โ† Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Newly Appointed Chief Justice Marston Gibson

On August 14, 2010, BU broke the story that our late Prime Minister David Thompson, after consultation with the Attorney General, Freundel Stuart, the present Prime Minister, and with the then Leader of the Opposition, Mia Mottley Q.C., had made the decision to appoint internationally acclaimed Bajan jurist, Marston Gibson, as Barbadosโ€™ new Chief Justice.

In making this appointment from outside the inner ring, the word of the late Prime Minister to Bajans has been kept from beyond the grave. The reason for reaching outside the ring has been fully discussed in this forum. A ring infested by incestuous relationships shaped by lodge and other fraternity ties. The course of events that followed are well known.

Many believe His Lordship should have been allowed to assume the CJ position without the hassle he has had to endure.ย  The Government, out of abundance of caution because it wanted to ensure that no nuisance legal challenges to the appointment could be made, amended the Supreme Court of Judicature Act to use the words โ€œcommon lawโ€ instead of โ€œCommonwealth”. Therefore any politically motivated time-wasting legal challenges to the appointment of an undoubted and eminently qualified son of our soil was effectively thwarted. A son of our soil who, as can be easily ascertained from the Internet, has never forgotten his roots and whose unrelenting promotion of Barbados is well documented.

Now, almost a year after it broke this story, BU is able to formally welcome Chief Justice Gibson back to the land where is navel string is buried to share with us his scholarship, energy and experience and to deliver back to Barbadians a justice system which has lost its way. Chief Justice Gibson inherits a comatose legal system that he must now raise from the dead. It is an gargantuan task, but one in which we are optimistic he will rise to the challenge.

To His Lordship the Chief Justice we say:

Dear Chief Justice,

Our most hearty and heartfelt welcome HOME!

You have a tremendous task before you and BU urge all Bajans to give you their unswerving support and a hearty welcome home. We realise the enormity of your task and we are encouraged by the number of senior counsel who have expressed their willingness to afford you their best efforts to accomplish this.

In this day and age of transparency through the social media, we offer, without really expecting you to do so, the forum to share your views with Bajans and residents of Barbados and Bajans around the World, as well as those who may have an interest in the justice system of Barbados.

We do not promise to always agree with you and you will see that our family have robust and outspoken opinions, but we have every confidence in your good-will, ability and determination.

Once again, welcome home, melud!

To the Prime Minister, our late Prime Minister Thompson, Miss Mia Mottley Q.C., and the Government of Barbados, we say well done! Pity it took a year, but better late than never.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


  1. Ha ha ha Scout

    Very funny about Eric WIlliams. He virtually killed himself by refusing his diabetic medication. He died a very disappointed man. His party was formed for all the right reasons (he was after all an active historian) but realized quickly that human nature, being the way that it is, allowed for the introduction of a lot of self interest within the hierarchy. Can’t say that I disagree with Williams approach …!


  2. Amused wrote,
    “I am a patriot who believes that you can take the Bajan out of Barbados, but you can NEVER take Barbados out of the Bajan. In fact, it takes generations of absence from Barbados to do that.”

    99% true.
    However I have from time to time met Bajans who have become Canadianised and say they will never live in Barbados again.

    The black children of Barbados benefit every time a person that looks like them rises to hold high office.
    Marston Gibson deserves the support of all right thinking Bajans.


  3. Well Hants I suppose that I am not right thinking then … What does that make me, left thinking?


  4. Hants
    I honestly wish him well but he has lost some of his creditability as a professional person, as far as I’m concerned. Having said that I would like to see him clean up the mess in the judiciary and cause me to eat my words.


  5. @BAFBF
    Let the painting begin!!! You are not the almighty! He is the only POWER and might I add that I am not afraid of YOU!!!


  6. Raymond

    You should be … My intelligent agent will be back soon … You do not want to meet this guy


  7. @BAFBFP
    This one is for you check out the song by Etana ‘I am not afraid’.Also Lucky Dube ‘That’s the way it is.’I shall not be dragged into any bongdogles with you.Pick your wars carefully.However one day……. One day……luv still


  8. Amused:

    I want to refer you to a recent CCJ decision. I think that you will find the judgment interesting.

    The name of the case is Delys O’leen Colby (Dec’d) v Felix Enterprises et al (CV 7 of 2010). See paragraph 3 and 4.


  9. @anonlegal. Oh my dear Lord. Not just paragraphs [3] and [4] either. What a litany of incompetence on the parts of all. As for the delays, well those are a feature of that supposedly efficient judicial system bequeathed to the people of Barbados by one D. S. and his cohorts. I am truly embarrassed to see the justice system of my country take such justifiable stick from the CCJ and be held up to such completely deserved ridicule before the justice systems of the world. ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!! Makes you shamed, man. Makes you CRINGE!

    As for Mr Justice Lionel DaCosta Greenidge (retired) โ€“ he been gone nuff years and YEARS after his retirement people were (and may still be) waiting for his judgments. They ought to have called for a Royal Commission and fired his ass. Instead, he and all the other jokers collect pensions from us taxpayers.

    You think the new CJ got an easy job? Think again. He is going to need to bury some TNT up the fundamental orifices of many members of his judiciary โ€“ and set it off. And even then it may not prise timely justice from them.

    You know how discouraging this decision is! You of all people know what I am talking about. Makes you shamed. But why did this go to the CCJ? This should have been settled. Instead it has made Barbadosโ€™ justice system look totally inept. What a wonderful advertisement for foreign investors, I donโ€™t think.


  10. @anonlegal. Another thing. You will know exactly the answer to this. Estimate three quarters of the costs to be paid fit for two attorneys by the losing party. Then, add to that the amount of costs the losing partyโ€™s (also two of them) will have paid or will have to pay to their own attorneys? Add them together. Then, subtract that from the purchase price. Have you got a minus? I have!!! I am not going to commit defamation here on BU, but I am sure as hell tempted to.

    And the wear and tear on the nerves of the dear departed and then on her executor! And the wear and tear on the nerves of the other party. This is not justice, it is MENTAL TORTURE pure and simple.

    But you can confirm that this is NOT a one-off in Barbados. It is the NORM! Shocking. The courts need to start handing out anti-depressants to any and all responsible attorneys, of which there are many. You canโ€™t help but be utterly depressed. It is like trying to swim through a big swimming pool full of jelly.

    Ah vexed as shite!


  11. Gentlemen, Amused and Anonlegal;

    For the sake of those of us who hold you is such high esteem, PLEASE elucidate


  12. @BAFBFP. Go to Googe. Look up Caribbean Court of Justice. Click on Judgements. It is the second down on the list. Click on the PDF. Read carefully at least twice. Then you tell US what you think it wrong with the picture.


  13. Conveyancing in Barbados would be much simpler and quicker – and recourse to the courts very much less – if a small working party of experienced conveyancing attorneys could prepare a set of standard conditions to be incorporated into land contracts except to the extent expressly modified with special conditions to cover the exigencies of a particular sale.

    The above forms the preamble to the judgement. One would have reasonably thought that with the many lawyers who according to George Payne QC can hardly pay their bills in Barbados would offer the recommended service to tidy this matter up. Making the rendering of justice a prompt affair is all part and parcel of a good system.


  14. The Scout | August 20, 2011 at 8:57 PM |
    “Hants
    I honestly wish him well but he has lost some of his creditability as a professional person, as far as Iโ€™m concerned.”

    The only thing Marston Gibson has done wrong is to care more about his country than himself.

    Until it can be proven otherwise, I am prepared to accept that Gibson is a decent competent Black Bajan who has taken the opportunity to return home and make a contribution to his country.


  15. @David. The conveyancing issue is not quite as simple as one might think. But yes, the advice of the CCJ ought to be taken. It is a big job, however, and will take time.

    What bothers me is that the CCJ case highlighted by Anonlegal ought to have been settled by ADR and never come before the CCJ. The losses to the clients (both of them) through costs etc. are likely to be enormous.

    Having said that, however, ADR is a cost-effective alternative to the courts that works to the advantage on the litigants IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. ADR does not excuse the courts from acting in a timely manner. 2 years and 4 months for the Greenidge decision and then 2 years for the Court of Appeal decision is just disgusting, but it is also the norm in Barbados.

    Maybe now it can be seen why it was absolutely necessary to appoint a CJ from outside of Barbados who is not numbed to the prevailing conditions in Barbados.

    I have had a look at some of the appeals from Barbados that will be coming before the CCJ shortly. The one likely to get he most publicity is the Gold Cup case. In brief, the actual winner of the Gold Cup was found to test positive to a banned and illegal substance contrary to the Turf Club rules. The matter was sent to Madam Justice Kentish, whose judgement talks some arrant nonsense about natural justice. This decision went to appeal – same rubbish. Leave to appeal to the CCJ denied by Acting CJ Moore who, in faithful immitation of a very disliked maiden aunt, has objected to the strength of the protest of the counsel for the BTC. Moore objection or not, it is going to the CCJ and I will be interested to see what the CCJ has to say about a winner of the Gold Cup that tested positive for banned and illegal substances being upheld by the Barbados courts. By the way, the purse of over $100,000 is claimed by the Barbados courts NOT to be property, so they clearly need to check out the definition of property before painting targets on their backs for the CCJ to shoot at.

    And do you know something else? The much-appealed Moore actually applied to be CJ of Barbados.

    There is another case that involves Auntie Moore. It involves an appeal and Moore is head of the Court of Appeal panel for that case. Now, you will notice that I say IS the head, not WAS the head. A little problem. Since one of Mooreโ€™s decisions IN THIS CASE is part of the record, Moore should never be a part of the appeal panel. Attorneys on BOTH sides told Moore it was improper for him to sit on the appeal and asked him to recuse himself. Now, any judge, except Auntie Moore, would have recused himself and the panel would have been re-formed with another judge and the appeal heard. Simple. Not Moore โ€“ no way โ€“ that arrogant auntie adjourns the case sine die. Yet there are some who thought that this auntie should be appointed CJ instead of Marston Gibson and paint yet more targets on the back of the Barbados judiciary for the CCJ (and the world) to take pot shots at.


  16. The case cited by Anonlegal only serves to give weight to what has been postulated on BU. The local media continues to romanticize our judiciary when unforgivable instances of justice being delayed has become par behaviour and can easily be attributed to a high level of ineptness from the bench. Good to see Anonlegal has come around, let us hear from Jack Spratt.


  17. “This is an appropriate stage to exhort conveyancing practitioners in Barbados and similarly circumstanced Caribbean countries to produce detailed standard conditions of sale for contracts for the sale of land that will then be used as the basis for all such contracts subject to such variations or ousters as might be appropriate for particular special circumstances. Currently, it seems that too many contracts afford scope for time-consuming arguments even on basic points e.g. involving the date and time and place for completion and what is required for a valid notice to complete and compliance with it.”

    Detailed standard conditions … Detailed Standard Conditions. You would think that an industry (aka profession) would understand the need for Detailed Standard Conditions. Christ these people sit in parliament, “serve” on boards, determine what is “reasonable” and what is not, and are incapable of determining Detailed Standard Conditions. It is no secret (as evidenced by the comments of the beagles on this blog) that there is no luv/respect between Bar and Bench in Barbados, for indeed the selections to the bench are seen as being chosen from the ones who could not make it at the bar. But whether justifiable or not, with all of the time delaying tactics and miscommunications and illogical findings both bench and bar have let the community down big time, and no appointment of a CCJ can change this disgusting state of affairs, if only because a number of people seem to be doing quite well for themselves with things remaining just the way they are.


  18. Hants

    You are a romantic. You could NOT lead me into battle…


  19. The appointment of Mr. Gibson reminds me of the election of the DLP. One hopes the outcome differs.


  20. Enuff

    U might also refer to the election of Obadma


  21. David said:

    “Good to see Anonlegal has come around”

    My views haven’t changed. I never said that there were no problems with the judiciary. I just have a different view as to what the causes of those problems are.


  22. @Anon Legal

    How can you continue to give a pass to the role of CJ and achieving an efficient judicial system? Only this morning the President of the BAR Association sounded of on the problems of the Court and looks forward to working with the CJ to improve the delivery of justice.

    How does his position conflict with yours?


  23. I would be interested to hear from Anonlegal on his views as to what the problems with the judiciary arise from. In the last few years, I have read some decisions from the Barbados judiciary that a first year law student would scorn. I have seen incidents where judges have either failed to understand or to have read the procedure rules on certain cases. Things that should be simple and easily disposed of are turned into major issues. I admit that it is not just certain inept judges at fault, but their support via the Registry. I also admit that certain attorneys are at fault.

    So where specifically does Anonlegal see the problems as coming from? I ask that question respectfully, as the more input we have into the problem, the better the average Bajan can be informed and have the chance to monitor its revival. And when a system as basic to democracies as its judicial system breaks down, the people of that democracy have every right to know why their rights are being trampled all over.


  24. What did the President say? I am not sure what he said so I dont know whether I agree or not.

    In any event, I am not giving anyone a pass. I know that Barbados’ court system has problems. I think that there are things that can be done right now that can help alleviate those problems. However, for reasons unknown to me those things aren’t being done.

    The point that I have made consistently is that I don’t think that merely changing the Chief Justice will solve the problem.


  25. @Anon Legal

    He made the simple point that our judicial system is currently in a woeful state.


  26. Amused:

    I have actually stated my beliefs before. In summary:

    I believe that the main problem is that there are too few judges on the bench (and even fewer seasoned attorneys willing to be judges). Unless the Government can find more money to hire more judges, I think problems will continue.

    Also, it is ridiculous to me that 15 applications are scheduled for the same time everyday. QC’s are usually allowed into chambers first and the other Attorneys then proceed to have their matters heard in order of seniority. The result: An applicant and a respondent can arrive at court early in the morning and end up waiting until afternoon before their matter is heard.

    It is beyond my comprehension why this practice continues. When preparing a notice of application attorneys should be required to estimate the time for the hearing. Then their application (and only their application) can be scheduled for a particular time on a particular date. I want to be assured that when I have a matter scheduled for 10:00 for an hour, I will go into chambers at about 10:00 and leave chambers at about 11:00.

    Another step that can be taken is the introduction of automatic referral to mediation. Mediation has mixed reviews in other jurisdictions. Some find it a nuisance and others sing its praises. Notwithstanding the mixed reviews, one thing is certain. It helps ease back log in the court system.


  27. In my last post I said:

    “Also, it is ridiculous to me that 15 applications are scheduled for the same time everyday.”

    I should have said that 15 applications are scheduled for the same time everyday before the same judge. So for example, Judge X will have 10-15 applications on his or her list all scheduled for the same time.


  28. @Anonlegal. I agree with every word you have said. You are 100% correct, in so far as you have gone. But what you have highlighted is not the whole story.

    SHORTAGE OF JUDGES: I agree. BUT. I know that in the English system, QCs are deputy judges. I have every reason to believe that the same holds true for Barbados. Therefore, does it not make sense to ask some of the QCs to assist to clear up the backlog by sitting as judges from time to time on cases on which they are not conflicted? The backlog is serious and needs to be instantly addressed. I cannot seriously believe that QCs would not be willing to hear a few cases each to relieve the backlog. This is not only a good way to speed things up, it also allows for the assignment of cases to fit the area of expertise of the particular QC. It beats the hell out of having a criminal matter heard by a judge whose main area of expertise is civil and vice versa.

    MEDIATION: I agree that there is a need of far greater use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). There are several very senior attorneys and retired judges who could be approached to mediate. That case you raised that went to the CCJ is a classic one that ought to have gone to ADR and not to the courts. I am sure you would agree with me on that. The sides could have agreed to retain someone like Sir Denys Williams or Sir Roy Marshall or Sir Frederick Smith as mediator and the matter would have been done and dusted YEARS ago and the sides, particularly the Appellant, would not now be facing massive legal costs. Costs, sure there would have been, but they would have been a fraction of what they are now and, I am sure, with exactly the same outcome. I am not sure automatic referral to mediation will work. You cannot force parties to accept mediation as an alternative to the courts and both parties have to agree on the mediator, so it does need to be someone of stature on whose judgement clients are inclined and prepared to rely. However, a judge can certainly recommend mediation โ€“ if he/she takes the trouble to read the court documents and outline submissions first. If they were to do a little reading first, then they could advise counsel in advance of the court date that maybe the matter should be mediated and let counsel speak to their clients and take instructions and see if they can agree on a mediator, see if their choice of mediator is willing to act, etc.

    SCHEDULING: Yes, that is a big problem. However, we do state how long a matter should take to hear. Therefore, the fault for this over-scheduling has to lie firmly at the feet of the Registry. Although I do have to admit that there are many counsel who will estimate, let us say, 3 days โ€“ and then argue for three days themselves with no time for the other side. I also have a real problem with one side arriving in court prepared to proceed at the time set, only to find that the other side is not there to proceed and that counsel for the other side has one or more other matters before the courts and is running from one court to another, adjourning here and delaying there. In these days of the computer, I refuse to believe that scheduling ought to be a problem. It is largely a Registry problem, in that, not only do they manage to schedule 15 cases on the same day for any given judge, but they also manage to schedule conflicts for attorneys as well. All the Registry has to do is to hire Chris Halsall to set up a computer programme for scheduling so that these mistakes cannot happen.

    Meanwhile, you wait for the judge to make an appearance and, half an hour after the time set when you ask when things will start, you are often told that the judge is having a cup of tea or some such. And, if counsel is billing hourly, the clients are in effect spending hundreds of dollars on the judgeโ€™s cup of tea. This is justice? It isnโ€™t even acceptable business practice.

    DELIVERY OF JUDGEMENTS: Many of the cases that come before the courts ought to be within the competence of the judges to rule at once, with written order to follow. Instead, they adjourn on the slightest pretext to consider the most minor of motions, even those on which the Rules are very clear. I am told that in Canada, these motions are heard by telephone conference calls with the judge and decisions given verbally right away and followed up by hand-written (by the judge) orders that are usually faxed to one counsel only, with the request that that counsel fax them on immediately to all counsel. This makes complete sense.

    PART-HEARD MATTERS: I know of so many matters that start hearing and remain part-heard for years, that it is not rare, but, shamefully, standard practice. So, counsel go through their pre-trial prep and bill their clients for it, then years later they have to do exactly the same thing again to get back up to speed โ€“ and bill their clients once again.

    LOST FILES: How many times have you arrived in court only to be told that the court file on which you are supposed to be arguing has been lost? Yet the ability to scan files and reproduce them to the court, exists and the taxpayer has paid a fortune for the Registry to have this facility. How many times have you asked for files of other cases, other than the one you are arguing on, that has a bearing on the case you are arguing, only to find that it too is โ€œlostโ€?

    JUDGES NOTES: In cases where there was no transcript, one relied on the judgeโ€™s notes. I am sure you must have had the experience of trying to prise these out of the courts.

    Your thoughts. Believe me, since the Bajan man/woman in the street foots the bill for all this, none of it has a right to be kept secret and within the justice system (in which I include attorneys who, after all, are officers of the court).


  29. @Amused and @Anonlegal et al…

    Might it be reasonably interpreted that the amount of interest in a subject is correlative of how many words are radiated on that subject?


  30. Kinda weird…

    I’ve been finding myself misquoted — and my submissions altered.

    Well, hey, we’re all having fun; aren’t we?

    Chief Justice Marston Gibson, please let me welcome you to a very difficult job.

    Some will want you to fail.

    Most others will want you to succeed….


  31. Will the earthquake on the East Coast of the USA keep Mr. Gibson away fromthe CJ post in Barbados ?

    I have noted that his farewell function in the USA occured at the time of the quake.

    Signs & Wonders !!


  32. @Earth tremor: “Will the earthquake on the East Coast of the USA keep Mr. Gibson away fromthe CJ post in Barbados ?

    The question should instead be asked: Why does “Whitee” deserve any special privileges?


  33. @CH. The issue of a computer programme to avoid duplications in scheduling ought to be fairly simple to both set up and to use. However, I defer to you on this.


  34. @Amused: “The issue of a computer programme to avoid duplications in scheduling ought to be fairly simple to both set up and to use.

    Indeed. Trivial in fact.

    But it must be used to be useful.

    It is a very common problem in the MIS domain that IT systems are established to solve problems, but because the employees don’t (because they haven’t been properly trained to, or simply won’t) use them the whole exercise collapses.


  35. @Chris

    Agree with you. People forget it is the business side that runs the place and not the IT people. Having agreed what is required to run the business efficiently the relevant procedures would have to be put in placed to ensure the desired objectives are met.


  36. @David… Agree with you.

    And there can (and should) be feedback loops.

    As in (for this particular case), policy should be established, written, and distributed to all staff which says “all bookings are to be done through the scheduling system”.

    Equally important, all staff should be trained on how to use the scheduling system, and accept any and all feedback on difficulties staff might have using the system. And then the IT staff come back into the picture to fix any real issues.

    Then, and only then, can people who bypass the system be reprimanded for not following the defined procedures.


  37. An irate Sir Charles Williams called the talk show shouting blue murder that he ‘dun’ with raising animals. Apparently a person who stole several animals from his farm ‘got off’ with a light sentence from the court, or was it probation? A case where our sentencing seems to be out of wack with current realities.


  38. @David: “Apparently a person who stole several animals from his farm โ€˜got offโ€™ with a light sentence from the court, or was it probation? A case where our sentencing seems to be out of wack with current realities.

    Now, that is a problem.

    If a person who has the resources to raise animals for consumption can’t even get a serious conviction when the thief is caught and found guilty…

    …then we will forever more be importing meat from “away” (unless, of course, Barbados is about to become vegetarian).

    Then the question must be asked: who might benefit from this decision?


  39. @Chris

    As Bushie is likely to state there is a crying need for leadership. A strategic i.e coordinate approach to dealing with Barbados’ problem. We are a country 23X14 for godsakes.


  40. @David: “We are a country 23X14 for godsakes.

    Yeah. I agree with you.

    So why then does the leadership show up on the Blogs, rather than the elected or even the candidates?

    Riddle me that.


  41. @David: “An irate Sir Charles Williams called the talk show shouting blue murder that he โ€˜dunโ€™ with raising animals. Apparently a person who stole several animals from his farm โ€˜got offโ€™ with a light sentence from the court, or was it probation? A case where our sentencing seems to be out of wack with current realities.

    Kinda weird…

    I thought you might have brought this further forward.


  42. Always interested in what the family has to say.


  43. @ David

    Bushie heard part of the exchange today between Sir Charles and the moderator. Clearly COW was seeking to highlight a dangerously serious national problem – to whit, the effeminate and spineless morons who currently sit on judgement in our courts.

    Naturally the moderator – as is her wont, took the opportunity to dominate the conversation and to tell Sir Charles what SHE thought of the whole situation (mainly that she was disappointed that he would consider giving up just because someone was always stealing his hard earned assets).

    Bushie don’t know where VOB got her from, but surely they can send her back….

    The moderator’s whole attitude closely mirrors that displayed by our sissy magistrates – quick to excuse the criminals and with little regard for honest, hardworking, law-abiding citizens….. then these are the first to complain about where society is going.

    …No wonder the bible identifies as a serious curse the situation where women become our leaders….

    BT commiserates with Sir Charles, It must be REALLY frustrating to have to deal with such useless asses who can produce nothing on their own, and who are so dense that they do not even understand the damage that they are causing to the few who CAN and DO produce….


  44. @Bushie

    Agree to a certain extent but to whom much is given much is expected. Sir Cow needs to use some of his wealth to help with the fight back. Whether it is lobbying government to improve enforcement or raising funds for police equipment etc.

    The moderator is a little opinionated, her weakness is that she sees everything in imperatives and absolutes. There is a place for the ordinary man to make observations based on intuition and gut.


  45. @David: “Sir Cow needs to use some of his wealth to help with the fight back.

    I don’t know the whole story here…

    But if Sir Williams had a thief in the dock who was given a slap on the wrist for stealing livestock, this is a serious problem.

    In America, people used to lose their lives for stealing livestock.


  46. @Chris

    Not excusing the criminal behaviour at all but Sir Charles opting to surrender and known to be an uber rich Bajan stinks.


  47. @David…

    Just because Sir COW is rich does not mean he’s fair game to be stolen from.


  48. @ David
    Sir Cow needs to use some of his wealth to help with the fight back
    ********************
    Surely you jest!
    Sir COW don’t have to do squat.

    No doubt he or his son could have shot the SOB and probably would not have spent a single day…..
    But what he did was indeed admirable – He FOLLOWED the law, spent his money to catch and apprehend the culprit and took the time and effort to actually show up in court…..

    YOU WANT MORE?

    All the man ask now is that the law not be an ASS.
    All right thinking Bajans should be outraged at the idiocy of the courts – what we want COW to do? wipe our behinds for us…?
    Stupes

    It is the same nasty attitude of the politicians with respect to the known crooks who have stolen millions of our dollars without fear of prosecution … while they make joke in parliament…..
    No wonder they are so…. they are just like the rest of us.


  49. @Chris

    Already agreed with you but it is because he is rich he will become fair game.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading