The Nation Newspaper Gaffe: A Case NOT to EXPLOIT Children

Photo Credit: Barbados Today

Photo Credit: Barbados Today

The Fourth Estate plays a critical role to the proper functioning of a democracy, it must. Providing citizens with information which equips them to make the best decisions and at the same time act as a watchdog targeting those who act as gatekeepers of authority and influence in our society. Any attempt to sanitize, filter, manipulate information which it feeds to the public must be rejected as a fourth estate reneging on its obligation. The consequence is a compromised democracy.

In Barbados the media [fourth estate] is heavily self-censored. With the exception of a couple media practitioners there is a lack of respect for the profession by the decisionmakers and general public. It is fair to suggest that media workers demonstrate a lack of respect for themselves if we are to judge their inability to promote a vibrant union or association. The Barbados Association of Journalists (BAJ) does not even have an official website or Facebook presence in 2013 such is the inadequacy of how media workers see themselves.

Related Link: Statement issued by Assistant Commissioner of Police (ag) Crime, Lionel M. Thompson

One of the tenets of a working Fourth Estate is the right to  leverage freedom of expression. However, while accepting that media must have the right to report freely on matters of public interest there are certain universal norms which respected media outlets observe. The requirement of a society to defend public morals and therefore the need to filter OBSCENITY.   There is DEFAMATION of course and a host of others based on jurisdiction. The one of interest to BU is PORNOGRAPHY and in this instance, CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. A simple definition of child pornography is “material that visually depicts sexual conduct by children”.

The arrest of Nation newspaper Publisher Vivian-Anne Gittens, Editor in Chief Roy Morris and Editor Sanka Price in connection with the sex story published on October 26, 2013 has signalled a departure from the norm given the response it has attracted. Many who read the article believed that the Nation had a right to report the matter, where they got it wrong was how it executed.    BU found it surprising how many leading commentators made the point that the Nation newspaper was on good ground to expose the matter and at the same time excuse the graphic presentation of the incident. Win lose or draw a message has been sent to media houses that sensationalizing stories of this nature which involve children will not be tolerated, and this is a good thing.   The time has come to fight back against the decline in standards in every facet of our society. There is one thing which as adults we cannot compromise and that is proving leadership (mentorship) to our children.

It gives BU no joy to see others brought before the Court on such a serious charge BUT enough is enough. BU had the opportunity when we received the link to the sex video to post a more graphic blog, we also had the opportunity to use the Nation’s redacted  image, we did not AND it did not require much deliberation on the part of the BU household. The good from the story is that the sensibilities of Barbadians everywhere have been aroused.  Let us hope it sends a message to the idiots who feel compelled to post all and sundry to social media. To all the schools which are covering up infelicities. To all the parents who are in denial. To the incompetents at the ministry of education who are cheating on their roles as guardians of our education system.

Congratulations to the Police and Director of Public Prosecutions for demonstrating the courage to travel a different path this time around.

185 thoughts on “The Nation Newspaper Gaffe: A Case NOT to EXPLOIT Children

  1. @Bush Tea “What the hell is sacrosanct about 14 year-olds?”

    The law of Barbados (not me, although I agree with the law) says that a person younger than 18 is a child. And children, even naughty children (I wouldn’t call them wutless/worthless) deserve special protection under the law, and I agree with that too.

    I you are one of those old men who needs to view the sexual activity of children to make you feel alive, then you have a problem, and there are plenty of psychiatrists around that will work with you to solve the problem.

    What the Nation did was NOT a public service, and old fools who say so should be ashamed of themselves.

    I believe that when the Nation published/distributed distributed this material it can be construed to be for erotic / profit purposes.

    The Nation is a business and like any business part of the reason for their existence is profit.

    A newspaper just does not put itself together. Editors sit down at an editorial table every single day and make EDITORIAL DECISIONS (senior editors are paid so well because they are expected to make WISE decisions) as to what goes in the paper and what stays out. That decision making process includes what is news and what is not BUT also what will sell newspapers and advertising and what might keep sales flat.

    So yes all newspapers are motivated by what’s news AS WELL AS BY WHAT SELLS (PROFIT)

  2. @ Simple Simon
    The biggest idiot that Bushie has EVER encountered had multiple doctorates ….. In engineering……

  3. @bush tea u deserve the licks uh getting u ole “peeping tom” …….Oh before i fuhget. share the topsy wid uh commander and xxhief caswell cause it contains both wunna egos which is the same size of MT rush moore.

  4. I ain’t touching this case until a verdict. However, I asked …….What about the case with the senior police? What about the little boy under twelve gyrating between a grown lady? Why did CBC refuse to mention the police act? I await these cases.

  5. Ever heard about PRIORITIES simple?

    The PROBLEM is that our schools are dysfunctional. …a MESS!
    The problem is that the authorities have been COVERING -UP.
    The problem is that this will cost us BILLIONS of wasted dollars and very likely – a few LOST generations.

    Your petty squabbles and concerns about some shiite-law, contrived by some set of brass bowls to impress simple folks like you PALES in comparison.

    When catastrophe is on the horizon one DOES NOT focus on protecting the feelings of misguided miscreants…..or even of grown up simpletons…

  6. “Sir/ balance u have access to the internet use it wisely. First hand evidence is mostly important in discussing these issues. do your own research”
    had a feeling you were only bluffing and had no cases to cite

  7. @Bush Tea “What the hell is sacrosanct about 14 year-olds?”

    I might as easily ask what is so special about marriage…and yet the law privileges marriage. If Bushie should close his eyes tonight, the law permits Mrs. Bushie certain privileges and these privileges hold whether or not Mrs. Bushie was a good wife, whether or not she ever cooked or cleaned or washed for Bushie, whether or not she bore him any children, whether or not she ever held a paid job. In fact the law in Barbados would take MY National Insurance contributions and pay the widowed Mrs. Bushie a pension for the rest of her life even if she has never made a single contribution to the NIS, or raised a child.

    So just as Bushie asks “What the hell is sacrosanct about 14 year olds?”

    I can ask “What the hell is sacrosanct about marriage?” and why does NIS pay pensions to widows, even to widows who have never held a paid job or raised a single child?.

    Why does the state privilege marriage, what is sacrosanct about marriage?

    The law privileges marriage because marriage is important. Bad wives enjoy the same legal privileges as good wives

    The law privileges childhood because childhood is important. “Wutless” children are legally entitled to the same legal protections as “good” children

  8. @BUSH TEA…………………………what a genius calling and small talk. man u are such a genius .i really got to hand it to u though. nobody but a bush tea could use the phrase “brass bowl ” in such a descriptive manner as well as execute it on members of the BU family in such a dictatorial fashion. the king must be shaken in his grave.

  9. @ac November 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM ” Have You noticed that expect for YOU and may be a few members of YOUR family who throws in one or two stars as compliments no one responds to your comments ”

    Dear ac that is because there can be no reasonable response to an elegantly reasoned, elegantly written blog post.

    And tobesides ac I don’t come here looking for stars or followers…if I wanted followers I would go over to Twitter.


  10. BTW what happen to ROBERT THE “moss” ross. gone ran and hide. now i see uh left Hal alone noow ur behind has been attacked come here pretending to play lawyer and what a lousy job of acting. TV lawyers do a better job. maybe u can acquire some of their skills and apply them to uh little makebelief lawyering ..goof ball what a waste.

  11. @ Simple Simon | November 17, 2013 at 9:34 PM |
    That post is SO illogical and such nonsense as to be approaching genius…….
    Bushie says that a law that seeks to protect teens who are doing shiite which can KILL them with aids, numerous other STDs, and cripple their futures with poverty is MISGUIDED…..
    And SIMPLE counters that if this is so, then the laws of marriage must also be shiite….. ??! :!

    …”Bushie going and sleep hear…!?

    Hush do! ac…..

  12. simple simon uh so sweet i take everything back that i said about U as a sign of good measure. i reluctantly retrieve my topsy brass bowl and hand it to U, take care, keep u the good work chopping and slicing BUSH TEA apart ,Nite NITE

  13. AC

    Gone? Not a bit of it. I was just watching you over-act. I leave the shadow to you.

    Bush tea

    I have to agree with SS that no-one is ‘wutless’ and certainly not children – and not even ac, the ‘let’s pretend I am somebody even the village idiot’ figment of someone’s fevered imagination.

  14. There was no logical reason for the Nation to print the photo.

    A written report of the incident is all that was required for people of average intelligence to understand.

    I hope the two children are getting the requisite counseling.

  15. “There was no logical reason for the Nation to print the photo.”

    Do you believe just a simple report could have captured dramatically the attention of the public like the photo did?

    “A written report of the incident is all that was required for people of average intelligence to understand.

    I hope the two children are getting the requisite counseling.”

    Were you able to recognize the two children who you suggest are in need of requisite counselling from the photograph?

  16. @ Robert Ross

    I am familiar with Barbadian logic, answering a question with a question and digressing from substantive issues to deal with minor points that are presumed to be central to the argument.
    Let me take you back to the real issue: that of an issue being sub judice, which is the rule in every jurisdiction that has the roots of its law in the common law system. It is about a fair trial.
    The thinking behind it is one of common sense: influencing a jury. As to the doctrine of ten guilty men going free than one innocent man being found guilty, glad you have pointed out it came from the Bible. Presumably the French too are Christians.
    As to press freedom: I have never put so-called press freedom above the rule of law; it is thew one thing that my colleagues in the National Union of Journalists will tell you I am a stickler for.
    The press must be part of our democracy, or it is nothing. When we give people like Rupert Murdoch the ‘freedom of the press’ what is the end result: page three nudes, the freedom to break the law?
    As someone who edits a paper I make sure that nothing goes in my paper without my approval – that is called editing – as I have a legal responsibility for thew paper’s content, including advertisements.

  17. H Austin

    So THAT is what you object to…page 3 nudes? Then I have it right. You are simply a humourless puritan who doesn’t like the idea of the Nation having any sort of defence. Oh – and do shut up about Barbadian logic – are you the new Colonial master – denying your roots and dick-tating from the City? Arrogant fellow. Gee H AUSTIN – the fella who thinks he’s Socrates.

    “The French too are Christians”…. yet again, oh do shut up you silly man.

  18. Back to U Ross then u get up in here trying to cat spraddle me when i indicated to YOUR other half stan pipe lawyer Caswell that anyone knowing of criminal ativity or in posession should be reported to the RBPF. Yet U are a sworn OFFICER OF THE COURT. nuh Wunda the court is dreadlock cause so call lawyers like u go before judges unaware and unprepared forcing the legal system to be stagnant forever. Not even to mention the clients whose pockets are drained financialy because of piss poor lawyers like U

  19. @ Hal
    Your position on the treatment of sub judice matters is outdated and flawed.
    That position has been used in Barbados to COVER UP all kinds of dirt and to protect the guilty.
    When shit happened, the principals ran to a lawyer who filed a “case” and effectively shut down all discussion for 10 to 20 years.
    All some crook had to do was “go to court”…. there would then be only hidden whispers on that matter and life would continue for 15 years or so after which the matter would be dismissed – or at most, have legal fees assigned….

    WELL THOSE DAYS ARE DONE……THANKS to the social media, the NEW mass communication reality.

    Like cellphones in schools, this new reality is unstoppable, so we had better learn to adjust….and FAST…

  20. @ Balance

    You wrote and I quote “Do you believe just a simple report could have captured dramatically the attention of the public like the photo did?”

    So if one were to extrapolate on your comment it would follow that to get the attention of readers it would be best to have pictures of say the slashed throat of the woman killed a few weeks back or the bullet ridden body of the shop owner at Salters?

    Notwithstanding the writing style of Sanka Price, the article, without pictures, would have been effective enough which underscores Simple Simon’s point regarding the fact that if these were children of privilege their pictures would not have made it the the Nation in such glaring colour

    @Hal Austin

    Sometimes you do come over as a sanctimonious prick and like Mr Ross went to pains to point out your observations re the sub judice issue seem to highlight your love for things Britanica. Now when your British newspapers were tapping people’s phone lines and the matter was before the police I guess that this law of the civilized denizens of the Rule Britannica that you love so much, kicked in, didn’t they? Nitwit.



    The issue of the Nation publishing the pictures with the faces masked out accompanied by the erotic writings of the ingrunt Sanka resulted in your first arrests, which will come to naught in the Bulbados courts

    Charging the children who published the video on FB will flitter in the wind and fail but, if I understand what the outcome is intended to be, you wish to preemptively warn other Balans of doing this

    I think that you are using this as PR to show that now Dottin has gone there is a new kid in town, so congrats on that count.

    I wiil wait and see what you do about your officer shaking his doggie on the internet though


    Please stay away from big people talk.

    It is better to keep one’s mouth closed and be thought of as a fool that to open one s mouth and to be known inconclusively to be one

  21. Balance in order for U to understand the legal ramifications and the Internationally rules and guidlines that regulates and defines “child por” again i suggest that u do a google of CHILD PORN LAWS. it is not sufficient to apply barbados laws . Again u must understand that Barbados has signed on to UNESCO laws which includes laws dealing with Child porn some of which includes images or simulation of children engaging in sexual activity it is irrevelant wether the faces are shown or not.

  22. Pieceof

    Mind we do routinely put pics, taken in church, of the bodies of the dead in newspapers and seem to think nothing of it. Is it a reflection of sorrow or simply an obsession with death as the two kids ‘wukking up’ is a reflection of fun – misplaced fun? If so, death is OK but not life??? I am speaking generally of course.

  23. OLE man PDR u think u so smart cause u ninety two ,old fart the world has move on beyond pitching marbles to technology. now stuff them marbles in uh back pocket and join the world for progress and forward thinking. uh not got much time left. just don.t try taking uh frustrations out on ac cause uh not gonna win. Stuespse….

    • @Hal

      Thanks for your advice, BU as part of the Fifth Estate will have to challenge the status quo from time, the buck stops with BU.

  24. @ Robert Ross
    I refuse to believe that you are a lawyer, since your intellectual impulses are far from those of any lawyer I know.
    The case in point: five people have been charged with alleged offences relating to the publication of a photograph in the Nation newspaper.
    Until there is a full hearing we would not know the prosecution case, but the case is now sub judice, a rule put in place to protect thew innocent.
    I know it is the preserve of barrack room lawyers to pronounce on a case before it is tried.
    I suggest that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done. Do not prejudice the case against the accused.
    However, Mr Ross and a string of brain dead idiots have come in the forum turning what is a proper defence of the law in to a personal attack on me – as if I will go away and cry.
    It confirms everything I have known about rum shop debaters, a people who abandon common sense in order to be offensive from behind their masks of cowardice.
    This offensive nonsense often includes putting up sdtraw men and knocking thwm down – that I somehow believe everything British is best, or words to that effect.,
    May I suggest that instead of writing such putrid nonsense that you and your mates go away and spend more time critically reading and thinking about new ideas instead of remembering things by rote, often incorrectly.

  25. @PDR …….Wont be surprised if U and ROSS are one of the same giving off that smelly aire of importance and wanting so much for others to see u the same way. fuh one ac not impressed by ones wishes hopes or desires of status or influencecause peeps like u are mostly phonies and hyocrites and hate when others expose uh weakness. Now go get a real life and stop thinking u better than others or smarter. ole man

  26. @ Robert Ross

    It is not rocket science: if five people are accused of a serious offence which could lead to their imprisonment, then the civilised thing to do is to back off and allow the law to take its course, in other words, let them have a fair trial.
    But if you, an alleged lawyer, prefer to blurt out your idiotic reasoning as a substitute for justice, it says a lot about your understanding of the concept of rule of law and a fair trial.
    I suggest instead of concentrating on passing exams, you spend more time learning about the theory of law, how these concepts shore up a democratic society.
    Also tame your barking dogs.

  27. Don.t pay ROSS and PDR no mind they are card carrying members and board of directors of “THE BACKROOMS and smoke filled rooms of the discarded ELITE.. influenced by money and prestige. mad as HELL when others contradict or challenge there point of view. think that they are exceptional and woe to those who suggest or disagree with they way of thinking. jus another set of bull shiters with tired and outdated brain cells

  28. @ AC

    The boardroom awaits the ole fogey that I am but I will pause from these more meaningful things and talk of you.

    Note that I did not say to.

    In the classic “knock on any door” with Humphrey bogart Nick Romano the youth bogart defends says these words

    “Live fast, die you and make a beautiful corpse”

    I see interwoven in your response a hatred for the process of aging and the aged consistent with the new ethos which we old fogeys have bred for were it not the phenomena of our own making how else could it be that youth like you could exist and we did not abort you in utero with your kind?

    BT refers to you kindly as brass bowls but I, the elder, without his upbringing, and incapable of grafting the holiness of the wife, can only call you waste foops

    Which idiot, incapable of seeing the future, would decry the state of becoming old unless being both cretinous AND / OR uneducated.

    In your case AC DC (assuredly cretinous, definitely c*** curse word removed) you MUST BE BOTH

  29. So the 16 year old got put on curfew in lieu of Dodds!!

    Does this mean the court has already determined the video he took meets the criteria for which it is empowered by law to punish?

    From where did the Nation get it’s picture?

    If it is from the 16 year old they are toast!!

    … or should be if common law rules.

    Looks like they might have to appeal!!

  30. @ R Ross
    No one is wufless?…certainly not children…????!
    You meking sport right RR?
    You never was a teacher?
    You probably got one or two little sweethearts for children and think that all so?
    ….or you like Wickham and ain’t gone none….?

    Well listen to Bushie…..
    There are LOTS of great children out there….but there ALSO are some wicked, wutless “so and so’s” too – so don’t fool yourself…
    …some of them would eat you alive…. 🙂

  31. @@PDR age is not a about number but the abilty as one grows old to have the capabilty to endorse and move ahead not being stuck to nostalgic ideas like crazy glue what that involves is tolerance not what most old foggies used to decry . frown and isolate those with opposite opinions. as for my hatered of the elderly couldn.t be further from the truth but its those like u who have a mindset that is rigid and uncompromising and excludes all others , and a boosey attitude which is a “turn off”to all.

  32. @ pieceuhderockyeahright | November 18, 2013 at 10:48 AM |
    “Live fast, die you and make a beautiful corpse”

    As a little boy I remember one of my uncles saying this to be his motto which he lived up to. He was indeed a most handsome dude who lived a fast life and died young; not as young or in circumstances like James Dean but electrifying enough to make dozens of women weep over his coffin wailing at the fallen Adonis.

    The motto might have found popularity among the young of the racy roaring 1920’s with the phrase genuinely attributed to a real liberated woman of our BU “Island gal” predisposition and dramatized in the 1921 play “These Wild Young People” by J. M. O’Connor as reproduced below:

    “Cyrillo. What do you consider wild?
    Patricia. Oh, to play around and be petted a lot, smoke in public and all that. I read in a paper once about a man who got a divorce from his wife on the strangest grounds. She said she couldn’t be bothered with a husband, intended to lead a fast life, die young, and be a beautiful corpse. I think that’s a fascinating philosophy. It’s my program.”

    You see PDRYR, there is nothing new under the Sun. Yet we have the brazenness of the Serpent to condemn the youth of today.
    If only I had adopted my Uncle’s philosophy I would today be in paradise with 7 vestal virgins for every week of the Solar month. LOL!!!

    PDRYR, do you know how I can get hold of that 1949 movie “Knock on Any Door’ starring the great Bogart? This movie was based on the novel by the naturally gifted Black American writer Willard Motley.

  33. H Austin

    On Legal Theory

    OK big boy…shall we go with Austin, Hart, Hohfeld, Kelsen,, etc etc …name your poison? What happened to the grundnorm in Madzimbamuto? Are cases decided as policy decisions or by the law’s own informal logic? If the latter, what is it? Is law about orders backed by threats or obligation? What of s.9, Wills Act? What can Wittgenstein tell us about legal reasoning?

    I will give you just this little tad of respect…

    It is piffling to say, as you do, ‘this is contempt’ and give a very simplistic account – ‘O’ level stuff. You have to explain how it is in relation to what is given of the facts, To do that you have to formulate a question – which I did. Then you have to look at the sorts of things that have been accounted contempt and see whether the question suggests a positive or negative answer and why.

    OK an example. If a man puts his hand in your empty pocket intending to steal, is that an attempt to steal in law? How does it help to give a simple definition that an attempt is an act that is more than merely preparatory? Or – if I intend to burn down the Nation building and buy a box of matches for this purpose?

    Or again how does the simple definition of the actus reus of theft, an unauthorized appropriation, help is decide whether it’s theft to take goods off a shelf in a supermarket intending not to pay for them. Does it make any difference if the goods are put in your pocket or the wire basket?

    Or again……

    Bush Tea

    I said in a post recently that I found the lawyers’ expression that an argument is “without merit” demeaning. Nothing is entirely without merit, not even H Austin. The more so with children who, for one reason or another, know no better.

  34. It is passing strange that the only minister to come out is the one who play he is the most powerful among the bunch of incompetent idiots…………..the one and only clown…Donville Inniss telling Jamaica to butt out of Barbados’ business. Hey minister, me thinks you doth protest too much.

    You have confirmed by your mouthings what most people have been thinking and saying…….these arrests are political. You can say all you want, we know that you all have put your people in place to do what the DLP wants. We are now only waiting for the time when you all are going to tell the police to crack heads and shoot some people!

    As Tennyson Joseph said in a column a few weeks ago that politicians need to remember that politics is a revolving door. The DLP will do well to learn this and that they would be allowed to buy votes again and so will not always be in power!

  35. John

    Bail set at $10,000 wasn’t it – $5,000 more than the Nation accused? And off to Dodds if he answers back. Have they all gone mad?

  36. Look u again ROSS still haven,t answered the original question poised by hal but have detour and twisted your way out usings detractions and legal mindfields for hal to fall into. Dirty DAWG.

  37. Miller

    We have similar tastes. I get my stuff from Amazon or ebay. Yesterday I watched Robert Donat in ‘The Winslow Boy’. Well, you will know the story I expect. Robert Donat as Sir Robert Moreton cross examines a hand writing expert. In particular, he asks the expert why his views on the handwriting in an earlier case were rejected by the jury in that case. He answers “Because they were all idiots” – and blew it. I invite you to compare H Austin’s references to “brain dead idiots” and my “barking dogs”.
    Which causes me to say that I am looking for ‘Spanish Fiesta’ with Toumanova.

  38. PDRYR, do you know how I can get hold of that 1949 movie “Knock on Any Door’ starring the great Bogart? This movie was based on the novel by the naturally gifted Black American writer Willard Motley.

    Hey ! so happens that it is showing this week

  39. robert ross | November 18, 2013 at 1:40 PM |


    Bail set at $10,000 wasn’t it – $5,000 more than the Nation accused? And off to Dodds if he answers back. Have they all gone mad?

    If it is the same material everybody published then I would have to conclude the folks from the Nation are enjoying special treatment.

    Maybe the Nation should pay some of the $15,000 it saved towards a lawyer to appeal the boy’s sentence.

    I am sure the three would sleep a lot easier!!

  40. John;
    Could you explain how from what appears at face value to have been a $10,000 bail you have arrived at the boy being convicted and charged $10,000 and that an appeal to the boy’s sentence is in the offing. Or perhaps it is just that I missed something, or rather a lot, in the latest developments.

  41. I am just saying that if the folks at the Nation work to get the boy off, when their turn comes they may not have to face Dodds!!

    …. assuming both the boy and them have published the same material.

    I understood from Ross the Boy’s bail was set at $10,000!!

    If my understanding is wrong, then I am wrong in my comments.

    See what you can find out!!

    Try the Gleaner link ….. “The boys were released on BDS$10,000 bail and placed on a 7:30 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew.”

    Ahhhh … so it looks as though the court is being consistent with bail for everybody.

    So if it remains consistent, Anne Gittens, Roy Morris and Sanka Price will also be placed on curfew ….. except that they are big able adults!!!

    If they could appeal the boys’ sentence now and are successful then perhaps they might sleep easier as their turn comes around to face the music.

  42. @ Hal Austin
    The kind of illogic robert ross spouts is inconsistent with any aquaintance with the number of jurists he rattled off to you . Dont pay him any mind . If he had legal work to look after he wont be able to spend so much time on these blogs .He said he is a lawyer so you must believe him while having some sympathy for his clients.

  43. @not amused .absloutely correct. the most ROSS gets to practicing law is when he gets here on BU and wrangles with others and spout his theories and intrepretaion of LaW. most likely than not he bought his certification on LINE

  44. @ Prodigal Son | November 18, 2013 at 1:37 PM |
    “It is passing strange that the only minister to come out is the one who play he is the most powerful among the bunch of incompetent idiots…………..the one and only clown…Donville Inniss telling Jamaica to butt out of Barbados’ business. Hey minister, me thinks you doth protest too much.”

    The Porn Don is a man on a mission. He fully understands that the DLP is on its way out into the wilderness for another long, longer time next time around.
    He wants to become PM someday but does not wish to spend 15 years or so as the LOTO man; not with his personal wealth.

    His only chance of becoming PM in a hurry is to depose the stupidly irrelevant incumbent whom he treats with scant respect, if any.
    He probably knows the current holder shelf life in less than another year before a call for a palace coup is on the cards once again with him wishing and hoping he will be the one the other DLP members would hang their hopes on to last to 2018.
    “DLP” now stands for Barbados’s ‘Destructive Lying Puppets’.

  45. I totally agree with you, miller. Donville is certainly on a mission. My sense is that the PM has no real power………….he wants to be PM so he has to let them do as they very much like. How else do you explain the thug still messing up our country?

    I saw the thug on TV tonight talking nonsense that the BLP wants to get power at all cost even tearing down Barbados. He cannot get the country manage so to cover his incompetence, the Destructive Lying Puppets resort to their talking point that the BLP tearing down Barbados…………….they lie so much that they dont know that they are lying. Barbados has a junk rating yet this idiot would go to the world market floating two bonds at the same time and then had to withdraw them. Was it the BLP who told the people with money not to subscribe to the bond issue? It was their sheer incompetence and arrogance that made them think that people would still buy the bonds even with a junk rating!

    Damn idiots!

  46. Bush Tea

    After a hard day in the office dealing with three clients who wanted protection orders (one an H Austin), two bail applications (both unsuccessful but then look who the magistrate was), swotting up a gaggle of jurists from my out-of-date copy, writing an essay for my third online degree, and an enormous number of time wasters in the skirting boards of my life, I fell to watching my evening ‘fix’ over dinner.

    There I learned of this new game called ‘knockout’ in the US, a favourite, apparently, of black kids. The idea is that you randomly throw a punch at a passer-by and the game is won if you knock the person out When I saw this, forgive me, I thought of our exchange on here – and smiled. I am sure you can guess why – yes, at pavement level you do have a point.

    It then occurred to me that life on BU was a bit like my day at the office and a bit like knockout – which is why I always try to leave not-too-late and with a knuckle duster on my right hand when I do. Pop by the office tomorrow if you can. We’ll share a pot of honest-to- gutsy side-street tea if you do. It’s getting less and less easy to find but it’s so much better than the pretentious wind-bag fizzy stuff.

  47. @ Ross

    It is correct to say that nothing changes under the sun.

    I give you “Knockout in deeper gangland style”.

    Circa 1985, New York City.

    Pass a car and they flick their headlights at you and you flick yours, they circled, came back and killed you!!

    Yes, very little changes under the sun.

  48. @ Ross
    Skippa, since you and Amused came to an “understanding” and stopped cussing and abusing each other – things have not been the same on BU.
    It is somewhat frustrating for Bushie….
    You are beginning to make sense, turning a Bushman’s world up sided down… 🙂
    Well let us ignore the invitation to visit to your office for tea…..Bushie is still suspicious of the Ross/Amused/Wickham association, ….but if you are conceding that some (thankfully small numbers) of our youth are essentially EVIL INCARNATE, and fully deserving of being described as “wutless” (which BTW is a Bajan term with very specific meaning that has nothing to do with WORTH) ….then you are on the right track.

    There are SOME persons (including youth) who REQUIRE extreme measures to be applied in the interest of the collective well-being.
    This is why ANY IDIOT who seeks to draw arbitrary limits to what the state (or a parent) should be allowed to apply in addressing any SPECIFIC situation has to be simple minded.

    Bushie has been around too long to be so gullible. There ARE persons among us who, in their own, and the wider society’s interest, would be better to NOT have been born, or to have that ‘mistake’ addressed as soon as possible…..

    This is the HARSH reality of organizational dynamics in a complex 21st century world…… 🙂

  49. @ pieceuhderockyeahright!!! | November 19, 2013 at 5:28 AM |
    “You can find that classic at …”

    Thanks, ole Wise One!
    Maybe “YIFI” could have it ready for downloading “FOC.” 1949 to 2013 = 64: Cannot wait another 6 years for the copyright to run out.

    If the Christians could aid and abet in the pirating their own Gospel Music
    why can’t a ‘born-again’ sinner follow suit? LOL!!

  50. A judge dealing with welfare issues relating to two children who were aged four and seven when their parents and grandmother were shot dead while on holiday in the French Alps 14 months ago has praised journalists for their “responsible and sensitive” reporting.

    Reporters had “respected” the welfare of Zainab and Zeena Al-Hilli, said Mr Justice Baker in a written ruling following hearings in the Family Division of the High Court in London.

    He said: “I would like to thank the press and broadcasting and media for the responsible and sensitive way in which they have respected the court’s orders and the girls’ welfare in the way they have reported this matter.

    “It is good to see the family courts and the media working together to ensure that the right to freedom of expression, and the right of the girls to private and family life, are both respected.”

    The girls’ father Saad, mother Ikbal, Mrs Al-Hilli’s mother Suhaila al-Allaf and French cyclist Sylvain Mollier were shot dead by a gunman on a remote mountain road near Annecy in September 2012.

    Zainab, then seven, was badly hurt and Zeena, then four, escaped without injury after apparently hiding behind her mother’s skirt.

    The girls and their parents had lived in Claygate, Surrey.

    Mr Justice Baker has said the girls can be named in media reports but he has ruled that any detail of their whereabouts must remain secret.

    He made comments about the media in a ruling in which he said he had made orders appointing two relatives as the girls’ “special guardians”.

    In July, Mr Justice Baker had ruled that, despite objections from police, journalists could attend a private High Court hearing where care arrangements for the two sisters were discussed.

    He said reporters could be present at the hearing in the Family Division of the High Court even though reporting restrictions designed to protect the girls prevented any coverage of the proceedings.

    Mr Justice Baker dismissed an application by Surrey Police for journalists to be excluded after The Sunday Times newspaper argued that there was a “strong public interest” in the “bracing effect” of the press being present.

    Police had argued that exclusion of the press was necessary for the “safety and protection” of the girls and their carers and said the presence of journalists would impede or impair justice.

    They said the girls’ lives could be at risk and argued that the presence of journalists at the High Court hearing would increase that risk.

    Senior officers also said there was a risk that “leakage” from the hearing might jeopardise the investigation into the killings and any trial in France.

    Times Newspapers – publisher of The Sunday Times – said police had failed to provide evidence to “merit the exceptional step of excluding the press from the hearing”.

    Mr Justice Baker refused to grant the police application for press exclusion.

    The judge said the circumstances in which journalists should be excluded from attending family court proceedings was an “important issue” – whether or not reporting was allowed.

    “Although the rights of the media do not extend to a right to report …
    it must not be thought that they are any less important,” he said.

    “Open justice has two components – the right to attend as well as the right to report – and the fact that the second is subject to legal restriction does not undermine the importance of the first.

    “On the contrary, it could be argued that what has been called the ‘watchdog’ role of the press (acknowledged and endorsed by the courts on many occasions) is even more important where the right to report is restricted.

    “As watchdog, the press scrutinises not merely the decisions reached by the courts but also the process by which they are reached.”
    by Taboola

  51. Steupssss @ Hal
    Apples and limes!

    Were the press similarly obligated to respect the welfare of the young idiot who shot up the school in the USA recently?
    ….or of the animals who firebombed the store in Bridgetown…killing innocent shoppers…?

    The ONLY general rule tha can apply across the board when it comes to inter-personal relationships is ” Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”
    ..extrapolated logically, ….it means that the state is entitled to do unto miscreants as they were prepared to do to others.

    Perhaps wunna can see now why “an eye for an eye” is not materially different from ” do unto others…”

    @ R R
    “Do we exorcise them or simply teach them cricket?”
    Clearly, based on the current India experience, the cricket approach ain’t working…. 🙂
    …looks like we need the exorcist…..

Leave a comment, join the discussion.