shrugged his shoulders, flung his arms wide and asked, “Uh wrong?”

    No, Sir Frederick, you were NOT wrong then and you are even righter now!!!

  8. Call me “doom and gloom” if you want to but this Gibson appointment is going to cause serious problems for the judiciary system in Barbados. The appointment, while in essence would havehad its problem, was made worse by the way it was handled and the first blunder this man makes is going to be blown shyhigh. I predict that if he accepts the job he would spend a year in office, he would run back to safer harbour and we would have lost him and any other overseas scholar like him. This government has made a massive mistake of adjusting the law to accomadate a person and that is disasterous.

    • @ruth

      You are entitled to your view but like everything in life it is the materiality of the change which should the final arbiter and not some hold fast view rooted in a law framed for another time..

  9. @Caswell

    Thanks for your comment which upholds the view that meritocracy is not a pervading culture in the civil service.


    Has anyone ever wondered why those members of the Bar who are so vocal now on the appointment of Gibson don’t mirror the same discuss at the many improprieties displayed by their colleagues?


    One has to try things. Should we continue selecting from the same contaminated pool i.e. old boys club or should we try a thing? They are no guarantees.

  10. i donot care how much partisan dlp supporters try to spin the issue. the fact remains that the govt did not do its homework in the recommendation of mr marston for chief justice and the amendment to allow mr marston to obtain the appointment is wrong .two wrongs do not make it right. the govt should apologise to the public for their incompetence and mr marston as well for broiling his name in controversy. i await too with bated breath all this supposedly cleansweeping when mr marston takes up his appointment. perhaps we should amend the law to make thieving legal if the act does not include violence or for minibuses and zr’s to stop where they like since most of the time this is done in the interest good or bad of the passengers. over to you bro cas.

  11. @Amused,

    While i appreciate your view, and while i also agree that we must try something different that might reduce the continued slide in the judicial system, what evidence is there to make us believe that Mr Gibson will not become like the others?

    I believe the reason they don’t want Mr Gibson is because he is seen as an outsider, not because he is going to shake up anything, but if he does it will be a welcome event and a fresh wind of change.

    The whole system is broken and we see the symptoms of this in our ZR drivers and school children. I am aware that when we point our fingers we point them only at these two, but what about the civil service, judicial system,
    Parliamentarians behave as they like, merchants raise prices indiscriminately, CLICO has defrauded policyholders and there is none to broker justice on their behalf, and so we have a society which is running amok and no end in sight to the slide.

    The way this process was and is being handled is unfortunate, because we open the door for any successive government to change any law at their whim and fancy and for any triviality.

    This country has become one where the law is interpreted according to the colour of one’s skin, who one knows, who one went to school with, how much money one can bribe the officers of the court with, and if one is in the same lodge as the judge.

    We are already a Banana Republic.

    Only in a banana republic can you have a white man who kills his son and has not faced the court up to this day to determine cause.

    Only in a banana republic can you have policemen going to a gated community and not being allowed to enter, that is laughable.

    Only in a banana republic can you have a company where people have invested their money and when they ask back for it, they are told they can’t get it, but the director sues for his and mostly likely he will receive his.


  12. Has anyone ever read a judgment written by Gibson? Did he get first class honours at University? Did he win a Barbados Scholarsip or Exhibition? How do we know that he is “bright”? How do we know that he will change the system? If the law is not being changed for him alone, can anyone name three others who are qualified and want to be judges but are held back by this law?

  13. You know, not one of us knows how the Gibson regime will work out. No one can say that Mr Gibson will not become a member of the old boy network/fraternity – or that he will. My bet, based on his enviable record, is that he will maintain scrupulous impartiality; but that is just my bet and it is as speculative as those who say that he will not.

    For those who object to Mr Gibson’s appointment, I note that not one of them has come up with the name of a suitable alternative candidate. And it begs the observation that they have done this simply because (a) they are objecting for purely political advantage; and (b) they dare not name an alternative as that alternative would be subjected to scrutiny and critical comment here on BU. So they indulge in the most dispicable sort of objection – that with no suggestions as to an alternative and that seeks simply to obstruct to the detriment of the people of Barbados and their dead and buried legal system.

    Sorry, folks, you fool no one.

  14. Amused

    In response to (a)Objection for purely political advantage, it would appear that THE LAW is of no importance to you. For your information, the biggest concern is not the appointment of Me Gibson as a person but his qualifications does not fully satisfy THE LAW as stated for this office. Had the government gone ahead and rectify THE LAW before inviting Mr Gibson would have been more palatable but having place the appointment before the asjustment, it shows little respect for THE LAW, and that is the real bugbearer. This government is watering down THE LAW in this country and that is very serious and the bad boys will take advantage of this, the judiciary system in the country is at its lowest and in an attempt to improve it, this government has made the matter worse. To (b) Are you then suggesting that in case Mr Gibson refuses the office, Barbados would be without a C.J until some one is concieved to fill the post? No man is an island, did Mr Gibson drop out of the sky ?

  15. @Scout. I completely disagree with you. The LAW says that Mr Gibson must have practiced in a Commonwealth jurisdiction for 15 years. He fulfills that requirement as he has been licensed to practice in Barbados for well oer 15 years. How do you or anyone else have any idea of how many cases he has been consulted on? I maintain that the fact of his being licensed in Barbados for well in excess of the time required means that he has practiced in Barbados. In addition, he has lectured at the UWI. Your argument, Scout, is of no merit. By the change of law, all the government seeks to do is to remove from the ambit of people who object to this most proper and appropriate appointment for political ends ONLY and who might seek to derail the proper and LEGAL appointment by challenges through a dead and buried legal system so that the very dead and buried legal system can be ressurected – FINALLY.

    So, Scout, let us have your list of alternatives to Mr Gibson and we will discuss their merits here. In other words, either put up or shut up.

  16. Do we want to rehash the argument about Gibson’s qualification or lack of or should we also be concerned about the cabals which have taken up station in the Bar and its impact on our justice system? We could extend the discussion to the Court Registry.

  17. @Anonus | March 15, 2011 at 11:12 AM. I didn’t think it merited an anwer as the record is public domain and on the internet. Just let your fingers do the walking on Google.

    @David. I agree. The biggest problem the new CJ will have is with the Civil Service. Let us by all means focus on the Registry. By the way, David, it has to be said that your report is well thought out, well grounded and extremely important. I take my hat off to you. Excellent piece.

  18. SCOUT

    The Scout | March 15, 2011 at 6:03 AM

    If you had said anything else I would have been the most surprise man in the world.

    The Democratic Labour Party has to do what the Democratic Labour Party has to do.

  19. Islandgal246

    “What happen Carson? Tick biting you?”

    No ticks biting me. They are biting you and the Barbados Labour Party.

    I watch your Owen”seethru”Arthur yesterday and he reminded me of a drowning man catching at straws.

  20. In so many ways, it is disheartening that we have a moribund justice system that Government is making serious steps to revitalise and resuscitate and all that appears to interest some commenters is their political agenda.

    Let us look at the scenario Government has faced. It has decided to appoint as CJ a Bajan who has distinguished himself at a West Indian university, then at Oxford and then in the United States and is a Rhodes Scholar.

    This Bajan jurist has held a practice certificate in Barbados for over 15 years and he has lectured at the UWI. The fact that he has never had his plaque on an office in Barbados does not mean that he has not been consulted and provided learned opinions on cases in Barbados, not that this is necessary if he holds a Practice Certificate, with the emphasis on “Practice”.

    He is qualified in law for his appointment.

    However, Government isn’t stupid. It knows that with the courts in their current state of Arthur/Simmons-induced state of catatonia, if someone launched a legal objection through the courts to the appointment of Marston Gibson, those same courts and judges could (and would) hold up the appointment for many years, until the case finally reached the CCJ and the persons bringing it lost and the appointment of Marston Gibson could proceed. Meanwhile, ordinary Bajans would continue to be denied access to justice and the opportunities for political point-scoring that such a situation would afford Arthur and his BLP cabal would be as the sands on the shore. So, what in effect they would have achieved would be at the expense of ordinary Bajans who need to come to the court for something they will not get (unless they got nuff money or political connections or both) – JUSTICE.

    So the government plans to change one word “Commonwealth” to two words “common law” so that no meritless delays can be manufactured by the very people who signed the death warrant for the justice system in the first place – and those people and their yard fowls vexed like hell and they will try anything they can to salvage their illusory political advantage.

    After all, why should ordinary Bajans have the right to expect justice at the expense of their political aspirations?

    Meanwhile, here on BU, David has given an insightful and well investigated insight into what is actually happening and only one person (Caswell Franklyn) has addressed the issue raised of Public Service inequities and practices – and addressed them extremely well.

    Fran serves up a compelling indictment of how the country has come to be run (or not run), while all others are seeking to distract from the point of David’s report.

    So exactly who is seeking to defraud whom?

    The Bar is in a state due to the arrest of one of its favoured sons for theft (which is a precursor to the opening of many other such cans of worms and serves notice by the DPP on members of the Bar); there are many actions, either filed or contemplated against judges and the Registry for delinquency.

    And people like Anonus seems not to have heard of Google (or much else, it appears).

  21. Amused
    It seems that Marston Gibson is coming like the grim reaper, so lawyers are going to be cut down, SOME NEED TO BE, judges are going to be cut down. When all of this happens then the DLP would appoint new judges RIGHT, a everything would run perfectly in Barbados from then on CONGRATULATIONS, Oh I’m looking forward to that day; UTOPIA comes to Barbados. Marston Gibson the instant BARBADOS HERO>

  22. To repeat an earlier point. Why is the Bar not as strident in its condemnation of its own kind? What has the Bar done in the last decade to implement measures to assist the public?

  23. @The Scout | March 15, 2011 at 4:01 PM. I see your voluntary absence from BU has not made you any less of an ass than you always were. Why not do a little reading of the comments I have made here – always provided you CAN read.

  24. It is interesting while some Barbadians are strident in their condemnation of lawyers, the very court system which to all who want to see is performing below par and at the root of the problem is not resonating across Barbados. Why is this happening?

    BU has always wondered how for example Sir Richard could lead the Jippy case for 7 years in our courts. Is this a case file we can use as a ‘best practice’. What went right? What went wrong? What could have been done differently?

    What are the underlying issues affecting the delivery of justice in Barbados?


    ACTIVIST MEMBERS from all walks of life in

    THE CAMPAIGN PHILOSOPHY is spread worldwide by its members. Campaign philosophy supported by academics, doctors and judges (U.S. & U.K.)….

    Join in the Campaign by downloading and distributing the free posters and educational pamphlets…

    Contact us by e-mail today for your free membership and privileges…


    Consider some of the following breaches of common law and Constitution to which modern government resorts, in order to enforce its money-motivated inequitable statutes:-

    Today, to ensure the enforcement of whatever unjust legislation government passes, a government-contrived legal obligation bans attorneys, solicitors, lawyers and barristers from presenting evidence which exonerates defendants, if it “disputes the law.” Judges forbid the accused likewise.

    In an unforgivable meretricious act of obsequious criminality, for pay, the lawyer adopts the perjury and subreption* of not presenting evidence which exonerates defendants…

    *Definition. subreption: concealment of evidence; the perjurious procuring of an advantage by concealing the truth.

    Over years, literally billions accrue to law firms’ personnel. In order to ply their lucrative trade (one can no longer dignify this morbid masquerade by calling it a ‘profession’), nowadays lawyers blithely abdicate responsibility and forsake honesty. For gain, lawyers perjuriously consent to this odious denial of the duty to find The Whole Truth. They compound their malfeasance by also tacitly concealing the Constitutional Jurors’ Rights and Duty to judge the law and to find the Verdict according to the Juror’s conscience.

    We point out this crime, this disgrace, this contemptible species of inhumanity. There is no defence to the charge of lawyers acquiescing to the denial of their duty to find The Whole Truth and their profiting from, and being party to, the abuse and imprisonment of innumerable masses of innocent citizens. Consider the charges:

    Fact 1: “Lawyers cannot present defence or evidence which exonerates defendants if it disputes the legality of the law.”

    Fact 2: “Lawyers must abide by the court’s authority whenever judges rule out exonerative evidence.”

    In shameful meek obedience, lawyers do not dispute the ‘law’ even when its enforcement is manifest injustice. Where the law is unjust and defendants are innocent of any crime (no mens rea), lawyers nevertheless ‘advise’ people to plead “guilty” and make plea bargains, rather than their pleading Not Guilty and electing to go to a Trial by Jury. This comprises one major reason why Trials by Jury have become so infrequent. It also results in the West’s largest prison population of all time, consisting principally of harmless citizens innocent of any crime; while the real crimes go unsolved and largely unchallenged; and the accountable progenitors of crime and their servitors, the hardened dangerous criminals, go “scot” free…

    (See Democracy Defined Campaign Philosophy Page 2; the section on mens rea, malice aforethought, criminal intent, “Guilty?” or “Not Guilty?” Wrongful Prosecution; Amnesty & Restitution. See: PROHIBITION: THE PROGENITOR OF CRIME; Part Six of THE REPORT ISBN 9781902848204, which has a Foreword by an official Adviser to U.S. government and is endorsed by academics, doctors [of a variety of disciplines] and judges [U.S. & U.K.]).

    The educated people who comprise the ‘legal profession’ are, by their acquiescence and continued participation in the unlawful, tyrannical, perverted processes of today, more to blame than any other group in society for the destruction of the Constitutional Justice System; and for all the inevitably ensuing totalitarian injustice that results therefrom: the enactment and prosecution of ex parte, money-motivated statutes; the abuse of innocent citizens; wrongful penalization; and the mass incarcerations at the highest per capita rate in history.

    It is not possible for anyone who is remotely au courant with the Illegality of the Status Quo, to deem as ‘true’, and as ‘counsel’ the word of these people who collude in and profit from the widespread enforcement of injustices against innocent citizens.

    In myriad cases, defendants would fare better by dismissing their lawyer and presenting a straightforward courtroom defence and the exonerative evidence for themselves, which is their right.

    If a significant number of defendants were to take up this option of pleading Not Guilty, electing to go for a Trial by Jury and presenting their own defence, then the legal profession would either have to put up with losing the greater proportion of their phenomenally lucrative and easy paydays—or press hard for restoration of Constitutional Trial by Jury in which juries judge the law, and defendants and lawyers are obliged, in seeking The Whole Truth, to present such evidence as reveals an unfounded nature, inequity, venal* motive, of any modern statutes, and hence the crimes per se of the acts of their enforcement.

    *Definition. venal: corruptly mercenary; (able to be) bought over; open to bribery.

    With defendants presenting defence for themselves, thus withholding from lawyers a major source of income, the legal professionals would have their prime, perhaps only, motivating impulse, i.e. money, compelling them to strive—for once on the side of Truth and Justice—for RESTORATION of the Constitutional Common Law Trial by Jury Justice System.

    In the face of extant modern tyranny, state crime and corruption, honest members must forthwith free themselves from dependence on income from, and all association with, the scribes and pharisees of the ‘legal profession’. The correct course for every man or woman of probity, the only honourable way of proceeding for members of the profession, is to resist in wrath and indignation, and to refuse to accept the gains so ill-gotten; and campaign (with us) to right the wrongs.

    Insincere, gravely wrong ‘advice’ and mendacity swiftly become the inscrutable, smooth practised habit of those who, for money, accept that they cannot tell the truth. Controlled by courts (judges) under threat of penalty, and as willing, paid participants in this massive Crime Against Humanity, today’s lawyers cannot give candid counsel nor veracious defence; let alone be trusted to educate people truthfully about the principal Safeguard of Democracy: Annulment-by-Jury (or Jury Nullification) in the Trial by Jury.

    The lawyer’s is the training which prepares the person for “the bench”—the judge who takes his pay from the government only as long as he or she reliably enforces the money-motivated politicians’ inequitable deceptions dissimulated under the guise of ‘law’.

    Today, to ensure the enforcement of the said inequitable (and therefore illegal) ‘laws’, judges knowingly exclude exonerative evidence, including expert documentary, legal, academic, scientific, medical, philosophical, and that which is based on grounds of equity, and tell jurors to consider only that evidence which he or she (the judge) allows ! (See THE REPORT, ISBN 9781902848204.)

    Thus, today, judges invalidate even their own pretence that “jurors try matters of fact.” By dictating the laws of evidence, that is, what evidence the jury may and may not hear, and by ruling how jurors should weigh such evidence as the court chooses to permit them to hear, judges corruptly arrange and dictate the conclusion, the Verdict, to which juries must arrive.

    This criminal tampering by judges produces innumerable false guilty ‘verdicts’, penalization and abuse of innocent citizens, and millions of man-years’ wrongful incarceration.

    Thanks to:

  26. Good grief TB you have to come here and muddy up the waters with your long and drawn out sermon that is best suited to your other thread you have posted.

  27. David you should create a permanent post for Terence Blackett.
    Give it a nice title like “The teachings of T.Black”. noam sain?

    David wrote “Why is the Bar not as strident in its condemnation of its own kind?”

    Lawyers are part of a profit centred cartel.
    Why would they want to do anything to negatively affect their income and cash flow?

    The Bar association is a group of Lawyers “policing” themselves.

  28. Hant said “David you should create a permanent post for Terence Blackett”.

    I will back you on that ! I reckon he has his own spot in Hyde park as well.

  29. Amused @4.21P.M
    I’m amused at the level of the vocab of you DLP yardfowls, as you’re cornered you resort to abuse and/or slander. I can’t read very well, that’s why most of the crap you write I ignore. Political yardfowlism is so serious that if a DLP politician tells you to drink gramoxzone you would drink it with a smile on your face.

  30. Yes! Terrence should post his drivel on his own thread as he is wont to do so the rest of us mere mortals can ignore them…. as usual

  31. TMB’s post on this thread looks relevant to me. My quick scan of it suggests that it puts the problem with our lawyers in somewhat of a global perspective.

  32. Speaking of Leroy Lynch who is his lawyer? Bjerhamn got bail, the woman who rained licks on Rawle and threaten his family got bail (although she was already on bail for murder) and now Leroy can’t get bail? Why didn’t his attorney ensure that his sureties have all their ducks in a row?

    Leroy must be so radioactive that he was sent up the river for 28 days. I must commend Acting Magistrate Renee, with such a no nonsense approach you shouldn’t be acting for long. I think a few others in your position would have let Leroy wriggle through a loophole.

    It will be hard on Leroy, I don’t think that he envisioned that at 61 someone will be telling him when to go to bed; when to get up; when to take a shower; when to eat… I know some of you will be saying that you already have someone who gives you those orders but you call them wives 🙂

    • This Leroy Lynch case is intriguing to say the least.

      Many are watching with a more than keen interest.

      Why would Lynch, who must be filthy rich, do such as he is accused?

      Why would a charge be brought if Lynch was confronted with his crime?

      Would he not have done like all the others and settle with prejudice?

  33. The fact that Marston Gibson would accept the job in conditions such as they are is as bad as David Simmonds accepting the job in conditions as they were in his time. My God, what ever happened to doing the honorable thing, the right thing? Just say no (to drugs, or whatever …)! That guy is destined to become one of the boys in quick time… mark my word, no Messiah, no nothing! (At least he di’n come from Crumpton Street High …)

  34. BAFBFP… Having never experienced the pleasure of being a guest at one of Her Majesty’s prisons I don’t know what goes on behind those gates…. But I have heard stories maybe you have heard them too.

    Perhaps some contributor to this blog can post their reminiscences about life on the inside; they can post under the pseudonym “Jailbird”

  35. hello BU,
    I wanted to know how the jury selection system works in Barbados? Do they select jurors for a case with out any alternates? Should one of the jurors take ill or could not attend the trial for some other reason, what happens with the trial? In a couple of weeks I got the answer. I read in one of the dailies a juror took ill on the tuesday and the trial was postponed until the monday the next week hoping that the juror would be well enough to come back.With the two alternates sitting in, one would have taken that place and the trial would have continued. I don`t know if Judge Gibson should take the job after all the BS. that is said. Let them select one of theirs who will let them continue to have a justice system that is mediocre and incompetent and they can do as the please with no one to answer to,one lawyer is expected to stand trial and the last I read they are over 100 complaints lodge against them for years and nothing is being done. Cases taking as long as 7 years to be heard with a population of 275000,for argument sake,say they were 550000, that would take almost 14 years, then they expect that the parties involve to give the same statements,word for word that they gave 5 or 6 years ago.

  36. I have had business dealings with Leroy Lynch personally. He was a decent upright lawyer who handled serveral legal matters for me and a few other people that I know. All on the up and up. No hankey pankey, no delays, no nothing.

    Leroy owns a big able house in Tino Terrace which has been empty for a while and he is living in Martindale’s Road.

    Something must have gone horribly wrong in his life that he had to resort to this crime. However, as one of the above bloggers said – how come they picked him to go to jail and all the other tiefing lawyers got off with a slap on the wrist. I guess they are making an example out of him.

  37. I suspect that the bank is behind the pursuit of Leroy Lynch. If I am right, it merely proves that it is money and not right that dictates the course of justice in Barbados. The other lawyers who are alleged to have stolen, did so from little people with no clout, either financial or political. So, of course a blanket was thrown over those issues. For the good of Barbados, this use of financial and political clout on the courts HAS to be stopped. Let us hope that, between them, Andrew Pilgrim and Marston Gibson can stop it. People will only put up with so much and it looks to me like a breaking point has now been reached. Also, the financial sector is suffering badly as a result of the justice system. It is very bad, you know.

  38. Look! I know absolutely nothing about the case. But something is rotten in Denmark. Leroy Lynch has an enviable humanitarian record at his church. He is on record as paying big monies for church functions. Workout testifies that he was a different kind of lawyer “All on the up and up. No hankey pankey, no delays, no nothing.” He apparently moved from a bigable house in Tino Terrace back to Martindales Rd, presumably his old family house that would have been minus the expenses of his big house. He has a history of helping the small man. His Legal colleagues did nothing to help him.

    Doesn’t this suggest that something was terribly wrong? Doesn’t this suggest that he was definitely NOT one of he boys? Doesn’t this suggest that someone was out to punish him? Doesn’t this suggest that he had fallen on very hard times and none of his erstwhile colleagues would help?

    There has to be a lot more in this story than has been published. Perhaps it is too early to suggest that he is the villain in the piece. Perhaps it might be the others that are playing that role.

    Perhaps BU and others shouldn’t rush to judgement yet!

    • @checkit-out

      Here is what BU included in the blog:

      Why would Mr. Lynch, who has represented First Caribbean International Bank, and before that CIBC for many years, sought to perpetrate fraud has proved to be incomprehensible to BU. It will be interesting to observe the Director of Public Prosecutor’s argument.

      Doesn’t it suggest some reservation on our part?

  39. Check it out said “Leroy Lynch has an enviable humanitarian record at his church. He is on record as paying big monies for church functions”.

    Perhaps that is where the problem lies. Because you go to church and say that you are a christian that does not say you are a good person. Look at the Mafia, they gave generously to the church and attended church with their families even though they lived a life of crime.

    The problem is that most lawyers feel that they are above the LAW. We are sadly lacking in strong leadership in many sections of government and that is why those who apply and defend the law, feel that the law does not apply to them.

  40. I continue to cite BASTIAT* as a relevant and credible source given the hindsight he possessed on the “EVOLUTION” of the law and how “The Proper Function of the Law” is inimical to the smooth running of society…

    Bastiat believed that – “in all sincerity, can anything more than the absence of plunder be required of the law? Can the law — which necessarily requires the use of force — rationally be used for anything except protecting the rights of everyone? I defy anyone to extend it beyond this purpose without perverting it and, consequently, turning might against right. This is the most fatal and most illogical social perversion that can possibly be imagined. It must be admitted that the true solution — so long searched for in the area of social relationships — is contained in these simple words: Law is organized justice.”

    Now this must be said: When justice is organized by law — that is, by force — this excludes the idea of using law (force) to organize any human activity whatever, whether it be labor, charity, agriculture, commerce, industry, education, art, or religion. The organizing by law of any one of these would inevitably destroy the essential organization — justice. For truly, how can we imagine force being used against the liberty of citizens without it also being used against justice, and thus acting against its proper purpose?

    Law Is a Negative Concept

    The harmlessness of the mission performed by law and lawful defense is self-evident; the usefulness is obvious; and the legitimacy cannot be disputed.

    As a friend of mine once remarked, this negative concept of law is so true that the statement, the purpose of the law is to cause justice to reign, is not a rigorously accurate statement. It ought to be stated that the purpose of the law is to prevent injustice from reigning. In fact, it is injustice, instead of justice, that has an existence of its own. Justice is achieved only when injustice is absent.

    But when the law, by means of its necessary agent, force, imposes upon men a regulation of labor, a method or a subject of education, a religious faith or creed — then the law is no longer negative; it acts positively upon people. It substitutes the will of the legislator for their own wills; the initiative of the legislator for their own initiatives. When this happens, the people no longer need to discuss, to compare, to plan ahead; the law does all this for them. Intelligence becomes a useless prop for the people; they cease to be men; they lose their personality, their liberty, their property.

    Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice.

    The Law and Morals

    You say: “Here are persons who are lacking in morality or religion,” and you turn to the law. But law is force. And need I point out what a violent and futile effort it is to use force in the matters of morality and religion?

    It would seem that socialists, however self-complacent, could not avoid seeing this monstrous legal plunder that results from such systems and such efforts. But what do the socialists do? They cleverly disguise this legal plunder from others — and even from themselves — under the seductive names of fraternity, unity, organization, and association. Because we ask so little from the law — only justice — the socialists thereby assume that we reject fraternity, unity, organization, and association. The socialists brand us with the name individualist.

    But we assure the socialists that we repudiate only forced organization, not natural organization. We repudiate the forms of association that are forced upon us, not free association. We repudiate forced fraternity, not true fraternity. We repudiate the artificial unity that does nothing more than deprive persons of individual responsibility. We do not repudiate the natural unity of mankind under Providence.

  41. @Checkitout

    Isn’t that what we do on the blogs? We speculate, we make accusations, we rush to judgement.

    We are not privy to what’s going on in Lynch’s personal or business life but he stands accused of stealing 2 million dollars (BTW the largest sum anyone has officially been charged with stealing in Barbados) so we have to go with what we know.

    For the record many people have had enviable business reputations and histories of humanitarian acts have also been convicted of crimes which seem out of character


    All societies govern by their Justice System…

    The power to punish carries with it ALL power…

    It remains a universal eternal criterion of justice that the validity and justice of laws and all acts of their enforcement require to be judged not by those who make and enforce the laws (government), but by those who voluntarily agree to abide by the laws (all the adult citizens)…

    All who do not uphold this tenet are then promoting unlawful rule by a tyrannical élite.

    Unwittingly, or for self-advantage, they serve despots, abet tyranny, and are the criminal enemies of freedom and equal justice…

    Because the fairness and justice of the laws and all acts of law enforcement require to be judged by those who agree to abide by the laws, according to natural law, common law, constitutional law, and the paramount requirement for Equal Justice, the Common Law Trial by Jury of ordinary adult citizens in which the jurors judge the justice of the law and each act of enforcement, is the only justice system which is legal and just everywhere, for all process of law, civil, criminal and fiscal…

    That is why Common Law Trial by Jury is installed by all legitimate constitutions as the sole justice system for all crimes (unimpeachable), civil, criminal and fiscal…

    On the aforesaid grounds, there is NO* legal enforcement of ANY* law but by the Trial by Jury…

    It is uniquely in the nature of Trial by Jury that juries fulfill the function and purpose of law in a democratic society…

    These are to maintain Justice by protecting the citizen from injustice and crime of all kinds, whether perpetrated by the state or by other citizens; and to uphold the rights, freedom and legitimate interests of all….

    The Juror is sovereign in Trial by Jury…

    Trial by Jury defines democracy, sine qua non…

    Within a Hellenic or modern democracy…
    (Thanks to:

  43. TB again with his rantings. David you may have to do something about this. This is the rantings of a mentally ill person, and I am serious. He is the only one posting the most responses under his post where there is a very small audience. He is not satisfied with that, he has to come upfront here in our faces with his rantings. He seems to think he can force us to read what he writes. Well I am for one who will continue to ignore him.


    “Democratic Trial by Jury alone proffers the preservation of individuals without prejudice in regard to their nationality, race, gender, religion and background.” See:

    (Democracy Defined Essay EIS#10 “We the People and the Matter of Words.”)

    If you believe in God, then you will marvel at His sublime wisdom in providing the natural law’s * simple, practical secular means for all men and women everywhere to create and live in the definitive civilized state of Equal Justice…

    Achieving it is the challenge facing all men and women…

    *The legal and societal term “Natural Law” is a sense of right and wrong which arises inevitably from the constitution of the mind of man.

    The people’s legem terræ common law of the land is derived from natural law and justice and Equity, the natural Sense of Fairness and conscience by which disinterested, randomly-selected people in a jury situation judge.

    Nota Bene: Sane humans cannot avoid acquiring an understanding of fairness, equity and justice. From simple human interactions, children everywhere learn to sense injustice even before they learn the vocabulary by which to define or explain it…

    It is for that reason that despotic villains who wish to control populations into passively accepting intrinsically unjust laws and ways of living, utilize perverted mis-education to condition (or ‘brainwash’) the mentality of children from an early age: viz. the inculcation by Mohammedans into the minds of the very young of epithets such as “apes” and “pigs” for Jews and non-Jews (who are not Mohammedans); the forced, fabricated ‘inequality’ of women under Sharia ‘law’, including that of a woman’s testimony being equal to only “half” that of a man, etc.; statism, socialism, communism “taught” to young Chinese and others to the exclusion of equitable, just systems which promote peace and genuine egalitarianism; the National Socialist (NAZI*) creed preached at the Hitler Youth, etc.

    (Natural law does NOT* refer to the laws of nature, the laws which science aims to describe. Nor is it to be confused with the opposite phenomenon, “the law of the jungle,” which is the rule for surviving by the use of force to succeed in a hostile or competitive environment. This latter is quite the reverse of natural law and justice.)

    The supreme secular morality of natural law pre-dates all the great religions: it is timeless, permanent and applicable to judicature in a universal context.

    It is antecedent to the invention of writing, the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Torah; The Pharmacopoeia of Emperor Shen Nung; the Bhagavad Gita; the Old and New Testaments; the Histories of Herodotus and Thucydides, and other texts.

    It is from natural law that all the universal, eternal commandments (i.e., rules of action) of common law derive, such as:

    “Thou shalt do no murder,”… (and),
    “Thou shalt not steal,” …. (and),
    “Thou shalt not bear false witness” [lie*],(and),
    “Do unto others as you would they do unto you.” (OOOPS!) [Emphasis mine]

    This latter secular commandment stands in perpetual judgment over all the acts and motives of humans as individuals and in groups or collectively.
    Theists like to call natural law “God’s Law.” (AND IT IS!!!) [Emphasis mine]

    The natural or universal law and its constitutionally-defined common law derivative (viz. Legem Terræ inscribed into the Great Charter Constitution of 1215, of which the sole justice system is the judgment of peers: the Trial by Jury), govern government and inclusively and impartially judge all the acts and motives of men and women everywhere, in all times and places, including atheists, agnostics, theists, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Mormons, Quakers, and, whether they like it or not, Mohammedans, etc.

    Understanding Legem Terræ, which prescribes the People’s all-powerful Courts of the Common Law Trial by Jury Justice System, reveals how, through Trial by Jury, the people at large peacefully protect themselves from despotism, villainy and potential holocaust.

    They re-establish the due primacy of the universal natural and common law and justice over statute law; punish and deter crime; resume their rightful responsible rôle to police their society; nurture the values of equal justice and respect for the rights of others; fulfill the purpose of Trial by Jury to eliminate crime; and they uphold the Constitution.

    The duplicitous legislation by which wealth and/or hegemony accrues to particular preferred people or segments of society is thus rapidly and permanently extirpated.

    Legem Terræ need not and indeed may not be subjected to interventions, disagreements or debate on metaphysics, the philosophical study of reality concerned with questions such as the existence of God, the external world, the relationship between mind and matter, and questions unanswerable to scientific observation.

    Oft-trodden in the history of ignorant mankind, that is the descent which leads to the replacing of the reliable, secular, eternal Principles of natural law, Equal Justice and Equity, and the impartial Constitutional Common Law, by totalitarianism which falsely claims to be ‘religion’ and/or ‘law’ and rule by cruelty, fear, force, and unnatural methods such as those of the ‘Holy Inquisition’ and ‘Sharia’; of superstitions, unfounded opinion, purblind ‘belief’, and personal prejudice in place of detached rationality, sagacity, logic, evidence and factual proof.

    The good news is that the controversies of theism, religions and spiritualism, which do divide humans, do not belong in the secular courtroom of Equal Justice for they are of no relevance whatsoever in consideration of The Universal Secular Paradigm of Judicature, “Do unto others as you would they do unto you.” This latter provides the Juror at all times and in all places with the means for ascertaining whether the act of the accused was definitively innocent or criminal: an act of injustice committed with malice aforethought; i.e., guilty.

    When individuals or groups preach sectarian ‘beliefs’ at people and bring them into the courtroom, they divide and distract people from the universally-applicable, secular nature of Common Law Trial by Jury. They do a disservice to the Cause of Equal Justice.

    Thereby, they delight and play into the hands of the statist financiers, politicians and judges who otherwise have have NO excuse for denying anyone, whatever their personal beliefs and religions, the legal, civilized, secular Constitutional system of Equal Justice over, and for, All the People* – that very Trial by Jury Justice System in which the citizen-juror is duty-bound in the trial, discreetly and peaceably, to swear to convict the guilty and acquit the innocent; to fulfill the Juror’s Duties, including that of the annulment of the enforcement of unjust prosecutions and arbitrary, inequitable, apocryphal or venal legislation. Let us remember that such acts of enforcement constitute judicable crime per se and form a central part of the Illegality of the Status Quo.

    *A natural common law first-corollary to this, is that anyone adopting a thesis which advocates or prescribes mendacity (perjury) as a means of advancing a ‘religion’ or protecting its adherents, is both disqualified from jury-service and remains subject to the full rigors of the secular Supreme Constitutional Legem Terræ: the Law of the Land.
    (Thanks to;

  45. @islandgal246. Ignore TB. I don’t even read his posts. I tried once – and went to sleep after the first paragraph and suffered the nightmare that the World was totally populated by people like TB and Zoe and there were none of you and me left. Not an original idea in TB’s head. You are correct – the man needs meds badly and he is determined to try to force everyone to subscribe to his brand of mindless insanity. He has persuaded himself that he is an intellectual, when in truth there is little or no intellect in evidence. Anyway, girl, if you ever have problems sleeping, 30 seconds of reading TB and you will be sound asleep, but may have nightmares – from just one paragraph.

    I have known Leroy Lynch for more years than I care to think. I find it difficult to reconcile the man I knew with these allegations. I see no evidence of BU jumping to judgement. A man is innocent till proven guilty before a jury of his peers. I am interested to see what evidence against Leroy will be presented and how he and his counsel will counter it. Until then, I reserve judgement and privately hope that Leroy will manage to clear his name, not because he is an attorney, but because I know and have always liked him as a person. I am sure that Leroy would not object to anyone calling him very eccentric – I suspect that he has been at pains to be eccentric for many years. But, in my experience, eccentricity is all I could say of him and, since I am a little eccentric myself, I mean it as a compliment.

  46. David,
    Even freedom of speech can be abused, and TMBlackett is abusing your blog. He is obviously in need of psychiatric help and he is lowering the standards of BU. A word to the wise is USUALLY sufficient.

  47. TMB can truthfully be described as one of the leading lights of the Bat Cave. However, BU seems to embrace all and all we have to do is press the down button. Easy.

  48. TB is another Ted Kaczynski clone. David you must do something about him. He is cluttering up your blog with his nonsense. This is truly an abuse.

  49. Amused have me cracking up…lmao!!
    TB reminds me of Dictionary….lol….love to see themselves type a load of shoite under the guise of educated men.
    One small mercy…….he doesn’t on his sabbath, so let’s give thanks and continue to scroll down…lol.

  50. @ Amused.
    I must agree with you. This is not the Leroy Lynch that I have known since 1993 when he handled my business, and many other people’s businesses that I recommended to him. The man was always straight up. I don’t know what happened, but I hope that my judgment of him was not wrong and I hope that this is one major mistake.

    My heart breaks for him in jail, but if he did the crime, he should pay the time, but so should everyone else who did worst than he did.

    Justice should be the same for all.

    I say, this man is not a friend or relative of mine, my business dealings and everyone else I sent to him, have always been completely above board, and I hope that in this country, he will be able to get the justice that he and all of us deserve.

  51. to david- you are missing the point. the issue goes way beyond whether mr gibson is suitablyy qualified for the job. it is about principle. the govt by not doing their homework dealt mr gibson a bad hand and is trying to correct the mistake incorrectly. they should admit their incompetence first and not play politics with this important matter of jurisprudence. everyone is saying that the judiciary stinks but that is no reason to undermine what little confidence tha public still has in it.they should have the balls to deal fresh

  52. I may not be a great fan of TMB, but come on, why do you suck up to Amused …? He is very likely to be a lawyer and with a handle the he has chosen, obviously a very arrogant one as well… just another haughty condescending example of a highly over rated group of jack asses…

  53. @Techie and Fran. Well, you got a laugh. Poor TB. He just doesn’t get it. Too far up his own fundamental orifice.

    @BAFBFP. Up yours too.

  54. Now, now, now. Cant we all get along and be civil to each other even when we have different points of view? When people say awful things about you on this blog, be the bigger person and go on to the next blog. As the saying goes, live and let live.

  55. Hey Terence,

    Some bad news, but we hope it’s only temporary …

    Jack Bauer managed to escape from the Papist lizard-people after the last commercial break. He managed to whack some evildoers from that Australian rigged jury who were being supported by the Baader-Meinhof Gang/Rote Armee Fraktion with finance from a rogue cabal of villains from James Bond movies (Ernst Blofeld, that Rothschild Zionist, was prominent here, and he’s still stroking that weird white cat) who have logistical support from the reptilian monarchies of Europe and the Babylonian Brotherhood (Boxcar Willie being a key figure in this regard) who were told by the Elders of Zion that we should abolish both Christmas and human knees (we’re still not sure what the whole knee-abolition thing is about) so that the Bilderberg Group and the United Nations can establish a One-World Government in which every parent would be forced under pain of death to call their first-born “Cedric”, irrespective of the child’s gender.

    We estimate it will take Jack Bauer until after the next commercial break (say, seven to nine minutes) to escape from the clutches of these evildoers and get back on track to make the universe safe for you.

    But Chloe has opened up that socket into the tyrants’ mainframe, and we’re still picking up chatter, so our best estimate at the moment is that about sixteen minutes from now, Jack Bauer will be abducted by a shadowy cabal of extraterrestrial reptiles working for the Trilateral Commission and Prince William of England, whose imminent nuptials on the symbolic day of 29 April 2011 (just think about it, Terence; just think about that date; why that date?) will surely be the trumpet blast and, indeed, shall summon the awakening of **ALL**!!! the reptilian, lizard-peoplian, papistian, zionistedleristian, rigged-Oz-juristian and Boxcarwillian forces of the darkside.

    But is it not written, Terence, in the writings of the ancient seers, that 29 April 2011 shall **NOT!!** be unto you as a deliverance while that lucky few, that band o’ bruvs, show their mettle. And then shall we not come to an understanding of humankind, a deeper and better and richer understanding?

    For has it not been written, and yes indeed said. so truthfully, as follows:

    “Mankind— that word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can’t be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps its fate that today is 29 April, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom, not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution—but from annihilation.

    “We’re fighting for our right to live, to exist. And should we win the day, the 29th of April will no longer be known as an English holiday, but as the day when the world declared in one voice:

    “We will not go quietly into the night! We will not vanish without a fight! We’re going to live on! We’re going to survive!

    “Today, we celebrate our Independence Day!”

    And thus it shall be, Terence, for as those who stay off their meds declaim, so shall the day be given unto them.

The blogmaster dares you to join the discussion.