Speaker of the House Michael Carrington Matter Referred to the Committee of Privileges

The matter of a recent judgement – Tales from the Courts–Justice Jacqueline Cornelius Makes Speaker of the House Michael Carrington PAY XXIV  directed at the Speaker of Parliament Michael Carrington was raised by member of parliament Santia Bradshaw. In a private member’s motion it was asked that Carrington be asked to explain himself to the House of Assembly known as the highest court of the land or to recuse himself until final ruling is ordered by the High Court. Deputy Speaker ruled that the matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges. BU believes until such time the Committee of Privileges hears the matter Deputy Speaker Mara Thompson will preside over the august body.

149 comments

  • BTW, I look forward to that published ‘Lawyers In the Cookie Jar’ list.

    And with that said let me give kudos to an attorney who I have dealt with through real estate matters and other issues and at no time did I feel disadvantaged, were any monies delayed or any other malfeasance.

    Over the years as many Bajan lawyers continued to let their integrity slip I would recommend the attorney to any and all who asked.

    There is justifiable gloom about many others of course, just as there are others with integrity left.

    Alas, being this attorney is very close to the political class I can’t ‘vouch-safe for ALL the integrity being intact.

    Like

  • Is’nt the attorney at law an officer of the court? Would the learned moderator of the Radio show Brass tacks be correct in announcing on air, that an attorney did legal work in “his private” capacity? Also, should a person after whom a school is named, where young, impressionable people attend” comment on this matter in a manner now interpreted by media to say, the other people did questionable stuff, so its okay for the present incumbent to remain in office?

    Like

  • Island Gal,

    I agree with you wholeheartedly. I just spoke to a gentlemen who walked away from $16000 he had paid to complete a transaction because he got frustrated by the inaction of the Fraud Squad. He had to hire another attorney and pay again. They can only do this because we continue to accept it. The register of crooked attorneys that BU is proposing would be a great start to discouraging this sort of behaviour. But that would only be a start. We need to finish the job and then move on to the crooked doctors. Have Bajans finally had enough? I wait with bated breath.

    In an earlier post during a senior moment I may have been waiting with ‘baited’ breath. My apologies for irritating those who know the difference and for misleading those who don’t.

    Like

  • Looking forward to the indiscriminate”jar’

    Like

  • I know of a case involving a man who received injuries as a result of being involved in an accident in Mapp Hill on November 12, 2002. He retained the services of attorney-at-law, Mr. Joseph H. Serrant, of N. Keith Simmons & Co., James Fort building, Hincks Street, Bridgetown, to act on his behalf. In 2009, it was agreed between the parties involved that the insurer, Insurance Corporation of Barbados [ICB], would pay him the sum of $12,173.78 ($14,000.00 less legal fees calculated at 12.5% plus value added tax [VAT]).

    After making enquires about his settlement, he was informed that two cheques were issued to the attorney, Serrant, one which represented the payment of $12,173.78 to him, and the other for payment of legal fees to Serrant.

    When contacted about the payment he received on the client’s behalf, Serrant admitted that he had made representation on behalf of the client so that the payments would be forwarded directly to him. The reason he gave for his action was that the 12.5% he received from the settlement was insufficient for his services and he was demanding a further payment of $6,000.00. He further informed the client that he would be withholding the cheque until he is paid the $6,000.00.

    After learning the client sought the assistance of the police, Serrant returned the cheque to ICB and sought the services of the court to place a “stop payment” on the cheque, under the grounds that the client owed him $6,000.00. He subsequently filed a writ of Settlement of 1225 of 2004, (Exhibit JH52) on October 26, 2010 in the Supreme Court of Judicature – Civil Jurisdiction, claiming the sum of $10,251.63 from ICB as bill of cost for legal business performed on the client’s behalf, so that the company would pay the amount from the accident claim directly to him.

    This guy wrote letters to the past and present presidents of the Bar Association, the Ombudsman, then and present Chief Justices, Sir David Simmons and Marston Gibson respectively, and received no favourable response. The few lawyer with whom he discussed the situation, said he had a good case, but none of them were willing to pursue the matter.

    It was unreasonable for Serrant to demand a further payment of $10,251.63 out of $12,173.78, leaving a balance of $1,922.15m when he suffered no pain. But what was more unreasonable is the fact, in the itemization of the services performed in his claim of the $10,251.63 Serrant listed a charge of $800 for telephone calls he made in relation to the case.

    This guy is poor and does not have the financial means to seek legal redress as was done by Griffiths, and had no choice to forfeit the money.

    And this man, Serrant, can be seen on the Bridge offering the “Watch Tower” and “Awake” to passersby.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Donna January 15, 2015 at 10:11 AM # … I wait with bated breath…In an earlier post during a senior moment I may have been waiting with ‘baited’ breath. ”

    So what’s wrong with ‘baited breath’. You were simply waiting completely ‘hooked’ at that moment of deep thought.

    Your senior moment, ‘Quickylism’, malaprop or whatever, sounds like a good hook, line and sinker to me whether your readers ” know the difference” or were baited along a breathless path.

    Sorry couldn’t resist.

    Like

  • Art……..thankfully, attorneys in Barbados are not allowed to touch the checks of personal injury claimants anymore unless it’s to hand it over, they have to take their 10 – 15% of the reward and shut up, however, plaintiff’s attorneys in personal injury lawsuits on the island, even the ones one work permits from other islands allowed to practice, are selling out their bajan clients to the defense and insurance companies, particularly if the claimant is not legally savvy. There is a congoline of dishonest, thieving lowlifes posing as attorneys in Barbados.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Dee Word January 15, 2015 at 8:04 AM #

    BTW, I look forward to that published ‘Lawyers In the Cookie Jar’ list………………….

    David,

    As a note of caution, I think you will have to be careful as and when this list is complied. There should be real evidence of the lawyer being caught with his hands in the cookie jar as I would not want you to be given false information which could put you and BU in trouble.

    Just saying!

    Liked by 1 person

  • Don’t expect anything to come of this storm in a tea cup. The goodly gentleman is in a position of strength. How, you may ask? Let me explain – I think you’ll agree with me that the money is not currently available to settle the claim or it would never have gone this far. If we agree on that then what options are available? All he has to do is to threaten to resign from Parliament and the money will appear from the private pockets of those who stand to benefit most from a continuation of this party in power. Think of those who will fall just short of their pension requirement, those who have or are due for contracts, those who have an inside lane to the gravy train, party consultants and those ministers who will fade into oblivion without gainful employment. His is a position of power. Even Mr Stoic will chip in as he will never ever get another well paying job like this where he has to do absolutely nothing for the money.

    Liked by 1 person

  • All he has to do is to threaten to resign from Parliament and the money will appear from the private pockets of those who stand to benefit most from a continuation of this party in power. Think of those who will fall just short of their pension requirement, those who have or are due for contracts, those who have an inside lane to the gravy train, party consultants and those ministers who will fade into oblivion without gainful employment.


    FA TRUTE Fearplay…..LOL, LOL….is this what it come to ? Man ya mekkin me laugh !!!!

    (MURDA) LOL…..dem brook? whuloss….wha D Fcku dey do wid D money?

    Like

  • @ FearPlay January 15, 2015 at 1:08 PM #

    Don’t expect anything to come of this storm in a tea cup. The goodly gentleman is in a position of strength. How, you may ask? ……………… All he has to do is to threaten to resign from Parliament and the money will appear from the private pockets of those who stand to benefit most from a continuation of this party in power. ……………………………………………………

    You are so right, I made this point under the other thread. Why did he not borrowed the money from the ones in the party who seem to be the wealthiest before it got to this?

    Reading the full interview in Barbados Today, this thing has been going on for 14 years……….long before he was in politics. With an annual income of $154,954.52 according to Caswell’s figures plus his legal practice, I am at a loss at how he allowed this to get this far.

    Naked greed!

    Like

  • According to today’s edition of Barbados Today, John Griffiths said the following:

    “[Carrington] was supposed to probate the will and what happened is he got all the assets from my aunt. My aunt had two properties and one was sold. I thought he was going to turn it over to me, but he never did. So at the moment, he has all the assets of my aunt’s properties,”

    Like

  • @ Artaxerxes

    “[Carrington] was supposed to probate the will and what happened is he got all the assets from my aunt. My aunt had two properties and one was sold. I thought he was going to turn it over to me, but he never did. So at the moment, he has all the assets of my aunt’s properties,”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    This ‘honourable’ gentleman has ongoing 14yrs of withholding someone’s money for one property sold, keeping another and is still walking around untouchable dealing with $ hundred thousands.

    Was he waiting for the old man at 78 years old just like his aunt to pass away and the matter die off, no pun intended.

    This is inexcusable and the FACT the Bar Association has not acted even though a complaint was submitted by the defendant.

    This is a travesty of justice.

    Liked by 1 person

  • If Griffiths dies the Executor of the Estate we assume would be positioned to pursue the matter. This makes the matter so ridiculous.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Prodigal Son January 15, 2015 at 1:45 PM
    “Why did he not borrowed the money from the ones in the party who seem to be the wealthiest before it got to this?”

    So who could be those friendly bankers to bail out that thieving rascal?
    Would the money come from Parris’s $9 million taken from the CLICO poor pensioners’ savings pot and looking for a home?
    What about Lashes stash from planting houses made by preconco and jada?
    Should we forget about the Lowedown’s family fortune in siblings’ dispute.

    One thing for sure is that from whichever source the money finds its way back into the client’s account the reporting requirements
    Under the Anti-money Laundering Act would be waived by the authorities as part of this massive perpetration of fraud, graft and corruption in high places.

    Like

  • @ miller

    Lord have mercy!

    Like

  • @ Anthony January 15, 2015 at 2:36 PM #

    Griffiths also mentioned that he is yet to receive a response from Carrington and plans to meet with his new lawyer, Khamaal A. Collymore, next week to find out if Carrington had honoured the court order. Judging from his other comments, it seems as though if Carrington does not conform to the court’s decision, Griffiths plans to seek a court order for him to seize the lawyer’s assets so as to guarantee settlement.

    And what is more ridiculous is the fact the DLP sympathizers on this blog have been trying in vain to defend Carrington’s action, by saying Justice Cornelius did not charge him with theft, so he is not guilty of any crime. This is indicative of the fact that they don’t know the difference between a “civil suit” and a “criminal suit”.

    Another DLP, Sir Frederick “Sleepy” Smith, was heard on this afternoon’s VOB’s 12:30pm news criticizing the BLP for questioning whether Carrington should oversee Tuesday’s parliamentary proceedings against the background of him with-holding $208,900 from Griffiths.

    What is ironic, is that the DLP consortium on BU and their parliamentary counterparts [including Michael Carrington] always refers to the BLP’s perceived financial infelicities, as well as their lack of accountability and creditability during their 14 years as the governing administration of Barbados.

    Yet, one of their own [Carrington] has been secretly perpetrating acts of financial impropriety over a similar 14 year period [Griffiths mentioned Carrington was handling the matter for almost 14 years], which has now caused similar questions to be asked about his own creditability and lack of accountability as a lawyer and as the speaker of the house.

    Like

  • David

    You wrote: “If Griffiths dies the Executor of the Estate we assume would be positioned to pursue the matter. This makes the matter so ridiculous.”

    You are assuming that the executor would have knowledge of property that the deceased would have been entitled to receive.

    >

    Like

  • Herein lies the twist with my previous post – whomsoever coughs up the money, be it LP, Jad Const., Will. Indust., or Pre Const., they will own this handsome hunk of manhood for the rest of his political life. Do you know what that means when a bill comes to the vote? A contract to be awarded? A decision to be made that might be detrimental to you and me but beneficial to the person/entity settling the debt? I say no more.

    Like

  • @Caswell

    Griffiths indicated the reason he moved the matter to the Court was because family/siblings were pushing for resolution.

    On Thursday, 15 January 2015, Barbados Underground wrote:

    >

    Like

  • @ Artaxerxes

    This guy ‘sleepy’ who I heard on the VOB news is comparing a libel case against a client misappropriation case as if to say that you can’t complain because of a former wrong by the other political party.

    The fact is that he does not address the matter and is finding an excuse along party lines.

    Now you understand why I have never voted in my life and have never believed that I needed any party or government to help me forge a way in life successfully.

    All of these ‘esteemed ladies and gentleman’ seem to use politics for skullduggery and to fleece the public of Barbados regardless of party affiliation.

    It has gone past a joke with so many people on the island suffering irregarless of what party they voted for in 2013.

    Like

  • Why would a 90 year old jurist feel the need to play the party card?

    On Thursday, 15 January 2015, Barbados Underground wrote:

    >

    Like

  • SENILITY

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    Like

  • @ David

    Why would a 90 year old jurist feel the need to play the party card?
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Unfortunately because of backyard politics and being a staunch diehard.

    It is evident these guys have never placed the country first but themselves, party colleagues and their own selfish motives.

    Like

  • If memory serves me well, Speaker Maxwell was the editor of the party paper, and when he was sued and lost the case regarding something that was published, the party didn’t rally around him. Speaker Carrington has to hope and pray that history doesn’t repeat itself.

    Like

  • I just heard that senile old man and had to take a break from what I was doing to post a response on BU.

    He should really go back to sleep. Carrington held Mr Griffiths lawful legal monies for 14 years………….how can that be compared to the Burton Hinds case? Burton Hinds was whatever you want to call him but his problem was as a result of being a newspaper man not a lawyer holding on to a man’s monies for 14 years.

    Sleepy is a real dem you know………..when the dead king was trying to win the government from back in 2007, Sleepy said ” give the dems a chance, if they dont perform, throw them out after one term.” You know that when the BLP brought that up, Sleepy denied he ever said that……………..they found the CBC tape and he was not heard from publicly until today!

    Sleepy go and sleep, are you condoning Carrington’s actions only because he is a dem? If it were a Bee, heavens help the man!

    I cant stand hypocrisy!

    Like

  • I read the Barbados Today article and really, it should render any rational person speechless.

    THIS is what we have come to?

    Alright guys, I am actually serious, a third party is looking viable come next election.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Focusing more on the overall implications than the specific alleged incident / circumstance, you do realize that this, depending on the actions hereof and the results of such actions, has the potential to cause an election?

    This will require a few events, including a critical aspect of which way the ‘independent’ would vote, but it is possible.

    Like

  • Prodigal
    Again we are on all fours.Hinds spent about 5 weeks on the “Ice” because he wrote about someone who was able to convince a court of law in Barbados that he was libelled.To hear Sleepy say that the BLP gave the Speakership to a criminal is giving the impression that Hinds was caught stealing an old man’s money.Far far from the truth.It was a clear case of the vagaries of his profession in the newspaper business.Guyana’s Kaieteur News column Dem Boys Say comes very close to what Hinds’ popular column “I am minding my business…’did back in the 50’s,exposing wrong doing in Barbados.Burton Hinds was ruthless and perhaps careless with the facts.Truth man Hinds was no criminal in our understanding of the word in Barbados.It’s akin to someone being jailed for speeding and being called a criminal because he was found guilty of breaching a traffic law that allowed for a fine/confine penalty.
    Sleepy has been a disappointment ever since he twice deserted his constituents who voted for him to represent their interest in Parliament and he rewarded their faith by twice resigning his seat and leaving Barbados.Ask him who called him a humbug!No wonder when he was lobbying hard for Governor General his DLP cohorts did not support his bid.Sleepy save your breath to cool your porridge man.Your views are taken with a teaspoon ‘o salt.You got the smelling salts handy?

    Like

  • Gabriel

    You should have mentioned that everyone in Barbados knew of Hinds conviction for libel and his subsequent imprisonment when his constituents voted for him. I am not aware that Carrington’s conduct was generally known so that his constituents could have made an inform decision to elect him. He should give his constituents an opportunity to vote for him knowing what they know now. He should resign his seat, not only the speakership, and run again if he still has the confidence of his constituents.

    >

    Liked by 1 person

  • Caswell,

    Do you know if there are more of these kinds of complaints floating out there that may soon come to light?

    Like

  • Where is R.Ross Esq on this topic? Somebody tell me they see he by Chefette, eating chicken… They musee coming for he next….
    Tip of the iceberg this. Putrid underbelly in Bajan society. If ya shine a light pun it, it ugly as sh&te.
    A 78 year old man in a wheelchair! Unbelievable!
    Kudos to BARP for asking the Speaker of the House of Assembly to make a statement.

    Like

  • Would it be correct to say Sleepy was an accessory to a criminal act and therefore just as guilty as the criminal perpetrator when he aided and abetted Peter Morgan in destroying public property at The Nita Barrow roundabout just outside Government House?Sleepy who are you to condemn anyone, you mixed up ole fella!

    Like

  • i refer this matter to the COMMITTEE of PRIVILEGES …

    If pigs had wings they would fly but they don.t

    CARRY ON SMARTLY DOOM AND GLOOMERS

    Like

  • You know how many MALE lawyers saw D inside of Dodds for misappropiation…some spend 1 week odders 3 weeks…..so as to set an example, that when ya a BROOK ASS(can’t pay) lawyer….is Glandairy (sorry Dodds) fa U…..so….But we watching and waiting….doan mind Sleepy talkin balls..

    Like

  • Hi folks,
    Michael Carrington owns Karibu restaurant on the west coast Mia Mottley, Dale Marshall and other BLPites like me patronise that place.
    Mia Mottley called last night and I pledged $10,000
    to help pay Mr. Carrington legal bill.

    I am a member of the Political Class.

    I love it!

    Like

  • In a previous related post David asked: “David January 15, 2015 at 4:14 PM # : Why would a 90 year old jurist feel the need to play the party card?”

    Caswell Franklyn replied: “Caswell Franklyn January 15, 2015 at 4:17 PM #: SENILITY”

    I recall the days when Sir Frederick Smith hosted a radio call-in-program on Fridays [I can’t remember the radio station], entitled “Lawyer on Call”, during which he offered legal advice to callers.

    It’s rather strange Sir Sleepy is taking a completely different stance on this matter with Carrington with-holding Griffiths’ funds and documents, especially taking into consideration he used that program to harshly criticize lawyers who took advantage of their clients by embezzling or with-holding their money or property, often suggesting these dishonest individuals should be incarcerated for their nefarious deeds.

    Is it safe to assume that Sir Frederick is a hypocrite?

    Like

  • Artaxerxes

    You wrote: “Is it safe to assume that Sir Frederick is a hypocrite?”

    It not safe to make that assumption. I don’t believe for one moment that he is a hypocrite. I do not want to be offensive to Sir Frederick but he is showing advanced signs of dementia, so please be kind to him.

    >

    Like

  • ac sais ” January 15, 2015 at 7:59 PM # i refer this matter to the COMMITTEE of PRIVILEGES …If pigs had wings they would fly but they don.t CARRY ON SMARTLY DOOM AND GLOOMERS”

    Yeah, pigs don’t have wings. And certain people, know NOTHING about morality, integrity and what is right or wrong. And we know, we KNOWWWW, that nothing proper will be done about this issue, we GET that, because as you say ‘if pigs have wings, so we ‘can xiss off’ right????

    You know what is so hurtful, that we employees have to pay our taxes (hey another thing, you know that earnings are to be taxed, I wonder if that income was taxed?????) paye the stupid consolidation tax, for money to be burnt. Pay our road taxes and act like good lil citizens, but folks who should be held to a higher standard, don’t give a xxit and as you say, have the attitude that we ‘can xiss off’.

    Well, news for you ac sweet sexy thing, next election is going to be different. Things going happen, we going tell alla wunna to to likewise and we going get some new people. I hope nuff folks come out and spend the $250 dollars to run independent.

    Those who do, may not get it back, but it is $250 well spent if it makes wunna sweat even a lil bit.

    You know, I was cool to just now, then get blue vex, thinking how hard I work, how many years of being a ‘good citizen’ I put in and then as Bushie say xxxxxbowls can get in the House and at like that??? It gotta done.

    This CRAP gotta done!

    Like

  • Sir Frederick merely playing party lines, from one of those old parties what was it??? the ELP, MLP, what was that??? Oh….onedem DLP or BDLP or such.

    Who really cares??

    Like

  • Sir Frederick is merely echoing what the Prime Minister let out a few months ago. The Political Class looks after its own. The Masonic Lodge of Palmetto Street.

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ Togetherness

    earlier in the precursor article You said, and I quote “With each statement from Owen and action by Mottley the likelihood of the BLP winning an election anytime soon recedes.”

    It could only be the bombshell news that Own has on Mia that could save the Democratic Labour Party from the absolute 30.0 defeat that they will suffer in 2018.

    St. John is gone and the myth of Barrow and Kellman land is dead like The late David Thompson

    Like

  • @enuff

    It depends on the leadership of a new party and its philosophy.

    Like

  • What is the point of having a third party participating in the current political system?

    Like

  • @Hants

    Because a new way of thinking driven by a relevant philosophy is required to change it.

    Liked by 1 person

  • But would they be able to manage an economy and govern a country or work with a public service?

    Like

  • Prodigal Son January 17, 2015 at 3:02 PM #

    Oh please, really? They cannot do any worse than many of the Ministers of the current AND previous administrations.

    Especially not when they are compared to the likes of ‘Five and Ten’, ‘Wuk Fuh Wuk’, Poochie, ‘Man That Know Evating bout Evating but does Nothing’, from the North, Seat Slash Man, I want a Plantation Man, Six Million (or is it Fifteen) Dollar Mother Man, Jumping Jack Man (left and right and back again).

    You REALLY want to go there???

    But then, I have not said anything, nor named names. I have just played with words. You cant identify any of these, so your point stands….. my statement has not merit, as none of these are identifiable..

    Right?????

    Only one thing, why oh why does every Prime Minister see it fit to place certain people as head of CBC, what is that??? Unfortunately, if we were not so sure of their good intentions, we would think it was because they appear to be good friends with said individuals. But that would be wrong, Right?

    As you say, these folks do a great job, who could match it, who???

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ Hants

    What does a third party mean?

    The structures and processes and calibre and constitution of the BLP AND THE DLP simply WILL NOT FACILITATE what changes are necessary.

    We have to depart from mediocrity and political largesse and deploy a new ethos of pride in what we do for country, community, family and self.

    It is not being utopian minded to support a thrust and mindset where Barbados and Barbadians are reoriented to a system where our compensation is based on the work effort we exert and our promotions and responsibilities are tied to our competencies as opposed to our ability to suck the minister’s private parts or some nepotism based on party allegiance

    We have no choice but to depart from these two spiritually empty political sepulchers because on this trajectory we have been following for 30 years we are seeing that they both have led us to Westbury cemetery

    Change or Die, while seemingly a dramatic slogan, is in actual fact where we are at January 2015

    Someone shared that the cutting of the sugarcane crop can’t start because the government is broke and has no idea where it is going to get the money to pay the workers

    Change or Die. Maybe de ole man should do like Kiki and Plantation Deeds and change me name….

    Like

  • It appears that the work ethic of Barbadians is in question. Rather than use general theories, why not conduct research specific to Barbados to determine which Barbadians are most productive; the conditions that create the atmosphere for their productivity; and use that model across all entities?

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s