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

  • Lets see how effective our Westminster style of government is.
    Some time in 2012 Andrew Mitchell lost his position at the ruling Conservative Party’s senior Member of Parliament in the House of Commons, and put paid to his political, simply for Calling a police Constable a “Pleb”, (some one from the lower class) ,as he was leaving the Prime Minister’s office in Downing Street on his bicycle.
    Mr Carington should be be given the order, ” on your bike!”, by the Prime Minister. Anything less , reinforces what Plantation Deeds/ John Hanson has been saying all along. I am sure that this is not an isolated case,and while we are at it , investigations should be conducted to the manner in which he acquired that land at Jackson, which he is building some monstrosity on. Damn Load of Pluckers

    Like

  • question..on what grounds must carrington resign.

    the BLP noise makers seem to have an affinity with the actions of a kangroo court,,

    Like

  • Commonwealth newspapers,periodicals and magazines please copy.Commonweath Parliamentatry Association please circulate to members and register your objection to having a fraudster among your membership.Write to her Brittanic Majesty’s Commonwealth Heads of Government Conference management committee and object to this dizhonest slime bag of a lying swine being associated with anything to do with that August body and lastly if Elyut got the strength he should ‘Tek pen in hand and ask that the instruments of appointment to the silk,be stripped from this low lifer’….in the year of Our Lord 2014.
    By now Bajans have concluded,rightly so too,that divine intervention is upon these lying,stinking,bag blind hoes and pimps called the democratic Labour Party.wunna stinking fushers.

    Like

  • Prodigal Son

    You wrote: “I am not one to gloat over people’s misfortunes but this speaker should resign immediately”.

    What misfortune are you talking about? The misfortune of suffering the consequences of your actions?

    Also, you must realise that the political class in Barbados does not have a culture of doing the honourable thing, so I am not expecting any resignations any time soon.

    >

    Liked by 1 person

  • Alien;

    Thanks for reminding me of the genius of Joe Cocker and the other stars of Woodstock.

    Also for reminding me that Carrington and several others in this administration would not have been allowed to wreck our country without a little help from their friends.

    Like

  • Artaxerxes January 11, 2015 at 11:13 AM #

    The FACTS has indicated a DISHONEST lawyer with-holding a client’s funds for 2 years,

    /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Now ! that is a bold faced lie even in the face of the” judgement handed ” some can;t help BUT to be untruthful then have the tenacity to preach about honesty,

    THE NECESSITY to correct fowlshite splattered on BU is tempting but ac prefer to let those who advocate such to wallow in their ignorance

    Like

  • @ ac

    THEN ALL LOCAL LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE THE CRIMINAL COURTS FOR EXACT ALLEGATIONS SHOULD SUE FOR FALSE ARREST.

    Like

  • Here is what is reported in the Nation newspaper,”Carrington , a practicing attorney-at-law, has been ordered by the High Court to surrender nearly a quarter million dollars to John Griffiths, funds received and withheld over two years ago from the sale of a property as well as various bank deposits”.

    JAs must be allowed to bray, and loudly.

    Like

  • Look at it this way, JA ac………………….If Carrington was working in a corporation, he would have been fired and the police called in.

    JA ac, this is the answer to your question..”on what grounds must Carrington resign”…………..

    It is unethical for a lawyer to hold clients funds and dont paid them……..even after the client reported the matter to the Bar Association. He must have known that the man went to George Payne. Wasn’t that enough reason for him to settle the matter speedily?

    You consortium of acs had to lot to say when the BLP candidate was involved in a financial scandal some years ago? Remember how you railed against the corrupt BLP……………………do so dont like like so, nuh?

    Like

  • Can the Nation newspaper ask minister Donville Inniss for a comment on the matter? Let us see if he is his usual loquacious self?

    Like

  • No, no, no. This one matter that even the loquacious Donville will not touch.. Cat would have his tongue.

    The DLP must be so mad at the Nation…….telling me! All like now their henchmen must be scoping the Nation to find any thing to again refer the matter to the police.

    Like

  • @ Prodigal Son

    The DLP must be so mad at the Nation…….telling me! All like now their henchmen must be scoping the Nation to find any thing to again refer the matter to the police.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    SHOWS HOW CORRUPI THE SYSTEM IS.

    Like

  • CORRUPT

    Like

  • David January 11, 2015 at 4:37 PM #
    Here is what is reported in the Nation newspaper,”Carrington , a practicing attorney-at-law, has been ordered by the High Court to surrender nearly a quarter million dollars to John Griffiths, funds received and withheld over two years ago from the sale of a property as well as various bank deposits”.

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    so where is the criminality of theft in the judgement counselor as so “alleged “and indicated as reason for “a””resignation by the BU BLP propaganda .
    machine

    Like

  • @ ac January 11, 2015 at 5:51 PM # “so where is the criminality of theft in the judgement counselor as so “alleged “and indicated as reason for “a””resign”——

    Simply stated sir, the resignation is called for not because of any criminality as there has been no conviction in a court of law.

    The resignation is called for due to a lack of confidence in the integrity of Mr. Carrington.

    Based on the facts outlined the gentleman appears to have been at best unethical and to have acted outside the conventions of the profession to which he has sworn a pledge.

    All this based on the fact that the judge who heard the evidence ruled AGAINST him.

    Surely Mr. Ac it’s unacceptable for the Speaker of our House of Assembly – the legislative body that debates and enacts the laws of the land – to be anything less than above reproach.

    Or is it your view that ‘they all is a bunch of crooks in thay’ (like Hanson preaches) so Carrington can do as he like!!! Shame. shame on you.

    Like

  • prodigal u do have a way with words, but in a linguistic manner by way to implied or inform” speedily” does not mean unethical,in the court of law,, what matters are the facts to support or convict the parties with fair and equal Justice which renders guilt or innocent .

    now the above brings me to an area where anthony has been trying to overlapped his attention to highlight or prove the propensity of fraud by mr, carrington,, one can bend the rules slightly if the evidence presented in court supported that an intentional act was done by mr, carrington which borders on unethical practices with intent to fraud, and so far no such evedience is put before the public domain for examination,
    the judges ruling as “is” have steered clear of such reasoning although slightly teetering or signaling on bad judgement and a possibility of mr,carrington/s misrepresentation of his client
    however it still will be a hard judgement “call “to imply with certainty that mr,carrington committed fraud,
    my hands at this juncture are folded,

    Like

  • I am not quite sure if Carrington is one of the Medes or a Persian, but one thing for sure is that there is lax enforcement of the laws when it comes to people like him. If a poor boy stole a piece of cheese from a supermarket, he would have been dragged before the criminal courts.

    >

    Like

  • Here is what the relevant section of the Constitution states:

    Like

  • David

    There is no need for any constitution. Our point of departure needs to be, that these people are guilty of something, and should be in jail, until innocence can be proven. LOL

    Like

  • @Pacha

    This matter has gone viral, Barbadians are aware and discussing. We will have to wait how it translates. What is for sure, the DLP government cannot lay claim to having clean hands when it comes to managing public finances, and the integrity of member of the Cabinet. They are ALL tainted by this matter.

    Like

  • Larceny. The unauthorized taking and removal of the Personal Property of another by an individual who intends to permanently deprive the owner of it; a crime against …

    I am certainly not a legal man. However our Speaker of the House Michael Carrington QC does appear to have placed himself in an unfortunate position.

    I wonder if our justice system will be allowed to operate unimpeded.

    Like

  • Seriously are there any honest lawyers in Bim?
    They just cant leave their clients money alone. Then they arrogantly walk around as the old people say as if they make themselves. Bah humbug lawyers and thieving go and in hand.

    Like

  • We need to keep the transaction between Richard Byer and the Caves on the radar. While not charged/convicted of a crime the BU court regards this as theft from taxpayers by all involved.

    Like

  • David…your reliance on the brief Nation report will come back to haunt you.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Caswell Franklyn January 11, 2015 at 6:25 PM

    Caswell, do you know if the judgement handed down by the judge stipulates a timeframe within which the money must be paid over to Mr. Griffith?
    It would be interesting to see if Mr. C breaks such a court order.

    As far as the rules and regulations governing the management of client funds the money should be escrowed in a client’s account and should be ready for disbursement in a timely manner right after the completion of the contract (minus any reasonable legal fees and incidental costs).

    We shall see if Mr. C for Crook has misappropriated his client’s money should that escrow account be found to be technically empty after the relevant book-keeping examination has taken place.

    Like

  • Miller

    I heard about this on Friday, and I have no more information than what is published in the Sunday Sun.

    >

    Like

  • @ David

    We need to keep the transaction between Richard Byer and the Caves on the radar. While not charged/convicted of a crime the BU court regards this as theft from taxpayers by all involved.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Agree 100%

    Like

  • David

    It would appear that these Dems were out in the wilderness for too long (14 years) and have to catch up. I know of one of these Dem lawyers who Galloped off with $750,000 of his client’s money and suffered no adverse consequences when he got caught. As a matter of fact, his friends made sure that he got legal work from the government so that he could overcharge which allowed him to quietly repay the client. Before anyone gets mistaken, I am not speaking about Byer.

    >

    Like

  • The matter was criminal in nature but justice was served in civil. That is the step most people take as many don’t know they can lay complaint with the Police fraud unit .

    Like

  • One is compelled to ask the question, where is Leroy Lynch ?

    Like

  • Effective midnight, January 11, the retail price of gasoline will be adjusted from $3.25 per litre to $2.83 per litre, a saving of 42 cents. – See more at: http://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/61948/drop-fuel-prices#sthash.hb9Bzjg2.dpuf

    Like

  • @ Ross (who told David)

    …your reliance on the brief Nation report will come back to haunt you.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Look who is talking….

    …on what did you rely to accuse others of threats about “shooting at dawn”….? @robert ross January 11, 2015 at 1:30 PM

    Your vivid imagination?

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    That’s good news but no doubt they will find another way of taxing us.

    Like

  • When someone in authority and position takes advantage of another and a disabled person to boot, they should be made an example of. If the PM sees nothing wrong with the head cook at Clico I wonder how he is going to handle this? They say birds of a feather flock together!

    Like

  • The man is not a leper. He is our Member of Parliament, our Speaker and our friend.

    Like

  • Recently someone on BU was taken to task for suggesting that blacks should steal smarter, or words to that effect. The actions of the Speaker of the House of Assembly has validated that suggestion. Carry away, Thousands or Millions of Dollars in Barbados, and you are scot free,like Dandrade and the PM’s friend,Leroy Parris, and its business as usual. But take up a tin of sardines or a lil ham from Trimart or Massy, and your arse will be in Dodds in double quick time. There was a time when well dressed individuals used to ply their trade in Broad and Swan Streets as Three-Card-Brag Men, today even more elegantly dressed, they can be found in James Street and Palmetto Streets.

    Like

  • I am sure he will be affirmed ’eminent’ for Froon too.

    Like

  • His Honour Michael Carrington,

    Just need to give his side of the story. Ideally he should have done that in Coyrt

    Like

  • AUGUST Chamber? when supposedly trusted people like the Speaker and some of his colleagues in parliament , go about behaving in such an underhand manner, we know then that our House of Parliament, has reached its DECEMBER.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Fractured BLP January 11, 2015 at 11:38 PM

    He is not too late to do just that.
    Come Tuesday 13th he could show what an esteem and honourable man he is by announcing in the highest court of the land his intention to:

    (1). Immediately write a cheque for the money due to the disabled client along with all court costs and;
    (2). tender his resignation as Speaker in true Westminster fashion as a fitting tribute and a mark of respect of Parliament and its 375 years of tradition.

    Now that would show that you guys are not really a bunch of lying thieving disrespectful incompetent wild boys in a “poor-rakey” parliament that have caused Barbados to fall from top dog to the laughing stock of the Caribbean.

    Bunch of black bloody liars and monkey crooks dressed up in European suits.
    White people really laughing at ‘wunna’, according to Chalkie.

    Like

  • Fractured BLP January 11, 2015 at 11:38 PM # wrote ”His Honour Michael Carrington, Just need to give his side of the story. Ideally he should have done that in Court”

    Cuh dear, yes poor fellow, likely his lawyer may have incorrectly told him not to say a word in Court and not to tell his side of the story to the judge….

    😉

    Like

  • Speaker of the House of Assembly Michael Carrington has suggested the need for a review of the island’s legal system.

    Carrington, an attorney-at-law, made the call in light of a recent case in which a man who was granted bail for murder ended up facing the court on another murder charge.

    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/2014/09/17/carrington-condemns-court-backlogs/

    Like

  • Why would Carrington not want to speculate what the problems are causing the backlog? He is a QC and court officer isn’t he? We really making sort at Barbadians.

    Like

  • Bush Tea

    To answer your question….YOU!

    Like

  • I should have said, Bush Tea, in your EXCRETA post of 11.10am on 11th.

    Like

  • No comment, but stay tuned.

    Like

  • @ Ross
    I should have said, Bush Tea, in your EXCRETA post of 11.10am on 11th.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    What you SHOULD do Ross, is to learn to read and to THINK …..and not make ASSumptions.
    Shiite man….. mean ALL lawyers are stupid?

    Like

  • @ Anthony January 11, 2015 at 5:13 PM #

    “The DLP must be so mad at the Nation…….telling me! All like now their henchmen must be scoping the Nation to find any thing to again refer the matter to the police.”

    Expect a smear campaign article from “Douglas”, similar to the one he unleashed on Lisa Marshall.

    Like

  • Don’t you all think that if Carrington had the money he would have repaid the man before now to avoid being publicly exposed and to have a judgement registered against him? It is clear that he does not have it. In my mind, that makes it a criminal matter…fraud. The duty of the police is to refer the matter to the DPP, whether the victim makes a report to them or not.

    Like

  • Agreed with Inkwell.

    Also interesting that, given the potential for this issue to damage the DLP, one of his “honorable associates” did not see fit to loan him the money until he could find a more pliable victim to scam…

    One has to wonder how many other lawyers are living at a level that is only possible by loans from client funds…

    @ Ross
    Your Client accounts balancing or wuh? 🙂

    Like

  • We still can’t understand why it is still deemed necessary for people to have to trust Bajan lawyers. Not in 2015!

    This has to be government sanctioned organized crime. Everybody knows that ALL Bajan lawyers ‘commingle’ client funds, at least, and steal them outright in the main. And the lofty law firms are no less guilty, as charged.

    Would it not be easier to have an independent agency administering the transaction. An escrow agent. Surely, it must be an intolerable situation for citizens to have to continuously deal with this conflict of interest. Persons being both lawyers being escrow agents.

    This is something the Bar Association should be happy to see set up. It may serve to protect their ‘reputation’. Unless they are part of the scheme and like it so.

    Last time we had to buy a property and in order to avoid this conflict we paid Seller more 10% in exchange for the title documents. Of course, this could be a dangerous thing but we’ll rather take our changes than expose ourselves to lawyer skulduggery.

    Like

  • The average Bajan maybe surprised at the ‘who is who’ lawyers in Barbados, many occupying the highest court in the land, who have done and are doing similarly to Carrington.

    Like

  • Recall on August 29, 2014, DLP stooge, “Douglas”, posted an article on BU entitled “Lisa Marshall – Retrenched Worker from the Transport Board”, in which he sought to tarnish the reputation of Ms. Marshall in response to her using the forum of “Brass Tacks” to ask for her legally due severance payment.

    Douglas wrote: “A lean clean and fully operational Transport Board need not be burdened with the likes of the Lisa Marshall types, rid the taxpayers of supporting uncouth thieves and criminals from the workforce.” And he also posted 5 memoranda from her personal file, some of which accused her of theft.
    Bear in mind, the accusations of theft were just that…. accusations, since she was not terminated nor did the Transport Board call the police or took her before the law courts.

    We must also remember the usual DLP sympathizers were on BU calling Lisa a thief, with the AC consortium leading the charge of tarnishing the lady’s character.
    Against the background of not being charged for a criminal offence and in the absence of any evidence which would suggest the funds were stolen or not, but relying ONLY on a memorandum which asked Lisa to account for $403,the Legion of ACs were ADAMANT that Lisa was a thief.

    Interestingly, the below contribution was posted to BU by one of the demons, in response to the Douglas:

    “ac August 30, 2014 at 2:08 PM #: who said the law is an ass..WE HAVE MINISTER WHO ARE LAW BREAKERS AND EMPLOYEES RUNNING BUCK SHOTOVER THE SYSTEM AND THE LAW SAYS THOSE KIND OF ILLEGALTIES THAT GOES AGAINST OF WHAT IS RIGHT SHOULD BE KEPT SECRETLY UNDER COVER..THE LAWS IS AN ASS..PROTECTING EVIL AND VILLIFYING THOSE WHO ASK WHY.”

    I hope BU notices how contradictory and hypocritical the Legion of ACs are, especially where, in this scenario with Carrington, they are seeking to vindicate him, despite the fact Carrington’s former client successfully sued the dishonest lawyer for withholding his [client’s] funds for 2 years.

    Like

  • The below are some of the contributions posted by the Legion of demons in response to Douglas’ article on Lisa Marshall.
    Remember, Lisa was not charged by the police for theft, there was no court case where she was found guilty of theft and was incarcerated or asked to repay the alleged stolen funds.

    “ac August 30, 2014 at 11:02 AM #
    barbados has morphed into a nation of beggars.it seems as if no matter who is in charge from the smallest to the biggest everyone feels entitled.”

    “ac August 31, 2014 at 8:44 AM #
    are u blp yardfowls really angry that the files where exposed, if so ,this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black,cause the blp operatives have never by pass an opportunity to release sensitive govt documents in the public domain when the opportunity arise,,,,”

    “ac September 1, 2014 at 2:03 PM #
    a thief demanding her fair share,,,,enough to make dog stomach sick,,but the BLP yardfowls seem to be O,k, with that not a picking teet about this criminality,,,,”

    “ac September 1, 2014 at 10:29 PM #
    i got some dirt to throw pun wunna low life belly aching scalliwags who believe that employees thieving taxpayers money should not be exposed,,,what nerve,,,,,”

    In this scenario, there was an actual court case, which meant dishonest Carrington committed some sort of malpractice by keeping his client’s funds, and the client successfully sued Carrington.

    Now the “chickens have come home to roost”, all of a sudden the demons are experts in jurisprudence, seeking to inform BU about the philosophy and theory of law.

    Like

  • Question ..in what way /s has ac defended or supported or condone mr.carrington.it seems that ac/s comments relied heavily on the judge/s judgement rightly refraining from assumptions

    signed AC consortium

    Like

  • @Pachamama January 12, 2015 at 8:59 AM #

    Pach your post makes real sense and Barry Gale and the rest of fancy attorneys running the bar association should take note. How many more lawyers are to be sent jail. Is Cadogan, Leroy Lynch the Bethell boy still in prison.? We know Errol Niles is out and practicing again. The high living lawyers have to take stock and place their profession on a serious footing where the public can trust tem.

    Right now not a cent of mine going to a lawyer. I would defend myself first. Its of interest that George Payne company blew the whistle on Carrington didn’t another lawyer Hinckson accuse Payne of big time skullduggery. What a sordid group and hundreds more qualify each year. To do what? Take the Carrington route?

    Don’t talk about Richard Byer his situation with Harrisons Cave is beyond scandalous. That should be referred to the DPP to be made a criminal matter.

    Like

  • Well put, Artaxerxes @ January 12, 2015 at 9:37 AM and January 12, 2015 at 9:20 AM.

    I am so impressed that you always take the time to show up the hypocrisy of the legion of ac’s.

    We all know that the dems have no shame and that their party is paramount over anybody and anything.

    Does the ac’s not notice that no one else is coming to Carrington’s defense. Had the dems not gone after the Nation so brutally since 2008, maybe, just maybe, they could have made an appeal to keep this out of the main stream media…….by the way, since I do not buy the Advocate, was there any mention of this there?

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Artaxerxes January 12, 2015 at 9:37 AM
    “Now the “chickens have come home to roost”, all of a sudden the demons are experts in jurisprudence, seeking to inform BU about the philosophy and theory of law.”

    “The palest ink is better than the best memory”.- Chinese proverb.

    Thanks, Artaxerxes, for those reminders of double standards and hypocrisy. A similar propaganda war with ammunition stored in a tinderbox of jurisprudence was waged by the legal firm of Ac & Partners to justify the actions of the dead King David and Leroy Greenverbs swindling of the CLICO policyholders.

    Maybe Mr. Crook can call on his good friend the Primus into Parris to bail him out of the financial quagmire he has found himself.
    Would he be declared a bankrupt in this corrupt Barbados?

    Like

  • I am hearing the moderator Ellis on VOB saying he will not be having discussion on the Carrington issue “because it’s before the court”.I posit the view that since there has been no appeal of the judgement,the matter is no longer before the court at this time.To deny public discussion on the issue informs Ellis’s assuming the role of public relations consultant and the sooner VOB sees this threat to democracy the better for Barbados.The court has delivered a judgement and it is in the public domain.What piffle is Ellis talking about.

    Like

  • Today’s Trinidad Express carry a story on Clico in which Lawrence Maraj is stating Clico has 17 billion in cash and the Bissessar cabal is denying payment of Clico policy holders 500 million dollars in policy holders funds.He also stated that the Bissessar govt is dragging its feet with the appeal to the Privy Council,such that the hearing is not going to be heard in March but now in July/August this year.
    When will we hear what is the status of the Bajan Clico policyholders .

    Like

  • The deed done by Carrington is tantamount to malpractice, whereby the lawyer failed to use the ordinary skill and care that would be used by other lawyers in handling a similar problem or case under similar circumstances. Stealing a client’s money is malpractice, because the lawyer has a duty to use a client’s funds only for their case. The client may also consider suing the lawyer for malpractice in order to get the money back.

    To win a malpractice case against an attorney, the client must prove four basic things:

    • duty — that the attorney owed you a duty to act properly
    • breach — that the attorney breached the duty: he/she was negligent, made a mistake, or did not do what they agreed to do
    • causation — that this conduct hurt you financially, and
    • damages — that you suffered financial losses as a result.

    Griffiths affidavit clearly stated “Despite repeated demands from me and my current attorney-at-low, as of the date of commencement of these proceedings, the defendant had FAILED and or REFUSED TO RENDER A TRUE AND FULL ACCOUNT OF THE SUMS belonging to him which were received by him (Carrington) as my attorney-at-law.”

    The judged ruled in favour of the plaintiff, in that she ordered Carrington to render an account of ALL sums belonging to the particular estate within 28 days. Carrington “was also ordered to pay interest at the rate per annum from May 13 until the entire sum is paid, and legal costs of over $7,700 incurred by Griffiths.”

    Any sensible person reading the above don’t have to “assume” anything. It clear that Griffiths successfully sued Carrington for withholding and not giving a true and full account of his money.
    It’s not a case where Carrington FORGOT to give the man his $208,900, he with-held it for over 2 years…….. is that not the same as stealing?

    Carrington’s behavior was unethical and he is a THIEF………… plain and simple. If it were another lawyer, I would hold the same opinion.

    Like

  • @ Artaxerxes

    Carrington’s behavior was unethical and he is a THIEF………… plain and simple. If it were another lawyer, I would hold the same opinion.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You hit the nail on the HEAD.

    Like

  • Prodigal Son January 12, 2015 at 10:01 AM #

    “…….by the way, since I do not buy the Advocate, was there any mention of this there?”

    Prodigal, I can’t answer that question, because I don’t buy the Advocate either, however, I would read it, if one is given to me free of cost [a privilege which I’m seldom privy to].

    But you can be sure there won’t be an article in the Advovate on this matter, and that the resident DLP lackey columnist, Guyson Mayers won’t be make mention of it in any of his articles “A Guy’s View” either.

    I wonder what “NationBLPnewspaper” thoughts about the Nation are at this time. He is always complaining that the Nation gives Mia Mottley and the BLP front or back page status.

    He can’t complain now, the Nation gave Michael Carrington [a DLP] back page exposure, since he has the entire page 36A of the Sunday Sun all for himself.

    Like

  • @Gabriel

    This is when social media becomes relevant and the traditional media lags. We cannot depend on traditional media to drive necessary change.

    Like

  • Apart from the insurance companies abusing and disrespecting the court system while simultaneously refusing to pay legitimate claims to injured claimants, which is bad enough, this is another clear example of how the judiciary is being misused and abused by the political class of idiots in the DLP/BLP governments with utter contempt, disdain and disrespect being displayed by politicians, lawyers, doctors, executives and business people, they believe themselves to be invincible and untouchable.

    Kudos to Justice Cornelius for doing her job and showing that the judiciary is not completely and irretrievably corrupt.

    Michael Carrington should be disbarred from practicing law for stealing this estate from an elderly, disabled client, that is what lawyers in Barbados have been doing for decades, stealing from the dead, dying, young, old, practicing as both defense and plaintiff’s attorneys and selling out their clients. Some lawyers actually act as attorney for the plaintiff as well as the defense. Lie to and mislead their clients who are not familiar with the law.

    Michael Carrington should be fired as speaker of the house of parliamentary vipers for stealing from a client and then adding insult to injury by dragging this elderly man through the court system for many years, wasting the court’s time and taxpayer’s money in the hopes that the client would die and the case would die right along with him. If memory serves me correctly, I believe Carrington himself nearly died TWICE during the course of that case. The old adage “when digging a grave for someone, always dig two” comes to mind and certainly applies right there.

    Michael Carrington a minister in the DLP Fruendel Stuart government should be fired forthwith (not allowed to resign) for being a lowlife thief while pretending to be an upstanding politician, lawyer and minister misleading the taxpayers/voters.

    If PM Stuart does not fire Carrington, everyone will have proof beyond a doubt that Stuart is just as corrupt and guilty as his ministers and executive friends he intends to protect and who commit crimes and then maliciously create legislation to frighten the citizens into silence by threats of arrest in an effort to cover up the minister’s crimes and shady indiscretions when people discuss them on social media. That is a direct violation of freedom of speech.

    Michael Carrington should be in prison and made to jump out of his ass in fright.

    I am sure the folks on social media are feeling some sense of vindication right about now.

    Like

  • @ ac January 11, 2015 at 4:24 PM #

    “Artaxerxes January 11, 2015 at 11:13 AM #: The FACTS has indicated a DISHONEST lawyer with-holding a client’s funds for 2 years….”
    “Now ! that is a bold faced lie even in the face of the” judgement handed ” some can;t help BUT to be untruthful then have the tenacity to preach about honesty,
    THE NECESSITY to correct fowlshite splattered on BU is tempting but ac prefer to let those who advocate such to wallow in their ignorance…”

    The judged ruled in favour of the plaintiff, in that she ordered Carrington to render an account of ALL sums belonging to the particular estate within 28 days. Carrington “was also ordered to pay interest at the rate per annum from May 13 until the entire sum is paid, and legal costs of over $7,700 incurred by Griffiths.”

    Tell me “bald pooched cat”, Carrington LOST THE CASE, which meant the judge DID NOT RULE IN HIS FAVOUR. As the facts were presented, Justice Cornelius found that Carrington with-held his client’s $208,900 for over 2 years, hence her ordering him to repay the money.

    Now tell me where is the “bold faced lie” in my statement? Perhaps you have been “wallowing in your ignorance” [about everything] for far too long.

    Essentially, the FACT is Carrington’s actions were UNETHICAL and by those actions he has proven to be a DISHONEST INDIVIDUAL. And this is the BOLDFACED TRUTH….. like it or lump it!!!!!!!

    Like

  • @WW
    Tell me how U really feel nuh!

    SWEEEET fa days!

    BIM badly neeeeeeds a top notch Benevolent Dictator to straighten this shyte out and bust these eggheads!

    NOTHING will change with BS talk, too many benefitting from crumbs falling off certain tables! Hanggers on, political stooges abound!

    Like

  • Moneybrain…..lol…I know you feel me…lol

    Wait until I out what really happens in the back office at CGI insurance company.. I hope Justice Gibson understands the level of corruption he now has to eradicate.

    Like

  • AC…..i don’t have the time, if it was available to me, I would really take a turn in your ass, you corrupt sliver of slime.

    Like

  • Using ac,s response to LM illegalties as a directive to or exemplify Theft or Fraud by mr.carrington is a whimsical defense,and as shown by the judge,s actions that mr.carrington actions were not an attempt to defraud his client and no conviction was recommended for such a charge
    Furthermore any speculation or suggestion to the contrary leaves one vulnerable to civil action a concern of reality that “intelligent”person should take seriously

    Like

  • David
    This matter with Michael Carrington is sub-judicae in that the Judgement requires Mr. Carrington to submit/render a financial statement and until he does so, anyone commenting on the merits or de-merits of the Judgement and/or the case itself, runs the possibility of being in contempt of court.

    This is a fact. I am not for or against Mr. Carrington but we have to be careful when matters are still before the Courts for final determination(s).

    Like

  • Don’t let political yardfowls cause the Courts (which has wide and far reaching powers) cause BU be on the wrong side giving ‘them’ the opportunity to do what ‘they’ have always wanted………..to shut down the site.

    Like

  • @Fuller

    Thanks for your caution but we are commenting on the decision not any financial determination.

    Like

  • @ ac January 12, 2015 at 11:30 AM #

    “Using ac,s response to LM illegalties as a directive to or exemplify Theft or Fraud by mr.carrington is a whimsical defense,and as shown by the judge,s actions that mr.carrington actions were not an attempt to defraud his client and no conviction was recommended for such a charge…..”

    “Jackass will jump and bray, let him bray, let him brayI say the Jackass will jump and bray, Lordy let him bray, let him bray, everybody!”: The Jackass Song – Harry Belafonte

    Judging from the above nonsense you spewed, this particular AC does not know what they are “talking about”.

    Firstly, the case between Carrington and his former client is a CIVIL LAW SUIT, [in this case, a private law issue between two persons], whereby Griffiths [plaintiff] filed a law suit in court against Carrington [defendant], to recover monetary damages, [i.e. as his claim he incurred a loss as a result of the defendant with-holding his $208,900 without being able to give any satisfactory explanation for this action].
    Justice Cornelius examined the evidence to decide whether, by a “preponderance of the evidence,” the defendant should be held legally responsible for the damages alleged by the plaintiff. By ordering Carrington to pay the $208,900, accrued interest and legal cost incurred by Griffiths, indicates she ruled in favour of the plaintiff.

    Secondly, Griffiths did not bring a CRIMINAL LAW SUIT against Carrington, whereby he charged that his former lawyer, by with-holding his [Griffiths] money, attempted to defraud him.
    Therefore, Justice Cornelius could not convict or make a recommendation “for such a charge”, since this was a PRIVATE LAW ISSUE [between Griffiths and Carrington] and NOT a criminal law suit.

    “A CRIMINAL LAWSUIT is any process in a court of law that seeks legal remedy for illegal actions committed against another party. The fundamental difference between criminal lawsuits and civil lawsuits is that with criminal suits, PUNISHMENT OR PUNITIVE MEASURES ARE SOUGHT AFTER, RATHER THAN JUST FINANCIAL REIMBURSEMENTS. The punishments in criminal law come in three forms; incarceration, fines, or the death sentence, depending on the gravity of the crime and jurisdiction.”

    As such your comments is “a whimsical defense, and as shown by” the above explanations and definitions.

    Perhaps it would be better if the consortium were to consult with each other before making any further attempts to comment on this issue.

    Liked by 1 person

  • OFF TOPIC!!!!!!!! This is what Barbados has come to. So as to be updated on our Government’s day to day affairs the leading radio station in the country, the most listened to voice in Barbados a Starcom Network Station, bends over backwards in its quest to seek out the type of information that at this time is most important to Barbadians. What came over is what has obviously become the staple of the current cabinet of Barbados. IDIOCY. Well into its second term of governance we are supposed to accept that all that has gone wrong in Barbados is everybody else’s fault except those that we pay handsomely to manage our affairs. Dennis Kellman just told all within earshot that not only does drowning men clutch at straw, but they are willing to blatantly LIE to cover their inept asses. God knows this. BARBADOS DESERVES BETTER.

    Like

  • @ Grace Fuller

    Those are the old, antiquated, rules. Nobody here can be coward by veiled threats.

    In this here Court of public opinion we declare ALL lawyers guilty, even by association, of commingling and stealing property belonging to others. Not paying interest as accrued.

    We will no longer wait on a court system which has long suborned legal criminality by lawyers!

    Like

  • David January 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM #…Thanks for your caution but we are commenting on the decision not any financial determination.—————

    I expect that you have gone down this path often enough that you well know the law re a matter being ‘sub judicae’. I was a bit amused when the commenter Gabriel called David Ellis’ remarks on the judicial restriction ‘piffle’.

    Ms. Fuller’s remarks sent me back to the ‘dictionary of things’, cause I was not so sure that your response was a solid defense to subvert a matter that is sub-judicae. ————-

    ” …, it is acceptable to publish material as part of a discussion of public affairs or as a contemporary report of the day’s legal proceedings.

    “Statutory contempt of court: Liability for statutory contempt of court is strict. This means that the publisher cannot escape liability by arguing that he had no intention of prejudicing on-going legal proceedings or that he did not know that the material was sub judice. The degree of prejudice which results from the publication is also irrelevant; it is sufficient that there was a risk that the proceedings would be substantially prejudiced.

    “However, a limited number of defences to statutory contempt are available to a publisher, namely that the material comprised a fair and accurate contemporary report or a discussion of public affairs, and, more significantly, that publication of the potentially prejudicial material was made innocently. This last defence applies only where the publisher did not know and had no reason to suspect that the proceedings which featured in the material were active.”

    But all moot I suspect. This should fall under “discussion of public affairs or as a contemporary report of the day’s legal proceedings”.

    The lawyers can pontificate with clarity.

    Like

  • To the Honorable Minister Longtalk……..Your performance on Down To Brasstacks today was nothing short of an embarrassment to anyone with just a modicum of common sense, not to mention those that gleaned anything from the efforts of EWB that today you still mention as one of this party’s achievements. Do us a favor and just GO AWAY.

    Like

  • We however should avoid giving them Star Chamber like social circumstances, for we may end up with another faux Magna Carta Libertatum. Or calls for such.

    We say go straight for the guillotine.

    Like

  • The good honest lawyers in Barbados should recommend a way to ensure that Client’s accounts are protected from abuse by dishonest Lawyers.

    It is ironic that you have to hire and pay an HONEST lawyer to get your own money back from a DISHONEST lawyer.

    Imagine what happens to a family if a member dies while he has money sitting in a client account.

    This Client account issue is one where the “good guys” can leave a legacy by changing the status quo. The president of the Bar association could lead.

    Like

  • Hants

    This is quite easy. Someone just needs to sue one of these lawyers for breach of trust. Funds received by a lawyer on behalf of his/her client are held in trust and the law is quite trite that the trustee of that trust cannot/should not benefit from that trust, namely, the trustee should not earn money (interest) on those trust funds or retain them for his/her personal use/benefit.

    Like

  • Also as fiduciary trustee the trustee has an obligation in law to set aside those monies (and notify the bank that those monies are trust funds) so that they are encumbered or risked by commingling with the trustee’s other business funds.

    Like

  • @ Grace Fuller

    There is no lawyer, in Barbados, that bring such an action. Why would they?

    Like

  • so that they are NOT encumbered or risked by commingling with the trustee’s other business funds. Sorry.

    Like

  • @Hants

    You sure Honest Lawyer is NOT an Oxymoron, especially in Bim these days?

    My cousin is a Lawyer here in TO and she works for a richass Professional Bajan who owns property here and loads in Bim. He has begged her to return to Bim as he could save so much $$$$$ and give her so much business among his friends/ associates—she just does not want to disrupt her family life here. When she charges him $3k he laughs and says that the same situation would be at least $15k in Bim.

    My cousin in Bim is also an honest professional Lawyer ( who you were at Kolij with), as best I can tell from my feedback and certainly believe, but what can he do when the system is broken? You require a ground swell to break the closing of ranks among the crooked Ls. ( I know a Kolij L who had to go out on his own to protect his reputation from the crooks he had in his office) Worked well as landed some large influential clients who said he would never have moved his business if he had stayed put!

    Like

  • The speaker should do the honourable thing and step aside and not wait to be asked. The old folks had a saying, ‘if you din went dey ya name couldn’t get call’. He is no longer Honourable in the eyes of the public, regardless. Who the hell can respect him now spouting orders from a Speaker’s chair. The other lawyers in his predicament are still allowed to practice even after being exposed. I don’t think he will be so lucky. He should be ashamed to show his face in that august chamber ever again and it wouldn’t surprise me if he skips town. He should never have been caught up in this scandal. Won’t be the first Speaker forced to run and hide. That is why I like U.S.justice. He would have been gone before the news hit the press. The other shoe will drop soon on further scandals. Stay tuned.

    Like

  • @artexeres
    firstly ac does not have to defend any comments made in regards to LM record. her record clearly speaks for itself wherby as an employee and held to public trust under her supervision monies were unaccounted.
    However the issue of carrington the source of your attacks seem however to be rooted in an ongoing tirade of retribution with a desire to convict carrington of theft contrary and totally in opposite to judges order or recommendation which now has become a blatant (although)unconvincinly effort on your part tocast a big net hoping to garner support branding mr.carrington as a Thief
    However what is evedient is your failure to incorporate your personnel tirades sufficiently as an attachment to the court ruling.
    In the meanwhile (short as it maybe)you might have gathered support among the few handful of followers here on BU .
    However in the Court of Justice and law you have failed miserably to convince and as of now nothing else matters
    Hav a nice day

    Like

  • The Honourable Minister of Housing embarrassed me and I am sure this nation today on brass tacks. I cannot believe that this is what Cabinet is made up of. The P.M. must cringe to think that his hands are virtually tied with the likes of this man. His constant references to blue peter shark is sickening. Mr. Minister, take a bow and step off – stage left. .It is times like these that I really miss David Thompson.

    Like

  • Miranda
    On the issue blue peter sharks, did the Hon Minister get around to mentioning his other favourite, Bill Hawk turtles?
    He cannot even get the name called correctly, its Hawks Bill turtles.

    Like

  • It must sting, or does it, when a CEO of a Sagicor mentions in public he plans to rap the knuckles of a minister by writing a letter to his ‘boss’. Barbados we weep for you!

    Like

  • David January 12, 2015 at 2:18 PM #

    It must sting, or does it, when a CEO of a Sagicor mentions in public he plans to rap the knuckles of a minister by writing a letter to his ‘boss’. Barbados we weep for you!
    …………………………………………………………………………………………
    And the list of Members of Parliament who should be downgraded goes on.
    (a) David Estwick,……….. Best Actor, 2014
    (b) Dennis Lowe …… ……Doctor Do-Little
    (c) Michael Carrington… Action Speaks louder than words.
    (d) Dennis Kellman……… Lord Haw Haw

    Like

  • That’s why my attorney is a Trinidadian. He was recommended to me by an honest, hardworking, compassionate, British- trained attorney who doesn’t drink at the Barbados Bar. He’s down- to- earth and can be reached by telephone. He works swiftly and is upfront about his fee expectations. So far, so good!

    Like

  • I find it very funny (not ha ha funny) when I hear a call for the exhaulted one to fire The Speaker, MoF, MoT, MoH or any other minister for poor performance. Would that not bring the government down, deny those hard working people of their pension, cut the travel privilege of the exhaulted one, disrupt the gravy train for so many and maybe save the once fatted calf which is now only a skeleton? Come on people, to do so would be to put Barbados first for the first time by this lot.

    What happened here is this band of (pick a title) were surprised that the sensible people of Barbados would have replaced OSA and team by an untried and untested team so once elected did not have a game plan. There was no expectancy that this aberration would recur hence certain skills had to be acquired quickly and a mad dash to see who could collect the most marbles quickest within term of office. When the results of the last election became clear in spite of the previous level of HIGH performance, you now had a very experienced band of (enter word of your choice) people again without a game plan and a lot of time on their hands. There’s an old saying ” If you don’t know wher you’re going, any road will take you there” hence the financial roads travelled.

    Like

  • Do the honorable thing? really? Honorable people don’t hold onto people money like this guy did. chuspe! People like him will only stop when somebody put a hard lash in one uh them for this crap. There is no fucking way that somebody can hold on to my money for that long without being very very afraid. Barbados is truly a nation of thieves, from the highest in the land to the lowest – thieving seems to a a national past-time.

    Like

  • @ ac January 12, 2015 at 1:56 PM #

    “I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn’t learn something from him.” Galileo Galilei

    It seems as though the coherent of the incoherent ACs has been commissioned to fight the consortium’s case on this issue.

    I’m not going to continue on any “back and forth” discussion with you any further. It is evident to all and sundry [with you being the exception] that you have FAILED miserably in trying to defend a lawyer who with-held a sum of money from his client, by mentioning he is NOT GUILTY of being dishonest.

    “firstly ac does not have to defend any comments made in regards to LM record. her record clearly speaks for itself wherby as an employee and held to public trust under her supervision monies were unaccounted.”

    Similarly, Carrington’s RECORD, as a lawyer, “clearly speaks for itself, whereby as a lawyer and held to his client’s trust under his supervision monies were unaccounted” for.
    Carrington breached that trust by with-holding Griffiths’ $208,900 for period of over 2 years, and when asked by the client [and subsequently his lawyer] to account for the funds, Carrington was unable to give a satisfactory explanation.
    Consequently, the former client had no choice but to sue the t’iefing lawyer so as to recover his money.

    “However what is evedient [EVIDENT] is your failure to incorporate your personnel tirades sufficiently as an attachment to the court ruling.”

    By explaining the difference between a CIVIL SUIT and a CRIMINAL SUIT, I succeeded in explaining the court ruling. Once again, I will re-state the definitions for your contemplation. The case brought against Carrington was NOT a CRIMINAL SUIT, and as such, he WAS NOT CHARGED WITH A CRIMINAL OFFENCE. Therefore, Justice Cornelius COULD NOT HAVE RECOMMENDED THE DISHONEST LAWYER TO BE INCARCERATED. Now tell me what about this you CANNOT understand?

    Do not blame me for your ignorance and failure to understand the law. However, I must commend you, in the face of adversity, for remaining loyal to the DLP and your obviously blind allegiance to a member of that party who has done his client wrong.

    This “January 12, 2015 at 1:56 PM” post by this particular AC was an eloquent piece of shiite………. and no matter how many “pretty statements” you use, it does not take from the fact that Carrington’s, by his actions, to wit, with-holding his client’s funds, is a SERIOUS breach of lawyer/client trust and indicates Carrington is a DISHONEST INDIVIDUAL.

    Maybe you should explain to BU why Carrington with-held Griffiths’ $208,900 for a period of over 2 years?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Just as Mia can ill-afford to get rid of Kherrie Symmonds from the Senate, the PM can ill-afford to outwardly fire Michael Carrington as speaker. He just does not have the wiggle room.

    Like

  • When U surround yourself with DOGS you likely to get up with FLEAS!

    Like

  • there is no denying that carrington did wrong, as has been pointed on at least occasions a civil suit was brought against him by one of his clients – in the newspaper report it is stated that ” Carrington did not contest the claim which was first lodged in the court mid-2014″. Surely the fact that he didn’t contest the action is proof of his wrong doing, QED.

    Like

  • @Adrian Hinds

    I must say I am very disappointed that no one has really placed a gun in one a these fools mouth as yet or beaten the crap outtta dem! Nothing works better than a very harsh wake up call!

    But then again these jokers instinctively know who to mess wid!

    Like

  • You can add Suckoo and Ronald Jones to the downgrade list. I 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 and Jones seems to be always ready for a brawl with his shameless self. Hey! Wait just downgrade the whole barrel of these useless politicians, bite the bullet and call elections. And while we are at it, throw in the clown from the Central Bank. All these folks seem to have an agenda to bring Barbados down to its lowest level, demean its people and stand by for civil unrest so they can ‘crack heads’.

    Like