Tales from the Courts–Justice Jacqueline Cornelius Makes Speaker of the House Michael Carrington PAY XXIV

The Speaker of the House Michael Carrington QC has been ordered by Justice Jacqueline Cornelius  of the High Court of Barbados to hand over $250,000.00 to a client. A transaction in abeyance for the last two years.The ruling confirms what the BU household has been posting about and what Barbadians already know. Lawyers in Barbados, whether junior or senior, have been managing clients’  monies in a less than transparent manner. BU commends John Griffiths who has shown he has the cajones to seek redress to the Courts of Barbados. Congratulations also to Justice Cornelius for ruling with speed, something the Courts of Barbados is unfamiliar.

Speaker Michael Carrington do the honourable thing and resign with immediate effect from the post of Speaker of the House, the highest Court in the land. Let the fact that you are a pal of the prime minister not deter you from making a speedy decision.

carrington00

High Court rules against senior lawyer

254 comments

  • It’s amazing that there is always someone(s) who will come to the defense of this person who withheld his clients funds for two years and will use all sort of hifalutin legalese to justify what amounts to stealing. Or only poor black people does teef? Poor black people may steal but they don’t build empires. I would like to know from some of the more learned folk on BU what would have happened if Mr. Griffiths had died before judgement was given. How would his money find its way back home.

    Liked by 1 person

  • I would love to see a list of lawyers to avoid. I know the Bar Assoc, won’t give me so someone please do a civic solid for us and let us have the names, the amount of money they absconded and where they are today, practicing or not. We need to bell some cats before, as my friend said, someone does some serious damage to one of them.

    Liked by 1 person

  • The ball is not in ac court to convict or defend carrington.it is in your,s to show proof of Theft …kuncklehead.

    Like

  • Understanding the NIS of Barbados (1) – Social Characteristics and Basic Structure: Walter Blackman

    ac May 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM #
    the FACT is that there are too many greedy bastards in the PRivate sectors and govts..one hand washes the other, the financial market meltdown should be a lesson for all to learn….the voters can vote out the scumbags if people not happy with the govt handling of finances throw them out……..with the private investors, when they f**k up yuh money it is gone,,,,,,,gone are the days when people can be trusted..walter puts out hypothetical that sounds good in theory,,but the reality too many people over the years have seen how private investors have been hauled off to jail for theft or the mishandling of people money….. thats why i buy land,don’t put my money in no body hand to invest,,,

    Like

  • Adrian,
    We can play with words but what is totally undeniable is that Carrington is not the first attorney to hold on to a client’s monies and refuse firstly, to pay it to its legitimate owner and secondly,fail to account for both the principal and interest accrued ,for long periods indeed for years.A few short years ago a former deputy speaker of the house was reported in the press as having to run for his life down James St,across Busby Alley,up Swan Street,mek a left on Coleridge St then anudder left on James Street again all the while being pursued by a cutlass wielding client only to be saved by an alert and agile young policeman who held the pursuer.The man got his money and Bridgetown was in uproar that this former Honourable member had so much speed for a senior citizen.
    Don’t hold your breath but if the Parliament wanted to enact legislation to protect its citizens from unscrupulous and shady,dodgy,attorneys who will not or cannot account for clients’ monies,they just need to copy the UK’s legislation which is clearcut.
    Btw karma is a bitch.That sprinter got his just desserts at his own hands.

    Like

  • Artaxerxes asks ac why Carrington held on to the money. Does anyone know the reason? I guess it would appear in the judgment. Has anyone got it? Without it the barrack room lawyers are just shadow boxing. On the same theme, in what account was the money placed? Does anyone know? Or is it enough to convict on guesswork?

    On theft – was there an intention to deprive permanently? What’s the evidence that there was? Back to para 1.

    Like

  • Miranda January 12, 2015 at 4:49 PM #

    I would love to see a list of lawyers to avoid. I know the Bar Assoc, won’t give me so someone please do a civic solid for us and let us have the names, the amount of money they absconded and where they are today, practicing or not. We need to bell some cats before, as my friend said, someone does some serious damage to one of them.
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………
    Maybe its much easier to ask for a list of those lawyers whom you may work with.
    But , as a people we should learn from the Nigerian students , if something is wrong, kick up a big fuss about it. Threaten to bun down some place.Behave in a menacing way, and BINGO, someone will sit up and listen. Those S.O.B’s in parliament know full well that they can kick the hell out of our arses, and we are unlikely to utter a word, moreso if these kicks are reign down on us by the particular political party which we support.
    Something has to give. Anarchy has now been allowed to become endemic on our highways, also in the drug and gun culture, because of a blatant lack of leadership in this country. Everyone can now do as he/she likes. Those sob’s now marking time for a pension, may be teflon coated, but certainly not armour plated.

    Like

  • Colonel Buggy

    It’s one of the wonderful things about Nigerians. They are not typically sly or underhand. The don’t just mouth. If they don’t like you it’s clear. If they like you it’s equally clear. Everyone knows where they are. I suppose they’re a bit like Jamaicans: very loyal and no nonsense.

    Like

  • @ T J January 12, 2015 at 4:01 PM #

    Kerry Symmonds is an elected member of parliament, so why are you stating he is a senator?

    Like

  • This man is guilty until found otherwise. The mere fact that one is a lawyer, in Barbados, amounts to guilt, intent, if you will. After all, it a culture of crimes one would have entered. A protection racket. LOL

    Anyone show the movie about pre-crime!

    Like

  • ross you have asked clear! precise and critical question all of which are necessary to form a definite conclusion as to whether theft was involved, don;t try telling that to the gang of mcguffie BU lawyers,
    the past two days was concrete evedience that ignorance has no bounds also well applied to the David the “ringmaster”
    yesterday i got a close up and personal preview as what will come in the months leading up to the election when David the ring master clueless as a blind bat flying in daylight took to the barbados Constitution to present evedience as to why Carrington should resign. a real charlatan indeed
    then there was the other road scholar artexeres setting self up for a free fall with accusation being level without substantial proof, boy if such attacks were leveled on my character invoking the name of God would not stop me from pursing at the highest legal level the attackers .
    between yesterday and today a confirmation of sort was made that there are some bajans who are mean spirited , hateful and downright nasty,

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ ac January 12, 2015 at 7:05 PM
    “between yesterday and today a confirmation of sort was made that there are some bajans who are mean spirited , hateful and downright nasty..”

    Aren’t you that way too when it comes to OSA and his (according to the ad nauseam version of ac) 14 years of mismanagement, graft and corruption? Do you know how many times you called OSA a big crook on BU? Why have no charges been brought to bear for corruption and maladministration while in office?

    At least the $75,000.00 (or is it $750,000.00, Stinkliar knows the difference) payment received from CLICO ended up as campaigning expenditures.
    You fail to accept OSA’s explanation of the final treatment of that payment but want us to accept that the refusal of Mr. Crooked Carrionton to pay the disabled man his money was to ensure its safe keeping so that greedy women would not rob him.

    The carrion face man is a bleeding crook and not a good one at that too; pure and simple!

    Like

  • @Miranda” I would like to know from some of the more learned folk on BU what would have happened if Mr. Griffiths had died before judgement was given. How would his money find its way back home.”

    Likely the Honourable Member would have duly paid the funds over to his estate, why would he not?

    Further, the estate executor would have had to ensure that all funds due to the estate were turned over to be disbursed according the to the relevant rules of estate law.

    Hopefully the estate executor would , in such a case, be like a Rottweiler in heat.

    Like

  • I tell wunna stay tuned.

    Like

  • “Between yesterday and today a confirmation of sorts was made that there are some bajans who are mean spirited, hateful & down right nasty”

    I came to the same conclusion with the Lisa Marshall affair.

    Like

  • enuff we will stayed tune but if any changes of movement down or up left or right comes about,it will be of no help to the BLP disjointed and disarranged party, so u can keep flying that red flag of ,’Stay tuned ” all you want unless the end result gonna help your party you could as well haul that flag down.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ David January 12, 2015 at 8:09 PM #
    “@Enuff, For what?”

    For the Shadow Cabinet shuffle.
    At least she is rearranging the deck to weaken her enemies within. What is Fumble doing about Estwick?

    Kerrie is planning to oust Mia goaded by his turncoat master.
    OSA and his gang of traitors don’t understand that the electorate will not be reelecting the BLP or any other political arrangement under his leadership. If he can’t beat fumble dick the most unpopular man and incompetent leader in local political history how can we expect him to convince the electorate he is up to the job to rescue the economy?

    Like

  • miller i would like for you to present evedience in any of my comments showing where i have engaged by the action of persuasion to convince others of mr, carrington’s motives, just another futile attempt by you and those of likened minds to interpret my comments through political lenses that support your theories /which by the way are false and misleading

    Like

  • I am merely waiting to see if this is the only occasion.

    Like

  • @robert ross January 12, 2015 at 6:05 PM…Artaxerxes asks ac why Carrington held on to the money. Does anyone know the reason? I guess it would appear in the judgment. Has anyone got it? Without it the barrack room lawyers are just shadow boxing. ——-

    Senor Ross you are the lawyer here so can you fill in some blanks.

    If you held the funds from your client because of some dispute (disagreement on sum to be paid to some 3rd party, disagreement on fees due or whatever) and said client is so incensed with delay that he goes to another attorney to sue you for his money then why at that point would you not seek to resolve matter in that ‘fresh’ environment?

    Surely, some agreement can be reached between reasonable men now with a new objective attorney representing your former client’s interest.

    I appreciate that we all firing blind here but in the sense of basic straight- forward natural commonsense why would it have to be dragged out for so long.

    Is this the way you guys operate daily in Coleridge St or White Park or wherever a simple process becomes so legally convoluted?

    Like

  • There must be a good reason why he had to let this matter go to court. Surely Payne as a member of the political class and a colleague would have offered a way to settle. He did not have the means it seems to repay?

    Like

  • Among other things like the lumpen proletariat accepting bribes to vote a certain outcome,OSA gave away his hand by A)allowing Barnie Lynch to be a
    candidate and a platform speaker and B)allowing his wry sense of humour to get the better of him, writing a promissory note of comfort to the actor from StMS that he won’t entertain any of the many traitors in the Dems camp to stage a palace coup and unseat the fumbler,adding a postscript about taking Mia off his hands.
    Mia is no suitable candidate to lead the BLP.OSA is by a long shot.Mia can count on her camp followers in StMNE,but is yet to convince buhbaydus. OSA crossing over as an independent has thrown a spanner in the works,so that the political fortunes of the BLP are difficult to read.

    Like

  • “Between yesterday and today a confirmation of sorts was made that there are some bajans who are mean spirited, hateful & down right nasty”

    “I came to the same conclusion with the Lisa Marshall affair.”

    ============================================================

    My point exactly…… I guess when “Douglas” penned that article, he was not “mean spirited, hateful & down right nasty”, he was performing his civil duty of exposing a thief.

    On that note, I must ask Robert Ross, as it relates to the Lisa Marshall affair, “On the same theme, in what account was the money placed? Does anyone know? Or is it enough to convict on guesswork? On theft – was there an intention to deprive the Transport Board permanently? What’s the evidence that there was?”
    Perhaps you can enlighten the “barrack room lawyers” so they won’t have to continue “shadow boxing.”

    The jackasses and incompetent politicians that make up the AC consortium, are reacting angrily only because one of their own, by his actions, has demonstrated he is a shameless man.

    Like

  • david now i know for sure you are not a lawyer with that dribble and asinine response,, how could you possibly come to such a conclusion is way beyond intelligent thought,it would be better if u stayed out of the fray and let the blp malcontents draw the blood,

    Like

  • you guys are so ridiculous that it boders on maniacial . LM marshall evedience shows and points directly to mismanagement of funds and not accounted for lost or stolen as was regulated to her responsibility,

    Mr, Carrington; evedience not provided as to how and where the funds are and nothing of actual evedience to bolster or show cause or proof that under his management the funds were lost or stolen .

    Like

  • Bajan in NY January 12, 2015 at 7:01 PM #

    @ T J January 12, 2015 at 4:01 PM #

    Kerry Symmonds is an elected member of parliament, so why are you stating he is a senator?
    ………………………………………………………………….
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Members_of_the_Senate_of_Barbados

    Like

  • @ ac January 12, 2015 at 9:32 PM #

    “you guys are so ridiculous that it boders [BORDERS] on maniacial [MANIACAL] . LM marshall evedience [EVIDENCE] shows and points directly to mismanagement of funds and not accounted for lost or stolen as was regulated to her responsibility”

    [if this is the case, did the Transport Board reported the matter to the police? was she charged for theft?

    “Mr, Carrington; evedience [EVIDENCE] not provided as to how and where the funds are and nothing of actual evedience [EVIDENCE] to bolster or show cause or proof that under his management the funds were lost or stolen.”

    First things first learn to spell and articulate your points in a coherent manner.

    Justice Cornelius was satisfied with the evidence presented to the court and ruled in favour of the plaintiff. In other words, the court held that Carrington with-held Griffiths’ $208,900.

    So, don’t care wuh you come wid, the fact remains that Michael Carrington with-held his client’s money, the man put he in court, and the court ruled he got to pay um back. Wuh ‘bout dah you doan understand?

    Like

  • DeeWord

    “Surely agreement can be reached by reasonable men”

    Of course – but find me two.

    Like

  • look nuff flimsy long talk to divert avert the obvious conclusion and recommendations by the judge, exclusive of theft now deal with that, LM obvious mismanagement of public funds which up to present she has not accounted for is not the answer no matter how many twist and turns are made

    Like

  • @ Colonel Buggy January 12, 2015 at 9:49 PM #

    The list in the link provided is outdated, since Symmonds and Bradshaw are now elected members of parliament and are no longer senators.

    Like

  • Don’t care wuh you come wid, the FACT remains that Michael Carrington with-held his client’s money, the man put he in court, and the court ruled that he got to pay um back. Wuh ‘bout dah you doan understand?

    Like

  • well at least you are coming ever so close to the truth,,now if only you would continue to exercise proper judgement in your dispensation to Tell the truth Nothing else But the Truth, SO HELP YOU GOD!.

    Like

  • Artaxerexes said”Wuh ‘bout dah you doan understand?”

    Please be gentle with ac, the bias has the glasses clouded, so it takes a little time to get through.

    Maybe you could talk to cement instead, that might have a better chance of getting through.

    Like

  • Miranda said ”would like someone to explain to me exactly what is Suckoo’s purpose in Cabinet. I can never make any sense of what she says in her breathless tones ”

    Look, leff Suckoo. If I was de PM and had to look at the likes of Sinckler, Lashley, Jones, Estwick across the table, I would have to be able to rest my eyes elsewhere.

    So, leff Suckoo where she is, at least she has a redeeming quality.

    Like

  • Hmmmmm…………. truth, proper judgement and God in the same sentence? Wow, had the lawyers in the consortium given Michael Carrington this advice, he would have avoided the predicament in which he now finds himself.

    The TRUTH, as revealed by Griffiths’ affidavit, indicates that despite repeated demands from him and his current lawyers, Carrington FAILED OR REFUSED TO RENDER a TRUE and FULL account of the sums belonging to him [Griffiths].

    If Carrington had “told the TRUTH Nothing else But the TRUTH, SO HELP HIM GOD”, he would have responded to his client’s request for settlement and would have also been able to render a TRUE and FULL ACCOUNT of his client’s money, so as to avoid been sued.

    If he had “exercised proper judgement”, he would have paid his client the outstanding balance of $208,900 and not commit the unethical act of with-holding the money for a period of over 2 years.

    If an individual had received money on my behalf and after a period of over 2 years, they refused to respond to my requests for settlement and cannot give a true and full account of the money, surely it would lead any reasonable person [not the ACs] to believe they misappropriated my funds for their personal use.

    Perhaps, from this juncture, Carrington should “continue to exercise proper judgement” and resign as Speaker of the House of Assembly.

    Like

  • Crusoe January 13, 2015 at 5:39 AM #

    “Please be gentle with ac, the bias has the glasses clouded, so it takes a little time to get through. Maybe you could talk to cement instead, that might have a better chance of getting through.”

    Yes, I agree, their unwavering bias for the DLP has clouded their glasses. I’m aware that maybe I should leave those idiots alone, but sometimes it’s difficult for me in resisting exposing their stupidity.
    The more they are challenged, the more their contributions become the ramblings of incoherent thought, thereby indicating a significant lack of in-depth knowledge of the subject matter. Yet, they feel it necessary to comment on EVERY issue presented to BU for discussion.

    Rather than engaging in intelligent dialog, they prefer to insult or cuss anyone who chooses not to support the views held or policies undertaken by the DLP.

    As demonstrated by the nonsense the consortium spew on BU in defense of the DLP, it does not surprise me that they see absolutely nothing wrong in Carrington with-holding his client’s $208,900 for over two years, during which time he ignored the client’s request for settlement, and has been unable to give a “true and full account of the money”, even after the client reported him to the Bar Association. It reached a stage where Carrington had to be sued and the court ordering him to repay the money within 28 days.

    What would be an interesting development is the course of action taken by Griffiths, if Carrington fails to honour the court’s request within the stipulated time period.

    Like

  • Why don,t u just give up and”save face”truthfully by admitting that you have failed miserably in your efforts on proving that Carrington stole his clients money.confession is a vital source of restoration.

    Like

  • Is this the same Government that touted transparency, the same Government that the PM was referred as being honest, is this the same government that claimed to be for the people????Is this the same government that has put laws in place to protect disabled citizens?

    NEVER in the history of Barbados has any member of Parliament brought the oldest parliament in the western hemisphere into such disrepute. Has this crop of leader no conscience? No pride? How can anyone with money want to invest in this country? This is another self inflicted gunshot and downgrade.

    Barbados I weep for you!

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Artaxerxes January 13, 2015 at 7:56 AM
    “What would be an interesting development is the course of action taken by Griffiths, if Carrington fails to honour the court’s request within the stipulated time period..”

    He will be in contempt of Court by breaching a court order. Would he then have committed a criminal offence? (either Caswell, R R, Amused or any of our resident BU (in-house) legal luminaries can advise).
    In addition Mr. Griffith can initiate criminal fraud proceedings against him if he fails to adhere to the court order.
    Can Mr. Griffith force Mr. C into bankruptcy to recover his money through the sale of any assets held by Mr. C?

    Now the above scenarios should provide sufficient circumstance to trigger the opportunity to invoke the provisions of the Constitution and the rules governing the election and removal of the Speaker from office before the expiry of the current Parliamentary session 2013-2018.

    We shall soon see if the requirements / regulations regarding the declaration and reporting of all funds as stipulated under the Ant-Money Laundering legislation are adhered to.
    We shall see how law abiding the officers of the highest court can be.

    Like

  • @ millertheanunnaki

    Mr. Griffith can ask the High Court (Judge) to incarcerate Mr. C if the money is not repaid within the time period stipulated by the Court.

    If Mr. C is incarcerated it does not discharge him from paying the judgement, he would still have to pay Mr. Griffith.

    Like

  • It will be interesting to see what the opposition does in parliament today.

    Their leader is a lawyer.

    Like

  • I NEVER STATED IN ANY OF MY POST THAT CARRINGTON STOLE HIS CLIENT’S MONEY, so I don’t have to anything to prove.

    I stated he is dishonest individual who committed an unethical act by withholding his client’s funds, and by refusing to acknowledge Griffiths’ repeated requests for settlement or not being able to give a TRUE and FULL account of the funds, in my opinion is tantamount to stealing.

    However, I will admit, that based on the facts as outlined by the case, it is also my opinion Michael Carrington is a thief.

    Perhaps the consortium should also advise Carrington that “confession is a vital source of restoration” and he should, with immediate effect, admit he did Mr. Griffiths a disservice and as a “vital source of restoration”, not continue to deprive the gentleman of his money.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ millertheanunnaki January 13, 2015 at 9:02 AM #

    “He will be in contempt of Court by breaching a court order. Would he then have committed a criminal offence? (either Caswell, R R, Amused or any of our resident BU (in-house) legal luminaries can advise).
    In addition Mr. Griffith can initiate criminal fraud proceedings against him if he fails to adhere to the court order.”

    I’m happy you raised this issue, as I refrained from doing so thus far.

    Like

  • Independent with a sense of humor.

    “However, former Prime Minister Owen Arthur, who walked away from the Bees last year to sit in Parliament as an Independent, likened Mottley’s key shift to John McCain picking Sarah Palin as his running mate.”

    Like

  • Why do some like to engage in semantics and meaningless words? If he withheld paying the wheelchair bound Griffiths his money which was forced him to seek redress from the Courts, it the world many operate this is tantamount to theft. Others can dress it it up how they want. To some of you who continue to engage with other who want every blog to be about them you are just as bad.

    Liked by 2 people

  • Gabriel
    I can’t even find him online to cuss his thieving ass.

    Like

  • This matter is now being discussed in parliament before deputy speaker Mara Thompson. Carrington has recused himself.

    Like

  • Breaking news.
    Carrington got real problems no doubt about it but they are personal not connected to the DLP. Mia on the other hand received another hard cuff from Owen today followed by an uppercut from Kerrie the newly wed. With each statement from Owen and action by Mottley the likelihood of the BLP winning an election anytime soon recedes. Any comments from the yardfowls? Arttexes, miller, prodigal what say you all.
    You correctly hammered Carrington now your BLP house is ablaze again.

    Like

  • Pingback: Speaker of the House Michael Carrington Matter Referred to the Committee of Previledges | Barbados Underground

  • Pingback: Michael Carrington and Allison Helen Alexander-Lovell – Is the Law an Ass? | Barbados Underground

  • Pingback: Government Levels Assault Against the Social Partnership | Barbados Underground

  • Pingback: Was Michael Carrington VAT Registered When he Invoiced the BIDC 706 thousand dollars? | Barbados Underground