Bar Association President Andrew Pilgrim Serving Two Masters

Andrew Pilgrim, President of the Barbados Bar Association

… we decided to approach Andrew Pilgrim, well known dramatist and President of the Bar Association for his view…

Bajan Reporter

The above was extracted from an article posted by Ian Bourne on his websitePresident of the Barbados Bar Association sees special Unit for Raul Garcia as Tax Inefficient – Let the former Convict live and work here!. What snagged the attention of BU was not the substantive issue highlighted by the article but the way Andrew Pilgrim was introduced. Whether Bourne realized, it he reminded BU of a growing concern we have about Andrew Pilgrim and his role as President of the Bar Association. To add to the rub BU got sight of a document which features Pilgrim in an upcoming TV-series. 

BU is fully supportive of the Arts and our concern should not be seen as being against The Soap Opera Project. We wish the Caribbean Film Festival all the success. BU has been  an advocate for this government to get more aggressive in its effort to support the cultural and creative sector. BU continues to monitor the passage of the Cultural Industries Bill and will not attempt to muddy the waters at this stage although we remain agitated at the agendas being played out.

We have to wonder to what degree Pilgrim’s extracurricular activities have compromised his role as President of the Bar Association. It is no secret BU had high hopes for Pilgrim to do what his successors were not able to accomplish; put a new face on ‘lawyering’ in Barbados. The appointment of Pilgrim and CJ Gibson both perceived as different thinkers appeared to be an opportunity to be seized.

We have to be fair and admit that the performance of Pilgrim continues to be a disappointment. We appeal to Pilgrim to suffer some introspection and do the right thing. His immediate resignation should feature prominently in his deliberation.

0 thoughts on “Bar Association President Andrew Pilgrim Serving Two Masters

  1. I just cannot fathom how a nation that prides itself on its intelligence can actually support the idiotic wish by some who should know better that a convicted drug dealer, who has not been publicly repentant of his offence, nor, as far as I can tell, provided the authorities with an intelligence about his contacts, if she had done the run before, who were his main contact in Colombia and the US, to live and work in Britain.
    What jobs is he going to do, apart from obviously making contact with his local drug dealing contacts? What message is this sending to young men and women about the abuse of drugs?
    The nonsense about keeping him in semi-private confinement as ‘tax efficient’ is economic irrelevant.
    The man should be deported back to the US, Colombia or Cuba. He arrived on a Colombian passport and that should be his destination. If Colombia fails to accept then we should call in the ambassador and read the riot act to him.
    He is a convicted drug dealer who was caught trying to corrupt our youth. That is a major offence.
    Is the support for him anything to do with his coffee coloured skin?

  2. David – come on…are you really attacking Andrew Pilgrim because he choses to express his (real) talent for acting? Seriously? You should be glad that well-rounded people are aspiring to leadership positions in Barbados. I think we need more of that, not less. Many of our leaders appear to be one-dimensional, navel-gazing, book-sense-only, cork-foot generals.

    If you have a problem with Pilgrim’s performance as head of the BBA then say so, but leave out the denigration of his thespian endeavours, please. Unless lately you have become a theatre critic.

  3. So once you go to jail then you are marked for Life? Well, why doesn’t Barbados become Islamist and like Saudi Arabia we just kill convicted drug dealers? Then the taxpayers have no worries except for a coffin? Mr Austin this is not the first time I experienced your myopia, as to what skills Garcia possesses, if you took the time to read original statements the man is an excellent artist not only can he sell paintings but he can teach art as well. If Cuba nor USA will receive him and he served his sentence then it is Barbados’ gambit, unwilling or otherwise, to see to the man’s rights to make a living where he’s at… Why should make tax dollars pay for him to be in a “holding facility” when he can be provided a chance to earn his keep? His passport can be renewed every 3 months, which means he’s on his toes at all times!

    As to BU’s posit on Cultural Industries Vs. Bar Association? Well, I never intended for Andrew to be viewed in that light – I see it as Plus not a Minus, then he can advise Cultural Stakeholders how best to ensure any amendments are made in their favour. The world is expanding via Social Media & Technology, so much so many people no longer have jobs or vacation but exist in a created milieu known as Weisure (read that on CNN) which is a portmanteau of work/leisure, what was seen as conflict of interests in many case may now have to be revisited.

    After all, I ran a blog and converted to a website while a publicist both for Govt and Private Sector on separate occasions? It’s still running…

  4. @Hal. While I agree with much of what you say in a general sense, in this particular instance we do have to address extenuating circumstances and our imperative as human beings also.

    The problem is that there are so many Bajans who have married non-Bajans and have had hell to obtain work permits and citizenship for their non-Bajan spouses, despite the fact that they often have Bajan children together. And these spouses of Bajans are often subjected to a lot of nonsense when returning to the conjugal home in Barbados by our mentally challenged immigration authorities.

    Therefore, I think it is meet and right that this issue be addressed either before or concurrent with the issue of Mr Garcia, but not subsequent to the issue of Mr Garcia.Otherwise the message is sent that law-abiding spouses of Bajans rank secondary to a convicted drug dealer

    While I do have considerable sympathy for Mr Garcia, to surrender to the tactic of starving himself to death is to say that all anyone ought to do to obtain Barbados rights is to effectively blackmail Barbados with a threat of self-starvation. That has to be unacceptable. We cannot deport Mr Garcia until some country is willing to accept him. As he is here illegally, he must expect to be confined, pending deportation or an alternative solution. But surely this is a perfect opportunity for government to address the whole issue of immigration and correct the grave injustices done to so many people who in any other country would be seen as having a right to live and work. Then and only then can we justifiably take pity on Mr Garcia’s plight and allow our humanity towards him to have expression.

    That Mr Garcia’s situation is urgent, I have no doubt. But is it any less urgent than the many others denied a basic right? I don’t think so. So the entire question of immigration, including the dismissal/disciplining of those arrogant and stupid asses in the immigration department, needs to be addressed URGENTLY!!!!

    • @Paul

      The submission is not to ignore the talent of Andrew. In fact we respect him for his activism and willingness to serve which is more than we can say for many.

      When the dust settles however it is about achieving. Has he achieve as Bar President?

      Our view is a perspective which posits that the job of Bar President requires laser focus which in his case maybe compromised by his involvement in the Arts. Nothing to do with his intelligence.

  5. @ Amused

    On the immigration issue…..I agree totally…..but this I know you’ll either ignore or take as a personal attack.

    • Ladies and Gentlemen

      Feel free to visit the Bar Association website. It list nothing of significance by way of accomplishments.

      About Garcia: like Amused BU is sympathetic to his plight however the need by some to denigrate the image of Barbados over what is a challenge for government exposes the disingenuous of some. Their willingness to jump to the ’cause’ of cases which will garner international publicity makes BU very suspicious. The Africans who were deposited in Barbados comes to mind.

    • Here is a Big Interview which Pilgrim gave to the Nation when he took up the office some time ago:

      THE BIG INTERVIEW: Frank and fair

      HE IS NO stranger to the public. The new president of the Barbados Bar Association has worn many hats, including being an actor and, in recent times, a television personality.

      In his first interview since taking up the top position, Andrew Pilgrim talks to Associate Managing Editor Tim Slinger about his vision for the legal body. He also comments on the bad apples in the fraternity and gives his opinion on the current controversial issue about the appointment of Barbados’ next Chief Justice.

      Q: You are the new president of the Barbados Bar Association. What are some of the items on the front burner?

      Pilgrim: I hope I will be able to bring a level of frankness and openness to the post and that my gregarious nature will also help to bring a level of friendship within the Bar and a friendship with the public that will hopefully foster a better image for the Bar and better relations at the Bar. And one of the big things we want is to make justice as accessible and as swiftly available as possible.

      A lot of people have concerns about whether the courts really function or not. We want to be meeting with the powers that be as much as possible and trying to find ways to facilitate making justice seem available and make the system work as much as possible. Inasmuch as lawyers can contribute to that and make that happen, we want to do that.

      Q: Do you see your radical approach and no-nonsense attitude getting in the way of fostering or improving relationships with the association?

      Pilgrim: Hopefully, I will be able to bring that no-nonsense approach towards anything the Bar has interest in, hopefully in a positive way. In the sense that, you know, sometimes being a radical one can be marginalized as being a maverick or being somebody who is a loose cannon. I do not want that messageto come across.

      I want the message to come across that we are no-nonsense and that there are a lot of issues . . . the public has with the Bar, and lots of issues the Bar has with the court. We want to be able to meet those squarely and head on and deal with them.

      Over the years, all the presidents have tried to tackle these issues and there has been success and I can’t re-invent the wheel. I can’t try to do things that people have found impossible, but I am hoping my style will help to assist in getting things done and making real progress.

      Q: As a criminal lawyer over the years, I am sure there are some issues you would like to place on the front burner. Can you tell us about some of them?

      Pilgrim: I think that not only as a criminal lawyer but as a lawyer in general. People have often had a lot to say about the Registry and how it works and the many delays. Many people will also focus on issues that I will consider important like parking at the Registry or the security system. Those things may be important but it cannot be as important as a fellow’s right to get a hearing in the court. It cannot be as important as the question of delay.

      A fellow wants to sue for $10 000 and it’s taking him five years to get it, and then he finds difficulty collecting his money after he gets a judgement five years after. It probably would be better if he said let me write off this debt. People have to feel that the courts work.

      They also have to feel like this person is doing something wrong, I can go to the courts and get something right. This wrong can be righted in the court, and those things have to happen in a timely fashion, if not they may as well not happen.

      Q: One of the issues over the years with the profession is the many charges of misappropriation of clients’ funds by some lawyers. How do you plan to deal with this matter?

      Pilgrim: Well, I think the former president Mr Leslie Haynes has focused on the amendment of the Legal Profession Bill in a big way and I want to carry that.

      But I also want to encourage a level of transparency amongst lawyers and have disciplinary proceedings carried out and allow the public to know. We are not going to hide anything. The Bar has a duty to its members but at the same time if members run afoul of the law, we don’t want anybody to have this feeling that we are protecting them and shielding them from the law.

      If a “fellah” thieving, let the court deal with it as it sees fit. Let the Disciplinary Committee deal with it as it sees fit. If there is a problem with a doctor [who] does a bad operation [it’s] very hard to find other doctors to say it was bad. Give these people some money and let them go their way, for example, and, by the same token, people have always felt that lawyers will band together to protect each other.

      And in a small society, that is difficult because quite often we will know each other or went to school with each other. But wrong is wrong and right is right. People need to feel that the man on the street is getting the same treatment as the lawyer and that the lawyers themselves are not going to do things to make that look any different.

      Q: One the things that has always been echoed in the system is that you have an interest in politics. In fact, you are associated with one particular party and at one stage there were rumours that you were planning to contest [a seat]. Were you ever interested in politics? Do you have an interest in politics?

      Pilgrim: When I was a little bit younger, or maybe a lot younger, I was very interested in politics, keen on it not only for the possibilities of contributions that one could make but also politics, like the law, is a theatre and my love for the theatre informs my association and affection for both of those things.

      The idea of being able to talk on a platform, I think that is something that I would look forward to because I think I have the oratorical skills for it.

      I know I can write because you know you might think you can translate one thing into another and you would think, oh, that is something I should be able to do and I have always felt that the way that party politics plays out in Barbados, those skills will be very useful.

      But more and more over the years, I have come to the view that political meetings in Barbados – which is where that particular skill is most evident – are generally stand-up comedy and that is what they are. And while I think I am a good stand-up comedian, I think I have shown that as a tent MC, I think that unfortunately our politics is reduced to a level now of stand-up comedy.

      I always go every time there is an election or by-election. I go to both sides’ meetings and I listen to both sides to hear what is being said and, really, it seems that the most significant contributions are the most funny ones.

      And there is still that sense in Barbados that politics is frivolous and it is a great divider. I don’t want to be part of anything frivolous and I don’t want to part of a great divider. So I made up my mind sometime ago that I will attempt to stay out of it and try to work on things that I can do that I can help people on both sides.

      The other thing is that politics has always affected our decision-making where it should not. By the same token now, speaking for myself, while I have issues with the limitations of the law as it relates to chief justice, it looks funny when you do something like what we are doing now.

      Talking about politics, therefore, I want to retain my neutrality. I want to be able to say to Owen Arthur, you doing nonsense; to Mia Mottley, you doing nonsense; Freundel Stuart, you doing nonsense; Adriel Brathwaite, you doing nonsense; because Barbados is so polarized that the moment that people start to think Pilgrim like he is a Dee – ’cause I think one time there was a rumor that I was running in St Joseph, then there was a rumor one time, I was running in the City, for different parties.

      Once in Barbados you accept a political hat, everything you say after that is coloured by that.

      Whereas I hope that if I say that the selection process for judges is being abused by both parties, I want people to say, well, Pilgrim talking sense, and I believe him because he is a man that got sense. I don’t want people to say we believe him because he is a Bee or a Dee or we don’t believe him because he is a Dee or we don’t believe him because he is Bee.

      Q: Do you feel the judiciary should be distanced from politics across the board?

      Pilgrim: If at anytime I am appointed to sit in judgement on a people, that is a massive responsibility. If you sit in that position and you feel in any way obliged to somebody for giving you that pick, you know, let me put it in basic language, there is a real danger. If you feel in your mind that I get this pick because the PM send me here and then there is an action against the PM – because you get actions against the governments, against prime ministers – will a party in that cause feel, ‘look, I don’t have a chance ‘cause this man is the PM’s boy’? That is the danger we must always be fighting.

      We do not want to surrender our society to the extent that a politician can blackball a fellow, as they used to say, and then that fellow gone through the eddoes. We must feel that when you go in front a court, if you head got on locks, if you is a baldhead, if you is a Bee, if you is a Dee, if you is a Cee, that you are going to get a fair shake . . . .

      Q: As the new president of the Bar Association, what would you want to suggest as a fair deal for the selection process in terms of judges? What do you think would be accepted as fair deal?

      Pilgrim: What you need is to distance the appointment as much as possible from the political directorate. So you really need a body that is chaired by a person who does not rely on the PM or the AG to appoint them and appointees who are there and who hold their power regardless of the change of government to make those decisions. You want that decision to be transparent and distant from the Cabinet or the prime minister.

      Q: You, throughout your career, have had some bumps and thumps. I remember one time you had a clash with a judge, and then you took a trip away from everything. Tell me about that in terms of what were the benefits of it, and was it a chance to do some introspection?

      Pilgrim: First off, the trip was not a plan to escape because the conflict with the judges, I think, came largely sometime around 2002 or maybe even before that. Then, in 2005, I started preparing to make that move. Having said that, the trip to Africa a whole year without working at all other than any work I did was volunteer work on projects in Africa, nothing at all pertaining to law or pertaining to looking for income.

      So I didn’t have to study one case for that entire year. I didn’t have anything on my mind except how to function as a human being with other human beings. That was my focus and to be with my wife. That was my only focus in that entire year.

      So I think I benefited tremendously from it and it helped me to learn to be more diplomatic and yet more forceful. And one of the things I got out of it was getting to see what I regard as my homeland because I don’t regard England or America where we are kind of programmed to feel that these places are very important. So from that point of view, it was a very beautiful trip.

      Q: Finally, the Andrew Pilgrim we knew of ten, 15 years ago, the Andrew Pilgrim now, is there a difference?

      Pilgrim: His hair is a lot whiter, but other than that, I would like to think essentially the same person. I hope that I will still retain my forceful nature and my belief in standing up for things that are right. I hope that those things will remain with me right through. © Nation Publishing Co. Limited 2012

  6. @ H Austin

    The great seer demonstrates the smallness of his mind and his ignorance of the facts.

  7. @RR. I do not take it as a personal attack and since you yourself commented on BU on the difficulties you as an attorney had experienced with the immigration department, I am hardly surprised that you agree.

    However, I do disagree with you on the subject of Hal whose mind has never been, is not and never will be, small.

  8. With Paul Barnes and Ian Bourne….

    Right on.

    This post is a mish mash – but the prime focus is not Garcia…it is Pilgrim. And so…….

    @ David

    Why do you say the “performance of AP continues to be a disappointment”? You offer no reasons for your perception. Perhaps you should – or is this the silly season yet again?

  9. Austin you like Caswell seem to believe that you two are superior beings with infinite intelligence I hate to knock you down but the two of you combined do not write one paragraph of sense.

    You arrogance and stupidity is absolutely unbelievable you write as if itvis the word according to Halloween Austin and nothing else matters, what is you claim to fame young man or do you have any claim to fame or do you see you fame on BU as a writer of utter crap every week?

  10. @ David (again)

    What would you expect him to achieve as Bar President? If you tell us it will give us a yardstick to measure him by.

  11. @ David

    For Christ’s sake will you never leave the past out of it? You betray so much about yourself and BU. The Garcia case is not about that. It is about what responsible States do and fundamental understandings of what Amused calls the “imperative of human beings”. As for ‘jumping to a cause’ – give us a break. There are so many causes – and we talk about them here daily.

  12. Yes…it’s reflective and urbane. NOW: on delay, what has happened to the proposed reforms he and the BA put to the CJ …was it last year……and which caused all the fuss and the famous ‘you’ll not dictate to me’ email? There was a promise of more proposals. Have there been any?

    Is there any evidence of ‘secret’ trials at the Disciplinary Committee? Have their ‘doings’ been transparent?

    Is the suggestion that his actions have not been quite so ‘loud’ as people expect of him given the character of ‘maverick’? Is it that in fact he doesn’t hunt publicity as other high profile people seem to do?

    I know that the BA has arranged a number of seminars on this and that. Have they been successful?

    I have no idea what the answers are to some of these questions though I suspect I know the answer to the first….but they seem to me to be questions warranted by the interview. Changing public perceptions is a well nigh impossible task – and so I ask no question about that.

  13. “We have to wonder to what degree Pilgrim’s extracurricular activities have compromised his role as President of the Bar Association.”

    now you will understand why i will continue to be regarded as pedantic whatever it means because i do not intend to allow comments such as the above to go unnoticed and unchallenged.

    The impact or non-impact of the Minister Of Education’s prominent position in the Barbados Football Association vis a vis his Ministerial duties has been the subject of widespread public discussion and never once has this topic which should be more a public concern than Mr Pilgrim’s extracurricula activities been made a talking point by BU.
    Why Mr Pilgrim and not Mr Jones?

  14. Well AP has answered my third question. He has upped his profile and YES of course he is right. That a Court is out-of-action for mold over nearly three months is absurd. And I venture to suggest that the CJ’s refusal to comment until he has first spoken to AP is equally absurd. Doesn’t the man know what is going on? His year is pretty well up…time to ‘look and see’ there too I think.

    @ Balance

    I’m sure most of us are with you. Once David uses the “pedantic” word you should know he’s in a corner. LOL

  15. This present numbing of legal discourse of Andrew Pilgrim and Raoul Garcia is reminiscent of another time another lawyer but same old Barbados…………
    Alair Shepherd was hell bent as a defense lawyer to (And this is my presumption) reveal the numerous loopholes in the system by defending obvious guilty criminals and using the inadequateness of the prosecuting teams .He was extremely successful most of the time (As has been Andrew Pilgrim).
    It is unforgivenly sad that such capacity for the knowledge of Legality should be used to the detriment of the true reality of Honesty,Integrity and Innocence.

  16. @Robert Ross

    I’m sure most of us are with you. Once David uses the “pedantic” word you should know he’s in a corner.

    Perhaps you should heed David’s advice to “Balance” and do a search on BU to locate the criticism of the Minister of Education vis-à-vis his role as President of the Barbados Football Association before you join forces with anyone

  17. David

    It seems I was coming to your defense at the same time you were posting your links, anyway my point still stands

    • @Sargeant

      You know what they say, you can never please all of the people all of the time.

  18. Continue to be pedantic, next time do a search of BU before releasing hot air.”

    Congratulations woud also be in order if your response to my other queries about your other conflicting positions were just as timely.

    • @balance

      ALL of your queries can be answered by searching BU. Appreciate that time does not allow for BU to respond to any and everything under the Sun. Use the search window!

  19. @ Sarjeant

    Joining forces? ME? LOL. The link post is a hoot…what was it… Barbados sank from 125th to 144th in the FIFA ratings? No Sarjeant, my joining forces with Balance has nothing to do with Ronald Jones. It has everything to do with the idea that someone should not, because they cannot, do two things successfully. Some people are bigger and bolder and more creative and talented than you or David seem to imagine – in this case AP……though to say this does not mean he has inevitably been a good President. I’ve yet to hear any argument about it yet. You got one?

    Mind – as to joining forces as you put it. How often does anyone say ‘I agree with X’. But if they do – as you did with David – so what? It’s not a gang fight unless we make it so. I think it’s called ‘intellectual integrity’ and sometimes it takes guts.

    And besides – maybe even you see the humour In David’s use of the word ‘pedantic” – it’s even been said of me…….GULP!

  20. I agree that this post is a mis-mash.

    On the subject of Garcia. Keeping him in confinement is against accepted humanitarian conventions, he has srved his time.

    Either deport him by whatever means necessary (parachute drop back into Cuba?) or ensure that he can contribute to society i.e. as Ian Bourne says, get a job.

    Dont the Police monitor things anyway????

    On the Pilgrim issue, not sure why this ‘two master ‘ thing is being espoused?

    Does anyone complain that under both administration the best bosom buddy and heavily invedted businessmen were heads of the state owned news agency?

    Why is that never a concern? CBC has always been politically controlled and it is disgusting.

    As for his extracurricular activities, why not? Cultural industry is a current money earner and future growth industry.

    It is not like he is the promoter of mud-wrestling for women or some such questionable activity.

    Strange outlook. But then, here is one example where the young are doing things their way, which some now have to get their heads around. We want change but want it ‘our way’?

    The only issue is whether he can and is fftively managing his role as the Bar Assoc President.

    No other.

    • @Crusoe

      We should keep our eye on the most important factor, PERFORMANCE. Can we say that since Pilgrim has taken the job there has been improvement from his association? All other arguments are peripheral. If Pilgrim believes he is getting push back from any of the stakeholders in the process he needs to make it known. As usual however the Bar Association and others close ranks and keep their shortcomings inhouse. The PUBLIC, the one affected by it all, is chastised when we question.

      The ball is in Pilgrim’s Court to report on his tenure so far if not he becomes part of the problem.

  21. ALL of your queries can be answered by searching BU. Appreciate that time does not allow for BU to respond to any and everything under the Sun. Use the search window!

    not with respect to redjet though. you should be glad that my laxiness allowed you to win one and help you to regain your sense of balance.

    • Remind everyone what is your problem with Redjet again. The first time read it conveyed no sense.

  22. @ David

    Well there we have it – and it’s all we have: AP should give a report. Maybe he does, I don’t know. But if he doesn’t then YES…he should.

  23. David to be fair to Pilgrim, all Lawyers in Barbados are complicit in the malaise that affects the system.

    It is not easy to change a system which serves to enrich a large number of the members of the Bar.

    What we need is leadership from the senior members of the Bar.

    Then again buying a condo in Toronto or a house in Miami might take precedence over contributing to the reform of the legal system.

  24. People’s (those believing that Garcia should be given home and job and citizenship) you make laugh!!!

    Tell me something attorneys and those of knowledge, when I am due for deportation, am I allowed to stay with friend and relative whilst being ‘detained’ for deportation? Am I held in a residential dwelling and allowed to seek employment whilst I am awaiting deportation?

    Yes, Garcia has served his term – he is pending deportation. Should we make him an honorary Barbadian just because he has served his term? Is that the law or are we suggesting that we amend the law to facilitate this man?

  25. David, I do not see Andrew’s acting affecting his performance as attorney or President. He cannot achieve anything on his own. If you say that he is doing nothing – you will have to prove that

    I believe that the CJ is in discussions but has done nothing as yet in certain areas pending discussions.

    What Andrew started maybe completed by the next President – what you should call for is what he has started. That research should have been done before posting this one.

    • @brief

      Think about it, we are saying/asking the same thing. Until Andrew comes to the pubic or the PRO of the Bar we have to assume that he has achieved nothing. Unless he feels that whatever he has achieved should be kept inhouse.

  26. @Hal Austin | July 3, 2012 at 9:01 AM |
    Our youth were corrupted before this man came on the scene and our youth will continue to be corrupted without the help of this man or others who have been identified in this trade.

    Sad but some of our youth could probably teach this man a thing or two. So let us not fool ourselves

  27. Brief said ‘People’s (those believing that Garcia should be given home and job and citizenship) you make laugh!!!’


    So, where exactly are you going to deport him to, with no one willing to take him (hence my reference to parachute drop).

    Ignorant to laugh, when you do not understand the situation. And, yes, to keep someone confined without justification is against international treaties to which Barbados has signed.

    However, it may be firtunate, as in Barbados he may get a hostile environment and no job, hence, maybe better that the taxpayers pay for his keep and leisure ad infititum.

  28. Crusoe help me here …

    Garcia came in on Colombian passport, resided in USA and was born in Cuba:

    If he is pending deportation, would it not be to one of these countries two of which said ‘no’ already? Can we not be awaiting on paper work for acceptance to another country? Isn’t this being sought after – seeking another country that will take him? Therefore he can be held whilst paper work is in process whilst we search for a benevolent country to accept him.

    I cannot in good faith and as human support or even consider a parachute Crusoe. That is gruesome and a death sentence for a free man.

  29. David he is apparently keeping it inhouse. Are the attorneys doing the same is it policy to keep secret the work of President of the Bar Association? If not, an interview should be conducted with Andrew and findings published.

    Did you ask Andrew for an interview or did you ask the BAR Association for an update on work done during his tenure.

    Maybe I missed postings, if I did, don’t want to waste time.

    The BAR Association is very important to our judicial system as we need everyone on the same page using the same hymn book when highlighting discrepancies, delays and injustices in the very system. I will not support being lenient on this Association – the parties need to share with the public what concerns they have and steps taken to improve our legal system. If they meet difficulties then their customers we definitely endure the lash out.

    Be persistent in asking for the President’s work during his tenure.

  30. @Brief,

    Technically he is a ‘free man’ and we have no right to hold him. We also know where he belongs.

    Why should we assume that sending back where he belongs is a ‘death sentence’? That is where he belongs, they refuse to accept him officially, that is wrong, they can therefore have him unofficially.

    Imagine us telling the US that we are not taking back deportees?

    However, I am not a lawyer., so I will watch the expert paper chasers deal with it.

    • @brief

      This is the point. If the Bar is operating using the tenet of transparency why should John Public have to ask? Didn’t AP promises change?

  31. @ David

    You really are chasing a ghost. You say AP is underperforming. Then show how that is the case. The fact is, you can’t – or you would.

    AGAIN – the BA under AP’s leadership put a document for reform before the CJ more than six months ago. Has he acted on it? If not, why not?

    Actually, has the CJ introduced any reforms at all? He has spoken about raising the retirement age for judges – but then he’s done a lot of speaking. But has he actually done anything? Has he actually delivered a serious judgment yet? One – in the gun case – was promised (was it in January?) for June. Has that actually been delivered – just ONE judgment??? In six months? Gee – he really does move like a meteor. Yes? Oh, and of course at this moment he’s talking to AP about Bannister’s out-of-action Court. You speak of AP underperforming. Get real David and scrutinise your darling. That might just prove worthwhile.

    Read the blogs here. Not one person – not one – has identified where AP has fallen short; OK – good for you – you are not alone.

  32. @ Crusoe

    There is a 2008 case decided by Reifer J which has very similar facts to Garcia’s. Reifer J held that the continued imprisonment prior to deportation nearly two years on was unreasonable and so unlawful. The fellow (who, like Garcia was Cuban in origin) was released into someone’s care and was requirement to report weekly to the Immigration Department.

    I do not understand why Garcia’s lawyer has not pursued this. There are at least two people who have offered to take him – one Plantation Deeds.

    It has been argued that the case is different because in the 2008 case the deportee had committed no crime here (unlike Garcia). His ‘illegality’ was his continued presence after he should have gone. My view is that this ‘difference’ is a fudge since Garcia has served his time, so that the critical period is not his imprisonment but, like the 2008 case, his continued incarceration two years on.

  33. @rr.

    Interesting. I am not a lawyer, but commonsense would dictate agreement with your interpretation, with the only exception being if and where the detention was for reasons of national security, which has not been stipulated.

    The reality is that we are in a pickle and the Government needs to demand that a country of origin take him, otherwise the default measure is residence here under common terms of a citizen.

    To keep him incarcerated in unacceptable and surely against international conventions.

  34. Crusoe

    I agree … parachute him back to Florida NOT Cuba. Cuba really has nothing to do with this, and it is the US that bred the f#cker in the first place … I know that this is what you and so many others want to say, but wunna frighten as shite to speak about the Government and people of the United States derogatively less they retaliate in some way … cowards …!


    I like the CJ… that should read that I like what the CJ is saying. So I guess I at this stage cannot fault what you are saying until he and AP actually do something that I can measure. (Got your comment on your friend’s response so I guess I am forced now to write another article on The Sham That Is The Political Campaign and The Lack of Avenues For Legal Redress … I hope i phrase dah properly ..)

  35. “agree … parachute him back to Florida NOT Cuba. Cuba really has nothing to do with this, and it is the US that bred the f#cker in the first place ”
    are you for real mr babf? are you telling me that a man should have more rights in an adopted country than the country in which he was born? Why do you not advocate that the govt of barbados refuse to accept persons deported from the usa back to barbados after committing a crime? would you like to be denied entry into the land of your birth because of some inhumane law promulgated by the govt of your country?

  36. “Government needs to demand that a country of origin take him”
    mr stuart is credited with talking tough to trinidad and making them issue redjet the licence to fly awayand to get the pine hill milk back to t&t; perhaps he can talk tough to the castros to remove that inhumane draconian law that prevents citizens fron returning to the land where their navel string is buried.

  37. “Why do you not advocate that the govt of barbados refuse to accept persons deported from the usa back to barbados after committing a crime”

    Oh but I do. And from you an admission that it is this stance by the US in opposition to the very policy that they have set for others is the other reason why they should be the recipient of this convict. In any event he is a US citizen. Leave Cuba out of this … … please!

  38. This would not have been a problem in the first place if the bogus courts bout here had sentenced him to life in prison as he deserved.
    …the gall !!! ….to leave where-ever-it-is he come from, and bring drugs here to destroy Bushie’s children’ lives… to make money for himself and his drug lords.

    ….far as Bushie is concerned, he should be kept under John Nurse’s care until RR, and who ever else wants him free, can arrange and pay for a country to take him…. Perhaps they can try Columbia….they may be interested in his skills….

    ….. “aginst international conventions my foot!”!!!

  39. @ Bush Tea

    I guess the ‘enlightenment’ couldn’t last. Thank God you will NEVER have political responsibility for anything.

  40. @ BAF

    On Garcia

    None of us know what is going on, or has gone on, behind the scene. In a sense, my view is as yours. The country with which Garcia is most closely connected is the US – but by reason of long residence prior to 1994 BUT NOT citizenship[. That’s the problem. But I would have thought that the US is big enough and bold enough to take the chance – not that there is any ‘chance’. The man, from all reports, is reformed – which is why the rant I”ve just read from Bush Tea is so antedeluvian. The fellow that was apprehended with Garcia was deported to Columbia some years ago. He did not have the same problem of ‘statelessness’ as Garcia. I rang the US Embassy and told them what I thought – but people don’t always listen to me – lol.

    On AP

    And I “like” the CJ too. He IS very likeable and certainly considerate, by all accounts, on the Bench. BUT I think I do have an “old boy” (Miller’s term to me) sense of ‘fair play’ – and so feel that what this post is doing to AP ( whom I know but for whom I have no particular brief) is a replay of Kafka’s ‘Trial’ and so journalism of the worst kind.

    The Bar Association (through AP) came up with a double figures list of reforms which was given to the CJ before Christmas after the latter, in oral conversation, had invited the BA to put forward its views. If you remember, AP got fed up, after waiting for months for an acknowledgement, and told the CJ off (in effect). That produced the famous ‘leaked’ email from the CJ to AP which was the subject of a post on here and which was used to attack the lawyers because in effect the CJ said ‘I will not be rushed by you or anyone. Get your own house in order.’ Everyone loved that of course – as they were meant to do. As a publicity exercise in deflection it was first rate. The BA promised further proposals, following the first list, but since, by all accounts nothing has really happened to the first, I’m not aware that it has. So if this post were headed ‘AP’s Frustration’ it would have more meaning I think. David has persisted in ignoring my request for information about the fate of the list, which I suppose corroborates my view of the meaning and intention of this post.

  41. The gist of the arguments on this Garcia situation is that Barbados and the Barbados government are somehow inhumane. That is nonsense.
    This man is in a quandary of his own design.
    How does it now become OUR problem to solve because he decided half a century aro that this was a soft easy target for his wickedness?
    Government can only follow the law….just like the US, Cuba and Columbia are claiming to do.

    The solution is for persons like RR and Garcia’s family and friends who sympathize with his situation, to take meaningful steps to assist him.
    …like offer to post a bond of $1 million to facilitate his release on bail and undertake to guarantee his conformance with the law while free.

    There are always persons like RR who would want us to ignore the REALITY that karma is unforgiving and unrelenting. But persons who choose a particular path to life MUST EXPECT a particular kind of ending…..and that goes for ALL of us.

    If the government of Barbados has excess funds to expend on issues like this, why are we not looking for those existing cases where innocent citizens are in Dodds due to circumstances totally beyond their control – and often associated with the greed and incompetence of lawyers and other officials?
    …..because it suits some particular ego…?

  42. @ Bush Tea

    ‘Karma is unforgiving’ – dunno bout that but it could explain why you will NEVER enjoy political office thank God.

    I mean cum on…you’re supposed to be a seer but what have you given us?

    1. There is no redemption and no forgiveness.

    2. There are ‘innocent’ men everywhere.

    3. Garcia is a corrupter of youth

    4. Lawyers are greedy and corrupt.

    5. RR should put up a one million dollar bond.

    6. Government must follow the law.

    7. It is not our problem.

    Makes a marvellous manifesto for innovation and change doesn’t it – ‘for sure’ intellect combined with elementary compassion and vision – all the qualities of the true sage?

    BUT it may be that somewhere in the make-up there is the phantom of drug abuse – in which case I’m very sorry; OR it may simply be that drugs for you, like homosexuality for others, is an abomination. If the former, it’s down to you. If the latter, then it’s Pharisaism.

    I once met a wonderful Jamaican doctor. In his scheme of things homosexuals were lesser animals than rapists and should be wiped off the planet. Maybe that line of thinking with drugs is your particular madness too – but if it is there will be many more long-term prisoners at Dodds and the greedy and corrupt lawyers will have a field day.

  43. RU4 REAL? ….is that what RR means?
    …that is the most disjointed set of gibberish that you have managed to produce to date….. and that is no mean task.

    Where did you EVER hear of a bushman seeking, wanting, thinking about, or in any way interested in any type of political office…?

    It is natural but quite childish to be judging other by your own standards and desires ….

    While you may have no problem with drug dealers for your own personal reasons, most others (and the laws of all countries) tend to see the situation differently.

    Bushie’s point may have been a bit above your comprehensive skills, but the point was not that it was not a problem for Barbados, but that the solution, as dictated by our law is what seems to be YOUR problem. You apparently would want us to REWARD this man with expensive gifts and national recognition.

    HE IS FREE TO GO….. And you, along with his friends and family are welcomed to arrange it on his behalf.
    What is it you want? Bushie to arrange it for you?
    …or do you want Stuart to drop AX, CSME, the Eager 11, elections, the economic crisis, O$A, Barrack, CLICO, the Court mess and whatever- else to facilitate your mission in life – which seems to be to ensure that this man enjoys a better quality of life than thousands of poor Bajans who only worked hard and did their best for this country.

    If Bushie was indeed interested in political office, he would make Garcia an offer in exchange for publicly naming those with whom he conspired to corrupt this country in the first place….
    ….wonder what kind of names would turn up…..?

    • @Bush Tea

      Some lawyers are known to attract clients who find themselves involved in drug crimes.Of course all are entitled to representation.

  44. They are entitled indeed David, but that does not entitle them and their minions to bullshit the rest of us citizens into feeling guilty because they ow find themselves reaping the fruits that they have sown.

    Bushie is always amazed and unimpressed when clear deviants from societal norms feel that they can apply reverse psychology to make the rest of us feel guilty about having made the right choices….

  45. @ Bush Tea | July 7, 2012 at 5:20 PM |
    “Bushie is always amazed and unimpressed when clear deviants from societal norms feel that they can apply reverse psychology to make the rest of us feel guilty about having made the right choices….”

    Explain to a naive potentially social deviant what are these social norms.
    Are you referring to some set of social ‘rules’ prevailing in Barbados?

    Give us some examples so we might be able to judge if our behaviour meet those “socially accepted” criteria.

    Can we include in your list of ‘non-deviant’ societal norms such common Bajan activities like:
    Having loads of children outside of wedlock, with a high incidence of teenage pregnancies, abortion STD and AIDS.
    Drinking rum and getting on bad with possible domestic violence for a night cap;
    Urinating in the alleys in Bridgetown and along the roads in a manner to ensure one’s manhood is on full public display;
    Walking in the road instead of on the sidewalks or pavements provided;
    Throwing garbage from car windows and taking rubbish from your property and dumping it on others; What about clearing debris and garbage from the road verges and piling it up for weeks on the pavements or the gutters?
    Using a plethora of swear words instead of communicating in simple Bajan parlance;
    Going to church every Sunday but refuses to offer your fellow parishioners a lift in your fancy SUVto the same church but got the gall to discuss with your church associate in hypocrisy the poverty of those churchgoers who tend to wear the same garments on more than one occasion.

    Come, Bushie, tell us what are these societal norms we must live by other than those enshrined in that Golden Rule: “Do unto Others as You would have Them do unto You!”

  46. @ BUSHIE

    YOU were doing fine until you delve into the psyche of the humane mind and pullout your broad brush .
    how about the married man who have a couple mistresses and outside kids ;Deviant ! or not!
    How about the man who kicks his wife and hugs the dog! Deviant ! or Not!
    how abut rev, morris! Deviant or not!
    how about unwed mothers! Deviant or not
    how about fathers who don’t support their children 1 DEVIANT or Not!

  47. ac
    Why you trying to make a bushman sin his soul tonight nuh? 🙂
    …did you or miller hear anyone complain about being a deviant? Can you imagine a bigger deviant than a bushman?
    (BTW …what is wrong with kicking the wife and hugging the dog…?)

    The issue is about being deviant AND expecting the other side to kowtow to your whims and fancies.

    if certain deviants want to play house with persons of the same sex why do they NEED OUR APPROVAL?
    If some want to play house with sheep, THAT IS BAFBFP’s business 🙂

    If RR wants to have a retirement package for ex drug mules why must he seek to impose his fetish on the rest of us “lock them up” freaks?

    @ miller
    these days are funny nights with that golden rule yuh!!
    Can you imagine a fellow could look at the bushman and want to do unto Bushie as he would want the Bushman to DO UNTO him…? 🙁

    …..that could lead to a fellow getting hurt REAL bad yuh hear!!?

  48. Great information, useful as well as superb style,
    as share nutrients along together using good
    ideas and concepts, a whole lot information and
    inspiration, both of which I want, thanks to offer
    this type of tips right the following.

Leave a comment, join the discussion.