Related Links:
George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Statement of Defense
Related Links: George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Storm Clouds Hovering Over MAM George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Barbados Labour Party Battling Demons
170 responses to “George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Statement of Defense”
-
@ Jeff. Well, re the qualified privilege, I will wait and see. I can see a convincing argument against qualified privilege – but we shall see.
Yes, of course it should be Truth……I think I referred to it as Truth earlier deliberately.
Actually, I don’t find the argument interesting, I’m afraid. I find them to be a rather silly attempt to manipulate the system and the courts – the sort of tactics that a law student might pull just to show how clever he/she is. Unworthy of a senior QC. That said, I can understand its fascination for the educator just the same and it is bound to provide you with a beautiful crop themes for your classes and I would dearly love to sit in on some of those just to watch you have fun.
Me, it distresses and annoys. I have now read the SOC and the SOD. The SOC states its claim clearly (whether believably or not is a debatable matter). But the SOD does not appear to me to respond to the claim, but to seek instead to introduce a lot of hearsay and opinion evidence, none of which, I suspect, will be supported with fact and all of it irrelevant to the claim itself in the first place. Fully 80% of it is frivilous and vexatious. Accordingly, if it were me, I would seek to have the SOD struck out and if I were the judge, I would strike it out. Also, rather than addressing and defending the claims set out in the SOC, the SOD appears to me to maliciously exaccerbate the defamation, but this time under the cover of the court’s privilege – which I find to be the worst form of gutter tactics and manipulation of the court. Because at the end of the day when those accusations are not supported, they are still in the public domain and Payne cannot sue on them. It is allowing politics to encroach on the justice system ONCE AGAIN!!!!
Indeed, maybe you are right in terms of Barbados to highlight the SOD. I can see it confusing those that pass for judges in Barbados, to the extent that adjourment will follow adjournment and the judgement will be reserved for at least the next 20 years, because the judge will be confused.
Oh well. As I have no involvement, like you, Jeff, I will observe with great interest, but without your relish.
-
I am awaitng Amused response to Jeff agrrement by the Defense in citing Qualified Privilege”based on “Parliamentary privilege..
-
Amused,
I think that you misunderstand Sir Richard’s pleading strategy. If it is established that the atmosphere at the meeting was one of accusations and counter-accusations of treacherous conduct, then Hinkson’s statements would be treated as merely part of the general discussion rather than the pointed defamation of Payne that they are claimed by him to be.
As you may be aware, statements made in self-defence are treated as qualifiedly privileged -Osbourne v. Boulter. What has not yet been settled is whether that self-defence is to be restricted to oneself or whether it may apply to the defence of others whom one considers in need of such protection.
The precedence given to freedom of speech in recent decisions should also ensure that no defence to a defamation action will be lightly struck out.
-
AC,
I did not refer in my submission to “qualified privilege based on parliamentary privilege…” as you imagine. This is to confuse two concepts. Parliamentary privilege is absolute and unimpeachable; qualified privilege, on the other hand, as the name implies,may be defeated by proof that the publisher was malicious in his or her statements.
-
@ ac | June 20, 2013 at 11:02 AM
This sounds like your husband speaking not you the customary ac!
Are you his BU mouthpiece?
Can’t he blog under another moniker, like dc?
Or are you- to use the Amused Rumpole’s pet name for a bossy wife- SWMBO and he is just HWMOOE (He who must obey or else)? -
Miller
I am afraid to tell you but your party is in shambles and your Leader is saverely wounded. This is serious crap going on deep within the bowels of the BLP. This is the party that was trying to convince an electorate to let them regain administration of this country?I notice Owen didnt nowhere round there for that meeting.
-
@Jeff. I note your comments and admit that, although I disagree, they cannot be lightly dismissed. However, what I fail to understand is simply why Hinckson did not issue an unqualified apology and copy in all those in whose presence he made the comments. Problem solved.
As you rightly say, “What has not yet been settled is whether that self-defence is to be restricted to oneself or whether it may apply to the defence of others whom one considers in need of such protection.”
Quite apart from anything else (and you know what I mean) I think the court might struggle with the concept of Mia needing Hinckson’s protection against Payne or anyone else – indeed, there would be much more of an argument if Hinckson had needed Mia’s protection against Payne. I mean, Jeff, be reasonable – would you with any degree of equanimity, choose to fight with Mia? Come on. With a blindfold and BOTH arms tied behind her back, she would beat us both to smithereens – at the same time. Imgine if she could do that to us what she could do to poor old Payne. Face it. No court is going to find that Mia needed Hinckson’s protection against Payne – not even the idiots we have here on the Bench.
Finally, I agree that the defense should not be lightly struck out. However, in all the circumstances, I think THIS defense should be struck out on the bases I have set out previously – malice, scandal, hearsay, opinion evidence – over 80% of it. I seriously think that is grounds to strike it. After all, it is a defamation case in which the SOD is using unrelated, unsupported and irrelevant defamation as a defense, while hoping that there is a judge myopic (or stupid) enough to consider that Mia is a shrinking violet that needs the protection of Hinckson against big, bad Payne. Please……pull the other one. BTW, that is exactly why I have all the time in the world for Mia – because she is NOT a shrinking violet and doesn’t pretend to be.
-
@Amused
You may recall the shortly have the melee at Roebuck Street which has landed us here the Nation newspaper attributed a very curt remark to Hinkson which gave the impression that he was not in a conciliatory frame of mind.
-
This woman Mottley too want power and control, it is scary why she is so fixated and so desperate think on this, if she is prepared to steal the money belonging to her own party and place them in her own bank account why would feel that she would feel any different about stealing the funds belonging to you the pubic of Barbados, now remember the notice that she stole the funds of the BLP was not a claim made by any DLP person it came from one of the BLP former Ministers she served in a Cabinet with and one who should know of which he speaks.
I am not sure which is her worse action, undermining her own party or her stealing the funds of the BLP or the instructing of Dottin who’s phones to Wire Tap, actually on either charge she is unfit to be around Parliament but with all three charges and of little doubt she is guilty certainly of her role along with Dottin in Wire Tapping Barbadians phones without doubt, she is both unfit to be representing anyone in Parliament and even more unfit to be Leader of any party in or out of Opposition .
-
@Amused,
We will not agree on this, but that is the essence of the adversarial system that has been our life’s study.
I am afraid that I am not in awe of Mia’s intellectual prowess as you are, but I will accept your assessment of it as your subjective opinion.
Yes, Hinkson might have apologised, made an offer of amends and have done with it, but that might be true of most, if not all, defamation actions. It is a matter purely for his decision.
Finally, it is not an objective matter of whether Mia needed Hinkson’s protection against Payne, but of whether his political inclinations honestly informed him that her defence was needed. As I have intimated however, this matter is still in the realm of legal theory.
-
@BU, David and Amused,
Sorry, I have to leave this discussion for now. I have an early afternoon engagement
-
U guys have laid out good defense but somehow i tend to agrre with Jeff .. as to amused sugestion Hinckson protectio MIA i think that in this incident suffcient or reasonable action was warranted or necessary to defend MIA charcater solely on the ground that payne did not provide legitimate proff in his allegations against MIA. hence hinckson actions were a reaction to Payne charges . however the question still remains is wether what Hinckson said was the TRUTH or hearsay
-
This too shall pass.
I have no problem with the Dems rejoicing in the stupidity of two BLP members.
The Bees rejoiced during 1991-1994 when Sandi was decimated by members of his own party……………..
…………During the dead king’s reign of terror…………days when he and Kellman nearly “kill’ each other so much so they did not even sit next to each other in parliament,
………….During the time when the dead king literally tried to destroy Clyde Mascoll and in so doing nearly destroyed the DLP
…………During the Gang of Eleven plot to overthrow the sleeping giant.So go on Dems, gloat all you want, we Bees will endure it and overcome. If the DLP could recover from the gory days of the nasty dealings of the dead king, so can the BLP.
You people dont watch the politics in the world? Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama went after each other during 2008 so much so Bill refused to deal with him after and what happened? She went on to become the President’s SOS.Look at what Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum said about Mitt Romney in their primaries, did both of them not go on to endorse Mitt Romney?
The BLP is the oldest party here, some members are doing things not in keeping with the modus operandi of the party but what the hell, the BLP will survive this, bad though it looks.
You Dems defend your party, onions, miller and I will defend ours! At the end of the day, people are not interested in Hinckson or Payne’s bruha right now, they are concerned that they have never seen life in Barbados so bad as now……………….they cant find jobs, their houses are being put up for sale because they cannot pay their mortgages, cost of living is very high, their children are coming out of school and university and cannot find work, they cannot pay their bills, electricity costs is sky high, the government increased waters rated by 60%, they cannot get back their tax refunds.
These are the things that matter now, not George Payne or Edmund Hinckson, bad though it is nor the firing of Darwin Dottin.
Next few weeks when the Central Bank Governor releases his report and we see how much trouble this country is in ………… that is what matters!
-
However on the political side i do not se any grave damage to MIA reputation unless the charges leveled by Payne at MIa can be proven….Given the source from which thos charges came.. a person of questionable character……However the damage done to the Party as a whole is undeniable when it.s past history is factored in.
-
The DEMS never had a past that saw its supposed leader undermine it own Candidates in and election or never have they been accused of carrying away party funds nor have they ever had a leader linked to and heading the illegal act of phone tapping as Mottley has done with Barhadians.
It is only with the BLP as a matter of course when Adams was coming up against Bree St John and he Adams realising that he was junior to Bree that he Adams put a plan in place in 1976 to oust Bree and install Peanuts Morrison as the elected representative of the people of CH Ch
-
What makes this case interesting to the observer is the political dimension 1) Payne is a member of the gang of 5 and 2) the role Payne is alleged to have played to support his cousin’s (Douglas Skeete) candidature in St. James North.
-
David the two of them Payne and Skeete presented to the electorate a paper with something like 30 reasons why Hinkson was unfit to be considered for the nomination for the seat in St James North, it was a vicious attack on Hinkson’s name, it went so far to state that he hires Jamaician prostitutes and takes his pleasure from beating them after sex with them, it was an attack of the worse kind by one party member against another party member.
it is not at all surprising to me that Hinkson waited his time and his opportunity to broadside Payne in cuss under the guise of protecting Mottley, he was still suffering the vicious attack he suffered at the hands of Payne and Skeete, that will Payne him for years to come some may suggest he will never recover from the assault.
Tell me you seriously feel that a bully that she is in Mottley really needs Hinkson to try to defend her ?
She quite seriously may have more balls than Payne and Hinkson put together she is certainly more man that the two of them combined.
-
@ David
and 3) This confirms the rumours rife after the elections and right up to now, which claim that Mia was the one who ensured that the BLP was defeated and that OSA got his second general elections defeat. A very senior member of the BLP has accused her of trechery, not even by insinuation or enuendo but by a forceful, bold and most open of accusations.
Sorry fellows but this is going to be trown back at the BLP time and time again and according to one DLP MP “we ain’t even gone into she ground sill yet”
-
That kind of gutter politics………….character assassination is all the politics that you Dems practice, so go right on digging into Mia’s foundation.
But you know what, this is the era of 1991-1994 all over again. The next election will all about the future of Barbados, not on Mia’s private life. My lawd, if a man like David Thompson with his scandalous past could be elected and eventually become PM, Mia certainly can. In 2008, people look past Thompson’s past as it was and elected him.
Give me a break, you getting on like we Barbadians do not know the history of the DLP.
-
But u pridigal can,t belive u talking about dems and character assination…wuh dam it is because of the flith and dirt yur members threw at each other that the dems responsding. its wunna party the dems only dancing. wnna provided the foodand the dems are eating
-
@Prodigal
If it is that MAM did indeed steal from her own party, I think tax payers have a right to question her suitability for leadership of this country and to be in charge of the treasury as PM The same applies to any other politician or PM hopeful. -
True Oilman some because they are politically blinkered they would try to sell you that you can thief people money and be fit to lead a country, she is as unfit and as dishonourable as they will ever be for High Office in Barbados .
-
No wonder average Barbadians have become disengaged from all that is politics.
-
@ Prodigal
What is so funny is way they come on like a gutter swell after a deluge ..with ac always up front n center always and Carson the thong in the backside…..this lil private matter between two old friends who rather than cuss and drink a brandy fro goodwill chose to litigate the matter is most unfortunate…but we all could guess why…..what is more important is reality and the suffering that going on as we speak….but they can find time to address such…RATHER like carrion fly, congregate and mutate around a ball a shixte….pissy wissy dat what ! -
But Onions>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Payne said she is a THIEF and unfit person to be Leader of the Opposition. If someone like Payne, a man who has been in Parliament with her for nearly two decades call her a THIEF and unfit person, what do you expect the average person in Barbados to think?
-
Onion
Can you tell me who it was that call the BLP St. Peter Branch within 24 hours of OSA saying he will not be seeking re-election again, to ask for Mr. Stuart Mottley to be positioned in that constitutency as the next BLP candidate for St. Peter?
Who was it, was it the person OSA referred to as the CARPETBAGGER?
-
@New Era
And that is the pertinent point. I think both political parties in this country failing de people but when you got a BLP member, a member of parliament no less, saying that his leader is not fit to lead, what more can you want as proof? -
LOL @ Old Onions
Skippa, you ever see a little sardine-tot retriever puppy outnumbered and surrounded by fowl cocks? ….how he does spin round yelping and hollering…? While they jump in and drive some beak in his tail…….well that is how you are right now
LOL HA Ha rotfl …Oh Sh]+€…. Har har!!As man onions. Advise Mottley, Payne and Hinkson to join Marva and resign NOW….
That is wunna best move.
Wunna could even claim “Principle”…Serious Onions….you could imagine Dr Estwick on this topic…?
MURDER!!!!
Wunna brass is grass skippa…. -
Bush Tea
Boy is if E from St.P ever get pun this issue, especially with benefit of Parliamentary privilege, it would like watch a surgeon operating pun a fragile patient with a dull and dirty sword. -
Gabby once sang Some day coming soon the people will wake up, well that day is at hand for Mottley but the people were woken up by her own members that she would sit at the lunch table of Parliament and break bread with and eat then go about sabotaging their effort at the polls with, they don’t nor do they get any nastier than a Power Hungry Mottley Clan you must always remember she is an entitled Mottley own who is Entitled to be Prime Minister she does not see it any other way.
-
I got a more serious matter that spoil my day Bush, go me hurt ….I just went in Solo in Black Rock…yeah D real cheap store for wood-dove raisers and future blackbird soup drinkers… this ent no lie my belly burn to see a litlle 14 year girl counting out $1.29… in CENTS pieces…for a pack of macaroni…and she was short ….I paid for it along with other essentials, that she choose….Yeah Bushie ..Onions the humanitarian….now today that family had a lil something…ya want to know what was the other essential she took? -sardines, mackerel, soda-buscuits, rice, flour and corn beef …..you can now afford your laugh Bushie..
-
-
You BLP people don’t put out unless you getting paid a reward, that is an utter crap story, used only to suggest that things so tight the person ain’t got $1.29, what levels you desperate BLP go to decry our nation Barbados ?
-
Some key question MAM will obviously have to answer well for the public at some point.
Did she canvass against Payne in St. Andrew?
Dis she canvass against Hinkson in St. James North?
Did her people canvass against Arthur in St. Peter.
BU has been given an indication that this in fact occurred and it will not go away until she addresses it. If members of her team are aware it occurred it is hard to think she will be able to lead a cohesive team UNLESS there is some purging.
-
@ Onions
Sardines and mackerel?
You should be shame as shiite though Onions..
Evabody know that you is a big millionaire and you dole out a little measly $10 bill and looking for PR and sympathy here on BU…..?…ya cheap so and so.!……and playing you sound glum bout um too…!
Why you don’t stop paying the lotta money ya giving the outside woman and help out a few neighbors? (Then you won’t have to claim that you ‘going fishing’ to sneak out pon a night 🙂 )
Um ain’t only the GOVERNMENT role to help the less fortunate….ALL of we suppose to help we neighbors…..and not brag bout um….
Hope ya feel like a wet duck now…..LOL Ha Ha
-
@Onions. Helping someone with a few cents ent nothing to brag about. You should not even mention it. And besides what the little girl bought was nutricious. Wish more people would buy these things instead of going to KFC or Cheffette and buy fried chicken that is more harmful.I have run out of money many times in my life. and use these things instead of going to KFC or Cheffette and buying fo
-
British Visa Rules Tearing Families Apart a group of British MPs and peers have claimed in a report that new migration rules for people from outside the European Union are “tearing British families apart”.
According to the report, thousands of Britons have been unable to take a non-European Union spouse or partner to live in the United Kingdom since minimum earnings requirements were introduced last July. The committee added that children have also been separated from a parent as a result of the new requirements. The rules require any British citizen who wants to sponsor his or her non-EU spouse’s visa to be able to prove that they earn at least £18,600 a year. The amount rises to £22,400 to sponsor a child and an additional £2,400 for each further child. These new rules are designed to ease the burden of migration on British taxpayers, according to the Home Office.
The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Migration is calling for an independent review of the minimum income requirement. In the course of its inquiry, the committee looked at over 175 cases from families impacted by the new rules. Forty-five claimed their inability to meet the minimum income requirement had led to the separation of children, including British children, from a non-EU parent. In one case, a woman was separated from her British husband and two sons, including a five-month-old baby she had been breastfeeding.
A number of UK sponsors in full-time employment at or above the national minimum wage reported that they were unable to meet the income threshold. Evidence suggested that 47 percent of the British working population last year would have failed to meet the income level for sponsorship. The committee noted that, by the government’s own estimate, almost 18,000 British people would be prevented from being reunited with their spouse or partner in the UK annually as a result of the new rules.
[. . .] According to a Home Office spokesperson, the rules had been designed to make sure that those coming to the UK to join their spouse or partner would not become a burden on the taxpayer and would be well enough supported to integrate effectively.
ivetteromero | June 20, 2013 at 2:43 pm | Tags: British visas, British-Caribbean families, immigration
-
it is hard to think she will be able to lead a cohesive team UNLESS there is some purging.
**********
Look David
This is ABC stuff. Once the BLP lost the election in 2008 they had a DUTY to listen to the voice of the people of Barbados and sit down and do some serious introspection.
Instead, they OPENLY accused the PEOPLE of being idiots and Brass Bowls (Wuh them think them is Bushie or Wuh?!?)
They KEPT THEIR SAME TEAM
They KEPT THE SAME POLICIES
They KEPT THE SAME APPROACHIt is only because the DLP tried their level best to lose – that we saw the kind of results that we did.
Had they even been THREE intelligent DLP politicians – the results would have been 22 to 8 for the DLP….
But alas we have brass bowls in abundance on both sides of the fence.OF COURSE THERE NEEDS TO BE A PURGING!…..for the country’s sake ….on BOTH sides.
-
@Hal Native son. How you like them apples? Bim is still the best place to live.
-
Onions
Why you don’t try to locate that money which Payne said was stolen from the BLP and use it to help the poor in Barbados.David
She gine purge:-
Arthur
Marshall
Payne
Toppin
Clarke
Symmonds (oblong head)
Hinkson
Bradshaw -
Where that eunuch Millertheannuaki is today, he normally bout here pompesetting wid he castrated laughing at the DLP and claiming the virtues of the BLP
-
@David | June 20, 2013 at 11:48 AM | Indeed, David, I DO recall and so too does Mr Payne and his counsel, I am sure.
@Jeff. When you rejoin this thread, can you confirm that you remember it as well? Sorry, Jeff, pulling your leg. Irresistible.
@Jeff. “I am afraid that I am not in awe of Mia’s intellectual prowess as you are, but I will accept your assessment of it as your subjective opinion.” My learned friend, I was not alluding to Mia’s intellectual prowess – intellect and politics rarely have anything to do with each other – in fact, it is likely correctly argued that they are mutually exclusive. I was talking about facing Mia in a real fight, either verbal or physical, with the no-holds-barred rules of the political, as opposed to judicial (unless you count Alair mooning a judge) arena. TRUST ME, my learned friend, neither you nor I nor Henry nor Trevor nor Clyde, definitely not Leslie who would roll over and play dead, nor Alair (who would likely present to her his ass for her to kick, nor Vernon, nor Hal – no body would stand against Mia – either individually or collectively. So, what makes you think poor old George Payne would stand a hope in hell of surviving a Mia retaliation? So how in hell could Hinckson (who, times 100, would also stand no chance at all against Mia) delude himself into thinking that she, of all people, needs his less than average protection.
No, Jeff, the evidence tends to lead us to the fact that Hinckson is always spoiling for a fight….rather like Owen after a few bottles of his favourite tipple. Evidence, as David (BU) has suggested, is that Hinckson went to the meeting looking for a fight – after all, he was now an MP and a BIG muguffee.
Come on. Too much on the public record on Hinckson’s propensities for slanderous accusations often with no provocation or pretext. And as I say, no way Mia, of all people, needed the protection of a wimp like Hinckson. Every time I see Mia, I think of the song lyric, “I am woman, hear me roar.” What a splendid creature she is, even if you do not agree with me.
-
But looka this big pack of idiots doa……stuppesss, skilled in discrediting anyone n everyone….Brag? Cud laud Alvin….I wish more of you would get in touch with reality…. what is really happening out there (visit Solo or S.Army one day)… and stop firing cheap punches just for political mileage….
-
David your remarks re Mottley’s underground campaign was a known to many and even to Arthur but it was too late in the game to fight her off, hence the silly photo ops that were meaningless and empty.
This release of the SoD by Hinkson clearly shows that Payne and at least Marshall were aware of her will to unseat them so to Toppin, the joker Hinkson who has supposedly rushed to the Bullies defence he too was one that she was working against, having instructed Cynthia Forde to send her PA or party friend with strong connections to the Sion Hill Area to go with the DLP Candidate Senator Harry Husbands and introduce him into the homes of die hard BLP voters which she did as she was requested to do by Forde and Mottley, she made three different visits with Senator Harry Husbands into Sion Hill and some nearby areas like Upper Carlton to secure the vote for the DLP candidate as opposed to Hinkson.
I put it to you David that Mottley had an able helper in Cynthia Forde and that their mission using Mottley family influence and stolen BLP money, it was to run a side by side political campaign to eradicate those that were anti Mottley and secondly to make sure the election was not won with Arthur at the helm of the BLP, simple and plain .
-
@Let them gather for they shall soon scatter | June 20, 2013 at 5:46 PM | Fascinating. I don’t accept the bit about stolen BLP money (how can you steal the stolen) but I am certainly enjoying the rest of what you said. It has given me much amusement.
@Onions. How can you possibly urge people to “stop firing cheap punches just for political mileage….” when that is PRECISELY what you do yourself all the time. Pot calling kettle black.
-
The confirmation of Mottley / Forde’s intent can be secured from the candidate himself .
-
If people in North America have been aware of this plan since before 2008, I fail to see why most people in Barbados don’t seem to know that this was all in the grand scheme of things before Thompson passed away.
-
Give us a break | June 20, 2013 at 3:27 PM |
True Oilman some because they are politically blinkered they would try to sell you that you can thief people money and be fit to lead a country, she is as unfit and as dishonourable as they will ever be for High Office in Barbados………………………………………………………….
You need to ease up. Was it not proven that your late leader was indeed…..A Liar, A Cheater and A Thief!
I want to know how comes this SOD was able to be made public and the will of the dead king is to this day top secret, was the probate notice even published in the newspaper?
-
Bushie wrote to Onions(Then you won’t have to claim that you ‘going fishing’ to sneak out pon a night)
One a these nights he gine buy the frozen fish too late and dey ain’t gine thaw out.lol
-
Let the dead bury the dead Prodigal.
Leave a Reply to Give us a breakCancel reply