Barbados and CCJ in a Tiff
Sir Dennis Byron, President of the CCJ
One of the most controversial court decisions handed down by the United States of America Supreme Court is Roe v.Wade in 1973. To this day the decision continues to stoke public debate about the license humans should be given to determine when to abort the life of an unborn child. It is also interesting to note one of the highest courts in the United Kingdom – still the final court of appeal for the majority of former British colonies – allows Dissenting Opinions by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
In 2001 the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) was established. It is the original original jurisdiction to translate and arbitrate matters arising from the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramus. Many suggest it is unfortunate only Barbados, Belize and Guyana so far, are the countries to recognize the CCJ in its appellate jurisdiction.
Three interesting events occurred in House debate this week which placed the CCJ firmly in the crosshairs. We listened to Minister of Housing Denis Kellman taking a swipe at the CCJ. In his aggressive invective, he is quoted: “It is not fair that we are paying our dues and then getting a kick. We were the first to agree to the CCJ. But what have we received from the CCJ? A judgment that people in Barbados have questioned, and when we put people up to be judges we are told we are not good enough to have people on the CCJ. When it comes to paying money, though, we must be the first to pay the money. If our money is good enough for the CCJ, our workers got to be good enough for the CCJ too. And it is time that somebody tell them where to get off!”. It is hard to imagine Kellman would have offered his rant without a license from the Sheriff.
Kellman’s rant followed Minister Donville Inniss’ own view which addressed similar concerns. Inniss was quoted as not advocating for Barbados to withdraw support for the CCJ but admitted he was ‘deeply troubled’ about the failure of Barbadian applicants to secure jobs recently at the Port of Spain based CCJ. “I think this is a matter we have to be very frank about in this country. There are those who will always talk about, ‘Oh, you’re being nationalist and you ain’t committed to regional integration’ and all of that. When it suits them fine, they say that, once they [are] getting all the largesse and all the top picks. But, I am satisfied that we have bright Barbadians, competent Barbadians, who have served on benches across the region, who today could be serving on the Caribbean Court of Justice. But, for whatever reason, we cannot find it fit to get one there. I am not bashing the excellent judges who are serving on that court. Far from it. However, what I am saying is what the majority of Barbadians are thinking and saying, but are reluctant to come out and say so publicly; and, that is somewhat strange, especially when we were very instrumental in setting up the CCJ“.
Finally, Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite sealed it by challenging immigration officers appear – in his opinion – to be intimidated by the controversial CCJ Shanique Myrie decision. It is obvious what Braithwaite wanted to convey during debate to amend the Immigration Bill. He is quoted: ”notwithstanding, what is said in the judgment, no one in Trinidad [or outside this country] can determine what our national security considerations [are]. We have a responsibility as the elected members of Parliament and part of our responsibility is to secure our borders and, therefore, we should not water down what we do because we are afraid of what people might say outside the region, in the region about being sued.”
The other segment to the CCJ drama unfolding was the criticism levelled by the CCJ at two prominent senior lawyers Vernon Smith and Hal Gallop, QCs by CCJ president Justice Sir Dennis Byron in delivering on the case Systems Sales Ltd. The criticism was quickly dismissed by Smith as ‘diatribe’ .
The CCJ debate in its current form is unfortunate. However, the CCJ if compared to feedback meted to the US Supreme Court and British Privy Council by the public, cannot be placed on a pedestal to escape criticism. BU’s view is, we have two issues: the quality of the decisions being handed down and the concern by the Barbados government echoed by its trio of Ministers, Inniss, Kellman and Brathwaite. In the case of determining the quality of decisions handed down by the CCJ, these are public and can and will be critiqued for rigour by the legal fraternity near and far in the months to come. This will be the true measure of the CCJ’s reputation which its bench will have to defend. The concerns expressed by the politicians can easily be resolved by the administrative arm of the CCJ and has nothing to do with Sir Byron and his team.
Barbados Underground 
Caswell
I’ve looked at it again – and am no further forward. That’s to say when I first read what you wrote one candidate obviously came to mind – and still does. But that would be entirely speculative and, as you know, I’m not a yardfowl nor otherwise privy to the corridors of power. So my ‘guess’ might have been entirely misplaced and my congratulations to the Court on its near miss irrelevant.
LikeLike
Ross
Follow you mind; I have confidence in you even if Bushie doesn’t.
>
LikeLike
David
Of course not…Myrie…then, of late, the PM’s and once-upon-a-time BU’s – Gollop. And then understand the inherent ‘superiority’ and mean spiritedness of the key players for whom the ‘big picture’ can be captured in a match box.
LikeLike
LOL…right
LikeLike
@Ross: “You continue to overreach yourself. If you are simply saying there’s no reason why a Bajan judge should sit on the Court leave it at that without the ‘law froth’.”==========
The Judge has ruled so I will proceed to jail or wherever.
On appeal though I am sure the appellate judge would be at pains to reconcile when, where or how I intimated, said or even suggested that a Bajan judge should not sit on the court.
The example you gave of Jamaica and a dated Larceny act as compared to a newer interpretation of a Theft Act is amusing to say the least.
I presume you must be suggesting that simple though that situation maybe that there are serious and complex matters which arise from this lack of uniformity which would completely discombobulate a learned and seasoned legal scholar/jurist.
Thus a local judge is needed to guide his peers.
You do this daily so if you know that as a fact then clearly I am overreaching in my belief that that sounds absolutely nonsensical in our Caribbean context.
I could understand that for a Euro court in the Hague or some place like that but here in the region!
I always thought that judges where there to review the precedents, listen to the lawyers present a case and then do a comprehensive review of the law pertaining to the matter prior to issuing a judgement.
They have competent legal assistants to provide the support required.
But I am a layman and you are the lawyer. So I am overreaching with legal froth.
Did you not admonish someone earlier about being rude with inappropriate invective.
There is a reason that lawyers do not sit on juries…simple, basic facts are very difficult for you guys to assimilate. You go into obfuscate mode in a heart-beat.
You know the law sir. I do not. I do know the difference though between BS and facts.
LikeLike
February 22, 2015 at 1:41 PM #
Balance
“Yes you do have a point. But you must know very well that the appointment of this CJ was a political appointment which had absolutely NOTHING to do with judicial quality. You’ve been around BU long enough to know that very well. I regard your remark, therefore, as disingenuous which warranted an expletive deleted.”
Thank you but if our Acting Chief justice was not considered good enough by the local authorities to merit elevation to the post of Chief Justice; how could one by analysis consider the other fine judges worthy of selection to the CCJ?
LikeLike
@ Caswell Franklyn February 22, 2015 at 7:22 PM #
“I read with surprise the Prime Minister’s comments about the leak of court documents and I was quite surprised by his position. I hope he was making sport. When a document is filed in the court it becomes a public document for all to see and what better way for everyone to see is to have them published in the newspapers.”
Caswell, I am at pains to ‘appreciate’ what you are on about. Are you suggesting to us that the learned PM, a QC at that, is blissfully unaware of such basic knowledge?
M’lud”, if that is so, one can only conclude that the QC title means Quintessential Clown.
Or you are misunderstanding the man’s plan of sending out threats of political
blitzkrieg to prevent the unsealing of the CLICO forensic audit report. Why not use the ploy that certain information contained in the report has already found its way into the public domain hence any further disclosure can only compromise the entire judicial process regarding the CLICO-related lawsuits before the court.
The man is not only a QC (in its more quaintly commonsensical meaning for a man from the Marchfield cane fields with a chip on his shoulder the size of Carrington factory) but also one bold-faced rat of a political survivor who would sell his dead mother’s virginity to the devil of Integrity and Honesty.
I am sure you are well aware of the far-reaching ramifications and reverberations, equivalent to a 9.5 earthquake on the Richter scale. such factual revelations would have on the political, financial and economic landscape of Barbados pretending to be a little England in a modern Britain.
I think I should start my next novel of intrigue, corruption, sexual deviancy, denial and betrayal called: “Dirty Moves in Bim; How to Con a Nation Full of Educated Fools”.
LikeLike
@ Miller
“Dirty Moves in Bim; How to Con a Nation Full of Educated Fools”.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Educated Fools…?
…if yuh mean brass bowls? say so nuh…!!!
LikeLike
When you want the returns of an Election and they call out bomb threats to shut down the courts and not reported in the news any where in Barbados,
QC means quick crook for most lawyers and able to charge a higher fee , a pay hike and nothing more,
Even Ralph Thorne made QC while before the BAR for years,
MIA is another Quick Crook that also need to be in jail and yet they also held the post of AG , PM also AG well look to see also the DPP what a world we live in ,
Sure cant wait for the King to come and lets get some KC s and then we will know where the line is drawn in the light of fraud pimp title holders,
LikeLike
The CCJ DO NOT NEED NO WELL KNOW NEST OF CROOKS ON THAT BENCH TO BACK UP THE FRAUD DONE IN ALL BUSINESS IN BARBADOS , NEED TO KEEP OUT THE SAME BAD WAYS OF ALLEN STANFORD , BUYING PIMP TITLES TO DEFRAUD PEOPLE OF THEIR TRUST,
WE SAY NO , HELL NO , NEVER PUT A BAJAN LAWYER NOR JUDGE ON THE CCJ , MAYBE IN THE NEXT 50 YEARS WHEN ALL THESES BITCHES ARE DEAD ,,
WELL MOST CAN NOT PAY TO GO TO UWI SO IT MIGHT BE ANOTHER 100 YEARS,
SHAME OF THE CARIBBEAN BARBADOS IN LAW AND JUSTICE
LikeLike
Should it not be the CJ and the Registrar to express concern about ‘leaked’ court documents?
LikeLike
David
Court documents are public documents. That is reason why they had to apply to the court to seal the Clico report to keep it out of the public domain.
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Caswell
Understood but if there is concern about leaked documents should it be coming from the political arm? Why not leak David Thompson’s WILL.
LikeLike
David
The concern certainly shouldn’t be coming from someone who has a vested interest in keeping documents in a particular matter secret to cover up allegations of wrong doing.
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Caswell
The assumption here is he referred to the Nation report on the filing by Leroy Parris.
LikeLike
David
Even if he did not refer to CLICO, that company has a matter before the court and the PM has already declared that Parris is his friend. The reported comments are therefore in very poor taste.
>
LikeLike
Here we have a PM talking about his concern for people breaking the law by leaking court documents. What about Lawyers who refuse to give client’s their monies??? What about the payment to Al Barrack ordered by the high court??? What about the length of time it takes for justice to be administered to ordinary citizens who have no connections??? What about the lying SOBS in the house telling the citizens of this country that all was well with Clico and BA???? Stupse man this PM is one BIG stink fart!
LikeLike
Will a Bajan Judge on the CCJ make them more honest? Will the judgements be any fairer??? The CCJ is correct in criticizing the local courts and lawyers on the way they are operating. Barbadians are being fleeced by politicians and lawyers and unless we have some drastic measures put in place it will continue. CHANGE OR DIE! Pieceofderockyeah I luv yuh gravatar
LikeLike
@ Islandgal
Stupse man this PM is one BIG stink fart!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In all fairness, the PM is made of more solid stuff….
@ David
This is all your fault. Did BU not call on the man to talk more?
Was it not better (bad as it was) when the PM kept his peace?
Should we not have let sleeping froons lie?
…at least then we thought that he was bright …but somewhat contemptuous …
Now after his various pronouncements on lepers, thieving speakers, and CLICO, we know that we were wrong on both counts.
…not bright
…extremely contemptuous of Bajans
He obviously knew what he was doing when he kept his mouth shut….
LikeLike
@ islandgal246 February 23, 2015 at 7:41 AM #
“Here we have a PM talking about his concern for people breaking the law by leaking court documents. What about Lawyers who refuse to give client’s their monies???”
Islandgal, are you suggesting Stuart, in his own words, is being a “sanctimonious hypocrite”?
Or, by providing us with the example of telling us “people are breaking the law by leaking court documents” and his support for Carrington who [more or less broke a moral law] by with-holding his client’s money for such a period of time that he [the client] had to seek the services of the court to be settled, Stuart is actually giving Barbadians an illustration of the meaning of a “sanctimonious hypocrite”?
LikeLike
Amen, Artaxerxes!
He has reason to support Mr Crook, the QC.
They have disgraced that QC honour. From reports surfacing, the PM seem to be in the same boat as the crook. Birds of a feather flock together!
LikeLike
Artaxerxes February 23, 2015 at 9:21 AM..”and his support for Carrington who [more or less broke a moral law] “==============
Good sir, you are being very kind or being very diplomatic.
There are several people who have been brought before the courts on charges of theft, fraud or misappropriation who did the type of thing Carrington did.
Some of those suffered the consequences of their actions significantly more harshly that Mr. Carrington and some surely suffered no more than he did.
But I think we can agree that he went a bit beyond the confines of what he learned in Sunday School when he and the other kids were examining morals and the Ten Commandments in detail.
LikeLike
DeeWord February 23, 2015 at 10:17 AM #
“Good sir, you are being very kind or being very diplomatic.”
Yes, DeeWord, I was being “sarcastically diplomatic”. It seems as though Stuart and his party supporters are of the opinion Michael Carrington had not done anything dishonest by with-holding his former client’s property, simply because he was not charged for committing a criminal offence.
By losing the civil suit brought against him, which resulted in him having to repay what was forcibly with-held, is enough for them to vindicate Carrington of his actions, or negate the circumstances responsible for him perpetrating such actions.
Essentially, what they are trying to say is ………… Carrington with-held the funds (for reasons unknown to us), he met his obligation, as instructed by the court, by repaying his client. Therefore, the matter has been resolved and there is no more need for discussing the issue further.
Comments, such as those coming from Stuart, pertaining to Carrington’s actions, has seriously led me to wonder what type of society we are looking to build for the future generation.
LikeLike
@millertheanunnaki February 22, 2015 at 11:02 PM “The man is not only a QC …but also one…who would sell his dead mother’s virginity”
Dear Miller:
It is my pleasure to teach you about the birds and the bees…it is impossible to be a mother and a virgin…unless you are suggestion that the Prime Minister is Jesus Christ and his mother’s name is Mary.
LikeLike
Who is the person who paid this debt for Mr Crook?
If it is a businessman, are we the taxpayers going to be the ones paying for Mr Crook’s withholding of this pensioner’s funds?
Why would a businessman take up his money and pay a debt off?
Would it be in the person’s interest to keep this inept incompetent moronic government in power?
Would this money be tacked on to the next contract?
I am just asking!
LikeLike
@Artaxerxes …One sir, in which the things that your Dad and Mum and mine and others, saw as part and parcel of the fabric of a strong, successful nation are torn asunder.
Maybe we were all being fooled when we admired Errol Walton Barrow and John Michael Geoffrey Manningham Adams and in fact the foundations for the graft, self aggrandizement and blatant hypocrisy were already well laid. Maybe so.
But there is surely no doubt about that now.
The CCJ broadside was a clear and definitive shoot across our bow.
We can choose to rail about it in the terms of the Inniss/Kellman/AG remarks, which badly misses the point.
Or we can look at it in terms of Barbados’ reputation as a bastion of law, order and fidelity is being shredded.
Unfortunately, I have to go back to this. David Thompson was not seen as a star only within the confines of our rock but he had the appeal and smarts which others in the region embraced.
They read the papers too.
So, sir. We need to do a lot of rebuilding. The sooner we fully understand the sooner we start to rebuild that damaged fabric; but I think you know how long it takes to rebuild a damaged reputation.
Stuart and his cronies or frankly Mia and hers are neither the alpha or omega of our future. Let’s focus on rebuilding despite their shenanigans.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When I heard the opinion expressed by the Prime Minister,I said to myself,this man is a lawyer and must know that court documents are public.Further,this lawyer must know that his attempt to influence judgements based on his views is nothing but a jaundiced view of justice.
Can someone tell this Prime Minister that his mannerisms on TV leave a lot to be desired.I know many an average “uneducated” Bajan who deport themselves in a much more dignified way.
But one must ask what does one expect of folk who just are better known as
“BRASSBOWLS”
LikeLike
I am beginning to believe that Donville Inniss is aiming to become the Clown Prince of this Parliament, a title I gave to Dennis Kellman.
Donville seems to believe that he is a maguffy and all I can think is……look what David Thompson unleashed on the people of Barbados.
Donville seems to believe that he is an authority on every and any thing in Barbados. No one is exempt from this man’s tongue. You open your mouth and say anything he does not like and he thinks he alone has the right to speak. No other person has a right to say a word he does not agree with otherwise you will feel the sting of his tongue.
It therefore did not surprise me at the outburst from the front page story yesterday. Donville knows that that story mashed the DLP’s corns so he had to get out front to lead the attack.
I would like Donville to deny reports that at sometime after two pm on election day, it was clear that his voters were not coming out and that he called the Stinkliar in a panic (Stinkliar apparently had most of the money allocated to buying votes……and allegedly said to him ….Chris, Chris, I am in trouble, I cannot lose my seat, I need re-enforcement. Chris allegedly replied……hold on, hold on, re-enforcement is on the way. The rest is history, Donville won his seat handsomely.
Donville knows that the last election was won by massive vote buying in his constituency, Stinkliar’s, Adriel Brathwaite’s, the ugly PM, Blackett, Mr Crook, Richard Sealy, John Boyce, Dennis Lowe, the education minister and James Paul. These are some of the areas where most of the vote buying was concentrated.
Donville, you are supposed to be highly educated, why would you touch that topic or do you think that if you attack, these people would shut to hell up and dont annoy you?
LikeLike
Dee Word
I do wish you’d stop being such an affronted prick. I simply pointed out that you and David were WRONG to say that there is a uniform law in the CC. Now sunshine that is fact. I draw no other conclusions from it.
OF COURSE judges are able to scythe through foreign laws. They do it axiomatically in Conflicts cases. They are advised by counsel. They know where to look.
So for Christ’s sake stop relying on your ineffable sense of superiority to find what is not there and attempt to justify the unjustifiable with your ‘teach yourself’ law book.
LikeLike
Balance
There is no right of succession. It is clear what this government wanted to do and the fella ‘acting’ did not fit into that frame. We all know what the result was. Don’t you?
LikeLike
The point about Commonwealth Law was made in the context of amendment to the Barbados Act read CJ Gibson. Some of you people live to be adversarial, unnecessary so.
LikeLike
David
So as to avoid being “adversarial” would you like to quote what precisely the CJ said?
However -to point out an error of fact is NOT being adversarial. I do wonder sometimes where you rest your brain…now that IS being adversarial. Get it?
LikeLike
Attorney Ross. Get off your high horse. If you want to throw around invective and and attack me or my blog post rather that simply do the reasonable and lawyerly thing to respond practically to the argument proposed then so be it.
You are simply showing your jockstrap as you huf and puff in bully mode.
As a layman it seemed kindergarten to me to bring an example of a local larceny act vrs an updated theft act to a discussion of APPELLATE Judges.
When you most recently can assert : “OF COURSE judges are able to scythe through foreign laws. They do it axiomatically in Conflicts cases. They are advised by counsel. They know where to look.”
I made that point repeatedly – in different words of course- in my posts.
“I always thought that judges where there to review the precedents, listen to the lawyers present a case and then do a comprehensive review of the law pertaining to the matter prior to issuing a judgement”
Who is trying to establish an “ineffable sense of superiority” other than you with simple examples not befitting a class of 5 & 6 years old re law and judges.
You are the lawyer. Act like one and show some courtesy and practical appreciation of a simple debate.
I certainly always understood that laws vary across jurisdictions and I certainly always understood that Appellate Judges had to “scythe through” those details and that “they are advised by counsel”.
I am absolutely impressed that the lawyer in you finally agreed on that.
Now waiting to hear why then it’s so necessary to have the ad hoc appointments to help adjudicate local regulations.
A frigging lawyer and can’t make a simple presentation without resorting to cussing and attacks against the blogger.
And we pretend not to understand why the Cariington’s of this world feel so entitled.
No wonder we are concerned about the future of Barbados. Steeeuupse.
Really Mr. Ross. Go and check those client statements that Bushie asks about often, please. I am not here to argue about whose balls are bigger, so put aside the ad hominem. Speak to the damn discussion.
LikeLike
DeeWord
What a wag you are.
Now listen.
On the substance, haven’t you got it yet I was agreeing with you? There is no reason in the world why a trained person could not give a decision on a point of law from a foreign jurisdiction. I was simply pointing out that there is no uniform law in the CC. Get it?
So I say again…now listen
This is not the first time that you have contrived to misunderstand what I am about to suit your purposes. It means either that you are vexatious and have some kind of personality problem OR that you’re actually a bit dim.
Now you did say somewhere recently in one of your frolicking moments that unlike some you didn’t get gold stars at school. Might I suggest the following for your (belated) consideration?
First, you write at too great a length and your points are surrounded by froth. Keep to the point without all the phoney baloney wit. Put your ego on hold.
Second, do learn to read carefully. In the exam you’ll miss the point of the question if you don’t. You don’t want a ‘Third’ all your life do you?
Third, you style is stilted and you write as if you have a rod up your ass. Drop all this ‘sir’ stuff.
Fourth, try not to suggest that you’re an expert on everything – a know-all.. You’ll irritate the examiner particularly if you are wrong – as often you are.
Fifth, if caught out own up and don’t try to justify or deny. If you don’t do this you’ll come over as self-indulgent and self-absorbed – in short a prick. Practice honesty don’t just mouth it.
Now DeeWord…those are very simple things and if you work at them you MAY just get a silver, if not a gold, star – well, unless you’re unteachable. My suspicion is that the personality traits you exhibit suggest that you are.
LikeLike
@ robert ross February 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM
“Third, you style is stilted and you write as if you have a rod up your ass. Drop all this ‘sir’ stuff.”
How does a rod up one’s ass feel? Sounds like something Bush Tea would enjoy seeing you, RR in such ramrod posture. No wonder DW is one of BT’s boys on the blog.
But aren’t you RR, Sir, being a bit too rough in the insertion of your hard rod of verbal correction up the poor fella DW’s intellectual backside?
I find the gentleman to be rather damn witty at times even if dry (not socially lubricated enough to take your acerbic rod); but certainly not, as you would wish to portray him, a dimwit.
After all DW- even though he is a man of “The Word”- is neither a lying politician nor thieving lawyer. Neither is he a graduate of the School of THOTH like YOU or even ME (miller the enigma).
LikeLike
Absolutely, teachable SIR. That sir thing is just one of these polite things that’s such a bad habit. Here though, just being annoying.
Generally, my teachers liked me as a student. Probably because I was so dense, you think.
Never found a teacher to give me all As though. Did get a few here and there but not nearly enough as you I am sure; as evidenced by your scholarly dissertation above.
And I love to frolic, so the attempted wit will continue.
And yes I do believe I have a personality problem; I challenge BS’ers. You tend to be sometimes.
And again, I am happy that we have reached agreement on the substance of this palaver: “There is no reason in the world why a trained person could not give a decision on a point of law from a foreign jurisdiction.”
Remember I did say on the blog that I would hire you as my attorney in a heart-beat. And that was not a frolic moment.
So, attorney Ross let’s start over as blog friends for the next palaver
You were clear from the beginning and in my overbearing manner I completely misunderstood everything. A concession.
Until next time.
LikeLike
@ lesser men, women and in betweeners,
I got up early tonight because of a loud raking noise that approximated what de old people would call the chains that accompany the Grim Reaper.
I must be slipping for I forgot that I am de ole peeple.
“Flintlocks or rappers at dawn, your choice of weapons”
Behold the stock of two verbal duellists sine bad words and malodourous invectives, poetry in motion.
Polemically equal the two contenders even in their argument bring to light something that is dying in Bulbados, the nobility of different perspectives, which, when left to our basal selves, brings us to the beast.
Both of you men make ole men’s like me “raise my game” knowing full well I will not be in your league given my backsliding inveteracy and calcified brain box, not brain.
But equally so, in observing your viewpoints on the paucity or plentitude of judicial talent and homogeneity or diversity of our legal systems regionally, your banter here in cyberspace, the nuances, sartorial commentary etc made me, and others?, aware of the real morass that exists here in Bulbados
Wunna do know that when you carry this “calibre of chat” in your respective circles and seek to engage with the numerous plebeians of your respective life encounters, you do realize how utterly “out of your depths you will find yourselves daily?
Yes I call those encounters of sinking in crass stupidity life in Bubados
@ those enquiring minds that want to know why I call Barbados Bulbados (all three of you – me, myself and I)
I give you the BBC And Cameron Student Photo is Banned” See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6409757.stm
“News media have been prevented from showing a photo of David Cameron with fellow Oxford dining club members. The image of the Tory leader, which shows him in about 1986 dressed in the uniform of the elite BULLINGDON Club, has appeared in several newspapers.”
“A night in the cells would be regarded as being par for a BULLER man and so would debagging anyone who really attracted the irritation of the BULLER men.”
YES IT IS ALL RELATED OLIVER MESSELS, LITTLE ENGLANT, BULLINGDON & Bulbados
LikeLike
“robert ross February 23, 2015 at 4:02 PM #
Balance
There is no right of succession. ”
THERE MIGHT NOT BE A RIGHT TO SUCCESSION BUT THERE IS A RIGHT TO SUCCESSION ON ‘MERIT’ IF THE CANDIDATE IS DEEMED DESERVING
LikeLike