The Jeff Cumberbatch Column – Dancing with Danger

Jeff Cumberbatch – Chairman of the FTC and Deputy Dean, Law Faculty, UWI, Cave Hill

Now show meh yuh slackness, show meh yuh
Went and practice,
Lucy is ah Carnivalist, and that is why I
Behave so loose! –
“Lucy” by Destra Garcia (2015)

Two incidents last week, both concerning an activity as mundane as dancing, have provoked the discussion of complex issues of propriety and legality in the public domain. Certainly, these provide a respite from the seemingly interminable diet of partisan political discourse that has been a staple in recent months, although one expects that this latter is likely to grow exponentially as the nation approaches the constitutionally stipulated demise of the current Parliament.

The first incident occurred at a local event, lengthily titled “Water Explosion -Party in the Tropics”, where the ubiquitous smart phone of an amateur journalist captured the image of a youthful lad vigorously engaging in a ribald mimicry of what the Jamaicans call “back shot” with a much larger woman who appeared as enthusiastic a participant in the activity as did the boy, whose actions of whipping the ample bottom of the female with his open hands betrayed an education that was decidedly extra-curricular. Needless to say, as is a given these days, the clip was published on social media and, ineluctably, went viral.

I must confess that my first reaction to the video was one of unbridled mirth. The sheer incongruity of this slight youngster wining on the sizeable buttocks of the adipose woman evoked memories of a cartoon motif I had seen on the T-shirt of a student some years ago. There, a slender man is portrayed stuck between the bottom cheeks of a large female as she inquiringly pleads, “Harold, where are you?” The probability of a real life re-enactment of this scenario seemed eminent from that posting.

However, I also appreciated that the ability to see the humour in any situation such as this is not an instinctual response of most Barbadians. Rather, attempting in righteous indignation to outdo a previous opinion is more in keeping with our nature and, given that it involved a minor, I sensed that my initial reaction would be an outlier from the popular one. The proof was not long in coming. There were some whispers of child abuse and calls for the awesome prosecutorial power of the State to be brought to bear on those “responsible” for the incident in spite of the clear intent of the parties. And the chief executive officer of the National Cultural Foundation, the organization that promotes the annual parade of the bands on Kadooment Day, ironically called for promoters to maintain a level of decency and decorum on stage.

I am mindful that in a jurisdiction where there is the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression, there will be a plurality of views on any given issue, but where a perspective that would create a mock reality of “this-does-not regularly-happen-here” informs these views, then we are being patently hypocritical. That youth did not learn those movements in the classroom nor at Sunday school; but he did not need to. Not when there is a diet of simulated “backshot” on public display on all forms of media in this season.

What more should we demand of an impressionable prepubescent youngster keen to prove himself a man? The fault, as some character once intoned, is not in our stars…

Consent, yes…but to what?

The second incident concerns a story widely reported in the regional press and on other media that popular soca artiste, Ms Destra Garcia, has been ordered by the Supreme Court of Belize to pay a sum of more than $ 16,000 in compensation to a claimant fan who suffered a ruptured bladder owing to her negligent conduct during an on-stage performance in Belize in 2015.

According to the reports, it was during Destra’s performance of her hit song. “Lucy”, the male claimant was invited on stage and instructed by her to lace face upwards on the stage, to close his eyes and to put his hands behind his head. Next, Destra is alleged to have told him, “If you’s a bad boy, I will treat you bad”. Then, turning to the crowd, she sought their approval, “Treat him bad, allyuh?”

Having duly obtained their fiat, she proceeded to suddenly jump in the air and land her body heavily onto his pelvis, thereby causing the injury that necessitated surgery.

The suit was undefended by Ms Garcia, but it nevertheless provides an object lesson in the law of negligence, especially the defences thereto, for interested persons.

One popular reaction on social media was that the claimant had consented to go on stage and thus, in local parlance, “got precisely what he was looking for”. Or, simply put in legal terms, that he was either contributorily negligent to his injury, or that he had voluntarily consented to suffering it.

On the facts, both of these assertions are, it is summited, difficult to maintain. It would be a quite a stretch to suggest that the fan contributed either to the accident itself or to the extent of the harm suffered merely by accepting an invitation to come on stage to participate in a scenario.

Likewise, a defence of voluntary consent to the harm or, as it is more frequently put in Latin –“volenti non fit injuria”– should ordinarily require a finding that the claimant by his conduct impliedly agreed that any harm likely to be suffered by him or her would result in no liability to the defendant and thereby no compensation being awarded to him or her.

Such a holding requires the clearest evidence and is available in circumstances such as those in one reported decision where the claimant and the defendant went on a joint drinking binge, consuming seventeen whiskies each and the claimant thereafter went on a light aircraft trip with the defendant at the helm and suffered injury in the consequent crash.

There are, of course, other cases where the defence may be applicable but, as has been put elsewhere, this case is not that case.

It should be noted that this determination has been made on a construction of the facts that is most favourable to Destra, that she was liable for mere negligence. Indeed, on another view, she might have been also liable for battery, unless she had first obtained the express consent of the claimant to her invasion, by the application of force to his person, of his physical integrity.

95 comments

  • With respect to the second case, Ms Garcia through her own action caused physical injured to the young man in question, so I don’t know how some people have concluded that just because the young man volunteered to go on stage, that somehow Ms Garcia wasn’t liable for the injuries the young man suffered? Ms Garcia’s actions is no more different than if I give a friend a ride in my car, and I hit a tree on an icy road because I was traveling too fast and jured my friend. He can turn around and sue me for the injuries he suffered when I hit the tree because it is clear that I did something wrong when I hit the tree which caused his injuries.

    Like

  • Thanks Jeff for raising the Destra matter.

    As a layman my initial reaction on reading it in the press was not the laugh you enjoyed from the other case (which ‘unfortunately’ I have not seen) but a perplexed “huh”: why did this go to court, I wondered.

    So maybe in general terms you can offer an opinion on why, if as you noted that Destra did not contest the suit, why did her team not settle out of court and avoid supposedly the ‘adverse’ publicity.

    In this cynical world of lil boys knowing well how to ‘spank de phat’ one is inclined to read the Belize judgement as free publicity for this Trini artist, after all if she can ‘mash up de man so, she must be real bad’.

    In fact the victim should have sought greater damages….I can see the big future ads now: we gine mash up u spleen, wid wuk up!

    But then that might be an entire new legal tangle…and more publicity. Alas.

    After this piece on 17 glasses of whisky and rollicking posteriors surely the term ‘bottoms up’ has new meaning!

    Thnx in advance re the query.

    Like

  • 1) When I was at that young lad age, a performance that may have been the height of my ambitions. Adults must be warned to keep children out of their ‘sex’ acts.

    2) I took a look at Destra’s jump. Perhaps the ugliest dance move ever done on stage; the WWE wrestlers jumping off the stage are much more elegant. I hope she was also fined for executing such an ugly move.

    Like

  • 1) When I was at that young lad age, giving such a performance would have been the height of my ambitions. Adults must be warned to keep children out of their ‘sex’ acts.

    Like

  • More seriously, though devoid of local politics the phrase ‘mock reality’ made me think of ‘alternative facts’

    Like

  • Question: how can Destra be liable for battery when it is clear that she didn’t make a conscious effort to intentionally injure the young man? One of the three elements necessary to prove that she was liable of criminal battery.

    Like

  • I know Bajans like to cut and slice even the cake is non-existent. Any fool could look and see that Destra’s move was not the usual dance move. It lacked grace and seem more directed to harm than to titillate the gentleman.

    But wunna will slice and dice.

    Like

  • Destra, could have quite possibly been liable for bodily injury as well as battery then?
    Question: what is the difference between bodily-injury which she has committed, and assault and battery then?

    Like

  • Vincent Haynes

    TheGazer July 9, 2017 at 8:26 AM #

    1) When I was at that young lad age, giving such a performance would have been the height of my ambitions. Adults must be warned to keep children out of their ‘sex’ acts.
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Very true…..once the child moves past puberty and looses the falsetto,starts to grow facial hair…..he is interested in one thing above all else……the lads pants back in my day if allowed to dry would be well starched.

    At my age I find interesting the changes in acceptable norms by society.e.g. rings in boys,pants dropping off on boys,lack of manly games by boys,lack of education by boys……….and now frowning on force ripe boys…..who would have been looke up to by my generation especially if they had scored…..an interesting new generation…..one of demons according to the MOE.

    Like

  • TheGazer, what would have been her motive or intent though? To arouse the audience by inflicting bodily harm on this young man? Your narrative belies logic as far as I am concerned!

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    So maybe in general terms you can offer an opinion on why, if as you noted that Destra did not contest the suit, why did her team not settle out of court and avoid supposedly the ‘adverse’ publicity.

    @dPD, I surmise that she was maybe ill-advised that no liability might result from an accepted invitation to come up on stage

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Haynes

    What you and other liken to you have failed to acknowledge in the fact that we are living in a changed world. Back in our day parents used to be the loudest voices in their children’s lives. But what you ought to consider today is the fact that the internet age with the pervasive nature of the electronic media, social-media, music, television, and movies, and you have an avalanche of other voices challening the voice of the parent. So children are entering their teens and younger with mixed messages brother, and they must decide which set of values to embrace, those of their parents our those of culture Sir. And brother, their need of acceptance and peer approval often causes them to lean toward cultural value Sir. NOT YOU GOT IT JESUS PEACE! We have to Stop blaming the young people for the indicipline in our present age, and face the fact that we as the elders are mostly responsible for their imperitence, because when we plant lettuce, if it does grow well, we don’t blame the lettuce. We look for the reasons it is not doing well; it may be the fertilizer; or the water; or the sunshine etc. But we never blame the lettuce/ children because blaming has no positive effect at all Sir.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    Question: how can Destra be liable for battery when it is clear that she didn’t make a conscious effort to intentionally injure the young man? One of the three elements necessary to prove that she was liable of criminal battery”

    @Dumpy, The intention required to commit a battery is not an intention to injure but rather an intention to do the unlawful act; that is, to apply force to the victim’s person without his or her express or implied consent. It is for that reason that an unwanted kiss may constitute a battery.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    Question: what is the difference between bodily-injury which she has committed, and assault and battery then?

    @ Dumpy, there is no difference in result for the victim, the bodily injury is the result of the battery. For the perpetrator, bodily injury is more likely to be used if there is a criminal charge. This was a civil suit only although, in my view, the police could have charged her with causing serious bodily harm!

    Like

  • Dumpy

    What has your above rant addressed to me got tuh doo with anything I have posted….where have I blamed anyone…..kindly reread and comprehend.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington.

    These are two seasonal cases of a joke taken too far. The punishments fitted the breaches of common sense. Hopefully, the society as a whole, has learned its lessons. For the youngster I hoped he learned where to draw the line between vulgarity/ exhibitionism and dance. He should put this episode behind him. It is this kind of vulgarity that the culture of bashment encourages.

    Like

  • Thanks Mr.Cumberbatch … I got it now!

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    You are most welcome, Sir!

    Like

  • Vincent Haynes

    ” At my age, I find interesting the changes in acceptable norms by society”

    The conduct of a child is before deliberation here Sir, as well as an adult Sir. And unless you are living in some isolated place in the world, you ought not to have been surprised by the conduct of the child neither the adult.

    Like

  • Dumpy

    Kindly look up the meaning of the word….interesting…and get back to me explaining the relevance of your rant.

    Like

  • Destra appears to be “thick”…… or she was under the influence of a mind altering narcotic.

    As for the “youngster” he was doing what adults encouraged him to do.

    At his age I would have wanted to do what he was doing but had a good enough up bringing

    NOT TO DO anything that would embarrass my family and friends.

    Like

  • Going to leave this alone after this…
    After reviewing the video, I must disagree with the legal eagle
    The understatement of the year ‘the police could have charged her with causing serious bodily harm!’ I think ‘attempted murder’ would be an appropriate charge.

    In this day and age to look for ‘motive or intent’ may be searching for the needle in the haystack. That is legal talk of past ages. People igrunt dese days

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    The understatement of the year ‘the police could have charged her with causing serious bodily harm!’ I think ‘attempted murder’ would be an appropriate charge

    Point taken.Indeed the criminal intention required for murder, as I recall it, is an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm! It would have been a difficult case for the prosecution however…

    Like

  • fortyacresandamule

    Jeff, your masterful way with the language always make for good read. I was laughing too bad with the T-shirt scenario with Harold. I first saw that image on the wall of a stripper club years ago when I was in my late teens.

    Like

  • fortyacresandamule

    If I was a young and conscious lad in this day and age, I would be hesitant to bring forth another human being in this world to experience the human condition. It seemed societies all over the world are converving to all kind of extremism. Indecency, amorality, violence and shamelessness is the norm nowadays. A virtue to some I might add.

    Like

  • Jeff

    Your article tends to limit certain expression to contemporary times.

    Under the Greeks, the Romans, it was acceptable for mothers to school their sons in the arts of lovemaking as a practical matter. Could you imagine this?

    Writers go on about all types of ‘inbreeding’ among siblings.

    Naked parties were had where anything was possible.

    Even into the English tradition children were married to adults to improve relative power.

    Our point is that all the complaints we have about lewd behaviour starts somewhere. It happens not out of thin air.

    Like

  • I thought Oedipus was a myth now I read it was a rite of ancient Romans and Greeks, however Jeff is entitled to view cultural norms from a contemporary lens even if they were accepted in the past. I heard that the ancient Greeks were avant-garde when it came to acceptance of homosexuality what says thou mighty Pachamama?

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    Just to digress a little from Jeff’s well written article. The nation has highlighted the following article showing clearly why the island must be brought under accountability and transparency legislation forthwith. The Freundel Stuart administration has shown yet again why their management of the country’s affairs remains poor rakey.

    Like

  • @SSS

    It is good to see the Nation newspaper beginning to see the importance of followup stories. Social media has been reporting on this lady being sent on leave for years. We have also been reporting about the 5 million dollars Leroy Paris deposit at the Central Bank of Barbados.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    David

    Do you know what type of leave is it? I was told that depending on the situation, the government would allow a civil servant to go on leave for up to three years. After that, the person must return to their work. My question is:

    How long is the several leaves government provide for civil servants regarding half pay leave and no pay leave
    What circumstances allow for a civil servant to go on special leave past the stipulated three year period and is there a clause in the respective government system (namely the public service act) that permits leave beyond.
    Who qualifies for such leave with full pay.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    Maybe sexy Caswell can shed some light on this. Yoo hooo oh Caswell where are you hon bun.

    Like

  • In one of these cases, it is very simple. Vernese Brathwaite tried to use the law to put a stop to Leroy Parris and his blatant disregard for the law of the land. No doubt she was also about to expose the rest of his malfeasance. The best way to put a stop to that process was to send her home. A bit like sacking a whistleblower.

    Like

  • Mia the the Opposition as the government in waiting can go on record that should the BLP win the government Vernese Brathwaite will be reinstated forthwith. Such a message would resonate with many.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    It will not be that easy, David. The post has been abolished. Responsibility for and oversight of insurance now lies with the Financial Services Commission. As has been the Commissioner of Inland Revenue whose remit has now been placed in BRA.

    Like

  • Vincent Haynes

    David

    Quite true it would resonate more than passing integrity etc.

    This govt saw what happened with OSA and the three at QEH but still decided against the odds to do this ignorance.

    They will pay a high price…..especially if CLICOs money does not come.

    Like

  • @Jeff

    A post can be created at the FSC or BRA with the stroke of a pen!

    Like

  • Vincent Haynes

    Jeff Cumberbatch July 9, 2017 at 4:46 PM #

    Hmmm…..I wonder why they were not made redundant then?

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Exactly…in the real world when posts are abolished, the employee is given a severance package, the post does not exist anymore and the employee moves on happily and well compensated with options for further training to transition to a new position, a new company or department…..if for whatever reason the employee returns to work at the same firm in another position, that severance has to be returned.

    ……..but that’s in the real world, not on fantasy island filled with corruption.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington.

    WW&Cat 6:48pm

    There are limitations in very small societies like Barbados. The options suggested by you are not feasible. Perhaps there were no suitable positions in the salary ranges at the time of these events. The practice would be to promote the persons unless there is an element of ???punishment?????
    WW& C Barbadians do live in the real world. Our solutions are tailor made for us.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Bernard…you are trying to be balanced, but dont care hiw you look at it, it makes no sense to…

    …first send the supervisor of insurance on leave for doing her job….not much of a punishment because it was with full pay.

    ….then …make the post redundant by creating a whole new agency to oversee insurance regulation…

    ..,.then…continue to pay the former insurance regulator her full salary, at taxpayer’s expense…FOR A FULL 7 YEARS AFTER…with no end in sight….despite the post being redundant for at least 6 of those years.

    ….that is not the real world…trust me…

    How is that fair to taxpayers and when will it end…

    The why she was sent on leave is well known…to cover up the ministers friends crimes against CLICO policyholders, but why is there no end to it, the post was made redundant after she was sent on leave.

    You get my point…even for fantasy island, that is a bit much.

    And since the useless yardfowls have all made themselves scarce on the blogs….we know it stinks of corruption.

    Liked by 1 person

  • WW&C

    Bernard has a point….it was worth the salaries paid as opposed to any other scenario involving possible court action one way over severance or court action the other way over prison time for somebody.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Bernard Codrington.

    WW&C at 7:35 PM

    No .You are missing the point. Who are the victims in the two scenarios? These persons jobs were made redundant. They did no wrong. They were appointed to the public service. Must they lose their pension rights and chances to advance in the Public service with a redundant package at this stage of their working lives? Barbados is not USA Or Canada with millions of job opportunities. Barbadians are caring people. That is what make us great. We look for solutions that are win win. May we never become a dog eat dog society.

    Like

  • @Dumpy July 9, 2017 at 9:16 AM “Question: how can Destra be liable for battery when it is clear that she didn’t make a conscious effort to intentionally injure the young man?”

    Because a reasonable person, and here I assume that Ms. Destra is a reasonable person, ought to have know that dropping herself on the young man was likely to cause injury.

    Like

  • @Bernard Codrington. July 9, 2017 at 10:24 AM “For the youngster I hoped he learned where to draw the line between vulgarity/ exhibitionism and dance. He should put this episode behind him. It is this kind of vulgarity that the culture of bashment encourages”

    I would have thought that the responsibility for responsible behaviour rested with the big hard back woman, who ought not to have permitted a child to wuk-up on her. She could have told him firmly , move. Or she could have moved her fat self away.

    SMH.

    Like

  • @mitchlans July 9, 2017 at 4:32 PM “In one of these cases, it is very simple. Vernese Brathwaite tried to use the law to put a stop to Leroy Parris and his blatant disregard for the law of the land.”

    In one of these cases, it is very simple. Vernese Brathwaite tried to use the law to put a stop to Leroy Parris [who is not a leper, and who is Prime Minister Freundel Stuart’s friend] and his blatant disregard for the law of the land.”

    And now we the taxpayers, without our consent have been forced to pay her $98,087 per year for the past 7 years, and since she is only 66 we will have to pay her another $98,087 for a total of about $784,696. And meanwhile in order to fund this igrance the government piles more and more tax demands on us.

    Please remember that Leroy Parris is not a leper. Please remember that he is Prime Minister Freundel Stuart’s friend.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Pachamama July 9, 2017 at 1:23 PM “Under the Greeks, the Romans, it was acceptable for mothers to school their sons in the arts of lovemaking as a practical matter.”

    Well the Egyptians tried this nastiness too in their royal family, insisting on brother/sister marriages/breeding to preserve the royal blood (whatever the sh!te that was) and in few generations that had inbred themselves out of existence.

    Mother Nature abhors this nastiness. Widely practiced even today in the Middle East where people marry their first cousins as a matter of preference. Have you ever seen an inbred cyclops child–that a child with one eye in the middle of the forehead, and with myriad other disabilities?

    Like

  • @Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger July 9, 2017 at 7:35 PM “How is that fair to taxpayers and when will it end?”

    I second this.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Bernard…I did not miss anything, cant miss a lack of commonsense…

    ….fell asleep before I could see your post…

    …again…how is a decision by a corrupt government to cover up their friend Leroy Parris’ crimes of robbing CLICO policyholders fair to taxpayers, by sending on leave the supervisor of insurance for 7 YEARS with full pay….to avoid being sued for wrongdul dismissal….

    Why not allow her to continue working and her pension would still be intact and available to her…their idea of punishing her with full pay is punishing to taxpayers.

    Both you and Vincent are looking at this assbackwards, small island style, the taxpayers are being punished because the government dont want to be sued for their corrupt actions.

    Again….when will it end and why was Ms. Brathwaite not returned to work under the new agency….again punishment for taxpayers, she gets full pay, but not allowed to work…because she troed to do her job.

    How could any of that make sense to educated, intelligent people.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Bernard…just for clarity, I dont know the facts behind the other civil servant sent on leave and being paid at taxpayer’s expense for 4 years…with no end in sight, but given the track record of government, am sure it’s to cover up another of their illegal, corrupt actions so as not to be sued for wrongful dismissal…..but.

    The Vernese Brathwaite case is cut and dried….SHE was/is a victim of government corruption….punished by not being ever allowed to work again…but with full pay, at taxpayer’s expense.

    The taxpayers are victims of government corruption…forced to pay Ms. Brathwaite’s salary until she reaches the pensionable age of 67….to avoid government being sued for their corrupt actions, the taxpayers are being punished to cover up government corruption. …

    …..only in banana republics can this corruption by low level, low class ministers be justified..

    How could that ever be fair to taxpayers, paying for 8 years to protect Parris from the consequences of his crimes against policyholders and government’s actions against the same taxpayers, because he is the friend of 2 prime ministers.

    I hope I broke it down sufficiently for you…it would have been cheaper to let Ms. Brathwaite do her job and lock up Parris and all the other CLICO executives for fraud, when she tried to present the evidence she found to the DPP Leacock….there is no excuse to justify this not being done.

    ….that is why 7 years later it has returned to haunt the government, as is usually the consequences for corrupt government actions.

    Bernard…you therefore made no point at all.

    …and next time, I will charge you for this breakdown.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Simple Simon

    Let us assume a man engaged in a consensual sexual intercourse a woman, but unknowing to the woman the man had HIV, and during this sexual encounter the man was wearing a condom which ruptured and inflected the woman. QUestion: is this man liable criminally or civilly for the injure he caused this woman though his intent wasn’t to cause her any harm, which is made evident by the condom he wore during this sexual encounter?

    Like

  • Simple Simon

    And shouldn’t a reasonable person ought to have known ( and let us assume the man is a reasonable person) that the condom could have rupture and inflect this woman? Or did this man had a duty to inform this woman of his sexual disease before engaging in the sexual act? Or shouldn’t this woman have known that she assume the risk of contacting this disease by consenting to this man?

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Dompey…Destra dropped her fat, well shaped ass on the dude and injured him, he was not expecting her to jump his bones in that matter, he thought she would have been more ladylike, giving him a gentle wine which he could boast about for decades and get endless mileage from the image and memory..

    As eager as he was to hop on stage, there was no expectation of injury.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Well Well
    Sitting at a cricket game you automatically assume the risk of injury because there is a possible that the ball could hit you in the face. What makes any other public event devoid of injury?

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Which show have you ever attended and seen the entertainer drop on top the audience member with their full weight.

    I have seen Marcal Mantano perform his famous wines on stage at Hyatt and no one got injured.

    Not even that savage from US…A-Con injured that underaged girl he wined on at his show in Trinidad. .

    Perforners are responsible for showing restraint when they throw around their bodies…which they know are weapons and can injure other people.

    Like

  • @ Dompey
    Steupssss!!!

    Like

  • WW&C

    Chuckle……for once we are not at odds….I am simply giving you the facts as they obtain in a small island banana soon to be republic….or not.

    Like

  • Well Well @ Consequences Observing Blogger

    Vincent…that level of corruption by government and their business/insurance executive friends must be fully exposed at every opportunity and consistently, this cannot be allowed to continue into a new decade.

    you will note how silent and scarce Carson Cadogan, yardfolws and Co…are….

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington.

    WW&C

    .Please reread my intervention at at 9:49 PM. Your concerns are obviously not my concerns. Your quests are not my quests. I deal with social justice . You with what exactly?

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Your “social justice” protects the corrupt government and their thieving friends Bernard..

    Mine protects the taxpayers and policyholders from the corrupt. ……and exposes their actions, you got a patent on social justice for only a few or something, it should be for everyone.

    Bear in mind, the one who thought justice should only be for the selected few, is being buried shortly. .

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Obviously, your ‘social justice” and that of Karma’s, differs significantly.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington.

    WW& C 10 :05 AM

    In the fullness of time we all will be buried.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    As we all know, but I much prefer be buried with a clear conscience and not hated….by thousands of people who were disadvantaged by criminal actions, false sense of arrigance and pretentious status.

    Those with clear consciousness know they can go at any time and are already prepared…with an even clearer conscience. …no sudden death can shock them.

    Like

  • Bernard,
    Individuals are not made redundant, the positions are. If a position could not be found elsewhere in the service for the two redundant officials, they should have been offered early retirement ie a payoff to retirement age and full pensions.
    As has been pointed out in this forum, Mr Parris and a colleague were charged, not with suspected fraud, but allegedly with ignoring a directive from the deputy supervisor.
    Therefore, according to this account, the police executed their responsibilities by investigating the allegations and passing a report on to the DPP who brought charges.
    So responsibility has moved on to the Registrar’s department, and in particular the Listings Officer. Was the case listed to be heard? If so when and before which magistrate? If it has not been listed in seven years can the attorney general, Registrar or Chief Justice please explain to the public the cause/reasons for the delay? Can they give a time span within which it will now be heard?
    Until then, Mr Parris and his colleague must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That is the rule of law.
    Sometime ago a certain loud mouth in this forum emailed me at Financial Times Group promising that s/he/it had information on an insurance company. I asked for proof, details, and s/he/it promised to come back to me within days. I have since retired and have not yet received the information, but almost daily read her/his/its rants in BU about insurance companies and their alleged bosses.
    We must stick to the rule of law, no matter how bitter and twisted we may be. I have been saying for years that the nation was misled by the so-called Judicial Management Review. That would prejudice any future trial. Hope Mr Parris and his colleague have good counsel.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington.

    @ Hal Austin a 10: 44 AM

    Thanks for the insightful intervention as usual. Due process ,as you know, takes an inordinately long time in Barbados. In the meantime these public officers have bills to pay and other financial obligations. They made or accepted options which best suited them. We Barbadians have always been pragmatic. Pragmatism served us well in the past. I see no indicators that it will not serve us well in the future.
    Like you, I have reservations as to how the CLICO affair was handled.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Hal……as usual my instincts about you were on point, your halfassed journalistic skills were apparent to me even back then. I sure as hell had no intentions of taking information I had so you can sit your fat ass on it and pretend you did not receive any of it…what could you do with it anyway.

    Besides, it is all working out quite well without your craziness.

    The blogs have done a better job than you ever could in exposing the likes of the Kutappa-Harrises…

    ……you could not even last 6 months as a commenter on barbadostoday online newspaper without getting yaself banned..lol.., so how would you even go about exposing CGI Insurance, whose building has since been sold….and was such a big secret that it took a parodox like event fir me to find out.

    …and with the upcoming and present mounting pressures being skilfully and strategically applied , you would be clueless on how to arrive at the intended outcome.

    Face it Hal….that particular insurance project is so above and beyond you as to be in another dimension to which you have no access.

    I made the right decision ignoring your 50s style intent.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Bernard…after rereading my posts, I am sure you realized that both civil servants are seen as victims of corrupt government action….but it cannot just stop there.

    We must be able to think above and beyond so that those types of behaviors and coverups come to an end.

    There are better ways to handle such situations, outside of government’s corrupt, obnoxious intents.

    Like

  • It is clear the plan is to pay Brathwaite until she is eligible for retirement which is soon based on a call to the talk show today. This lot knows what they are up to.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    That one was easy to figure out, but Brathwaite could have continued her job as a productive member of the civil service right up to pensionable age 67, had the DPP done his job, arrested and charged Parris and his clown executives for fraudulently selling illegal policies to senior citizens without their knowledge. ..along with the charge for blatantly ignoring the directive from the same supervisor of insurance…to cease and desist from selling those illegal policies.

    Instead…between David Thompson as PM and Fruendel Stuart as attorney general, there was a concerted and massive conspiracy to shut up Ms. Brathwaite by sending her on leave right up to pensionable age…8 years…in a bid to cover up Leroy Parris’ CLICO crimes against vulnerable senior citizens. ..

    ……….but…it is all now in the light of day….7 years later.

    …and Ms. Brathwaite will still get her pension…and Karma will continue to demand answers from each and every one of those small time crooks in and out of parliament.

    Liked by 1 person

  • It is difficult to deal with hysteria some times. It is not the duty of the DPP to arrest people, that is for the police. The DPP brought charges against Mr Parris and his colleague. The Registrar’s office is the weak link in the chain as I have pointed out by apparently failing to list the case. There is no suggestion of fraud so allegations of fraud are defamatory.
    By the way, and this is one for David, it is clear to my mind that Mr Parris has a clear case of malicious communication and defamation. His lawyers can seek an injunction, compel WordPress to identify the source of the defamation and malicious communication and seek a resolution. Using bogus names is no shield.

    Like

  • Well Well @ Consequences Observing Blogger

    Now we know why Fruendel and his gang were desperate to cement the DPPs place in the taxpayer`s life and money for nearly the rest of his life…..

    ….quid pro quo for not doing his job and arresting Parris for fraud….

    …am sure a supreme court judgeship position would have been promised for later to further stink up and corrupt the judiciary, but as is always the case with man made plans KARMA made decisions.

    Man makes decisions, the DIVINE laughs.

    Like

  • Well Well @ Consequences Observing Blogger

    …and it`s a such a shame that Hal is not a lawyer.

    Like

  • Well Well @ Consequences Observing Blogger

    …or he would know, that the police cannot act on an arrest without a directive from office of DPP….that is basic worldwide knowledge…elementary.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Hal Austin July 10, 2017 at 10:44 AM
    “As has been pointed out in this forum, Mr Parris and a colleague were charged, not with suspected fraud, but allegedly with ignoring a directive from the deputy supervisor.
    Therefore, according to this account, the police executed their responsibilities by investigating the allegations and passing a report on to the DPP who brought charges.
    So responsibility has moved on to the Registrar’s department, and in particular the Listings Officer. Was the case listed to be heard? If so when and before which magistrate? If it has not been listed in seven years can the attorney general, Registrar or Chief Justice please explain to the public the cause/reasons for the delay? Can they give a time span within which it will now be heard?
    Until then, Mr Parris and his colleague must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That is the rule of law.”

    And shall it be! “The rule of law”, that is!

    Man, why don’t you climb down from the soapbox you have erected, not in Palmetto Square but in the Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park? This is Barbados you are dealing; with not the UK.

    What rule of law what? The highest law of the Land also ‘demands’ each citizen is entitled to be heard and to receive Justice before a court of law in a “timely” manner.
    Would you consider a wait of 5 years or more for the hearing of a murder charge a ‘timely’ dispensation of Justice?

    The rule of law in the UK and definitely in Barbados also mandates that income from all sources (unless specifically exempted) must be treated as assessable income for income tax purposes and the appropriate tax deducted there from and paid over to the Treasury via the Barbados Revenue Authority. As a big-up journalist you ought to be aware that in the UK even those living off immoral earnings like prostitution in Soho are required to pay their ‘fair’ share of taxes to the HM Customs & Revenue.

    The same way you, Hal- the topnotch British trained financial journalist and investigator par excellence- can assert that your bosom buddy Greenverbs has not been indicted on any charge of fraud and must therefore be presumed innocent until proven guilty is the same way you can tell BU whether the same Greenverbs has followed the same rule of law by declaring the $3.3 million he received as a gratuity via the convoluted laundry scheme and by paying over the relevant tax due.

    If the law has not been followed who is at fault here? Certainly not the innocent Greenverbs, right, but the BRA and the minister charged with the responsibility of protecting the financial interest and integrity of Government.

    Can you imagine how far the tax payable (and collected) on that ‘gratuitous’ income could have stretched in meeting the cost of keeping those two senior civil servants on unproductive leave with full pay?

    Walter Blackman can confirm or refute that the tax payable would be somewhere in excess of $1 million.

    So Hal, just go a fly a kite in the park when it comes to talking about “Rule of Law” in Barbados.

    Maybe now that your former bête noire is now legally non compos mentis for eternity you might just get some traction in your ‘rule of law’ application in the local banana republic called Barrowbadus.

    Like

  • @ Miller
    Your problem is that you refuse to believe Hal when he says (over and over) that he did not ‘go to school’…. but learnt from BU.

    Dat man telling the truth yuh hear??!!

    He used to be ’bout the place’,…. but even back then, we all wondered why….?
    …now it is clear that his parents just wanted his miserable donkey out of the house…..

    LOL
    ha ha ha

    Like

  • @Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger July 10, 2017 at 3:28 AM “How could any of that make sense to educated, intelligent people.”

    Who you calling educated and intelligent?

    Like

  • @Dumpy July 10, 2017 at 4:20 AM “Let us assume a man engaged in a consensual sexual intercourse a woman, but unknowing to the woman the man had HIV, and during this sexual encounter the man was wearing a condom which ruptured and inflected the woman.
    Question: is this man liable criminally or civilly for the injure he caused this woman though his intent wasn’t to cause her any harm, which is made evident by the condom he wore during this sexual encounter?”

    Yes this man liable criminally or civilly for the injury he caused because he ought not to have engaged in sexual intercourse with the woman without first informing him that he was HIV positive. Then she could have given true informed consent, or could have withheld consent.

    Like

  • Here is a little reading for you Dumpy
    http://www.aidslaw.ca/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/CriminalInfo2014_ENG.pdf
    The obligation to disclose HIV positive status under Canadian criminal law

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger July 10, 2017 at 10:23 AM “Those with clear consciousness know they can go at any time and are already prepared…with an even clearer conscience. …no sudden death can shock them.”

    Actually Well, Well people are NEVER shocked by their own sudden death.

    Like

  • @Hal Austin July 10, 2017 at 10:44 AM “So responsibility has moved on to the Registrar’s department, and in particular the Listings Officer. Was the case listed to be heard? If so when and before which magistrate? If it has not been listed in seven years can the attorney general, Registrar or Chief Justice please explain to the public the cause/reasons for the delay? Can they give a time span within which it will now be heard?”

    Since the attorney general, Registrar or Chief Justice are highly unlikely to respond to you through this forum, may I remind you that the Prime Minister himself told the people of Barbados that “the man [Leroy Parris] is not a leper, he is my friend’

    Pick sense outta dat.

    Like

  • @Bernard Codrington. July 10, 2017 at 11:08 AM “Due process, as you know, takes an inordinately long time in Barbados.”

    Justice delayed is justice denied.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Simple….as cold as it can get on the blogs sometimes, I like giving everyone, including the yardfowls on the blog the benefit of the doubt and presume everyone is educated and intelligent, despite a few displaying on a nearly daily basis what dumb asses they really are, I still give them the opportunity to prove themselves wrong…lol

    …..ya challenging Hal by asking him to pick sense out of simple common sense….that is an immense challenge right there…lol

    Re….”shocking deaths”….am sure the experience woukd be mire of relief in some cases, sadness in others, but I doubt shock would be involved, only the living love to be shocked even knowing death is unavoidable and visits anyone at anytime.

    In DPPs case, I understand he may have had an adverse reaction to anesthesia, which is unavoidable, known to happen, rarely happens particularly in prostate surgeries, particularly in that new procedure, but with other health issues involved, quite possible, particularly if a person is genetically prone to heart attacks….so he would have been happily asleep anyway.

    ….. it’s the living who are always shocked despite knowing that death is a drop in, unannounced visitor most times..

    Like

  • Thank you Simple Simon, but I thought when you engage in a sexual act you assume the risk of infection because of the number of sexually transmitted diseases known to the public? And this is analogous to working in a medical setting where you use Universal Precautions because of the Hipper Law here which prevents the hospital or any medical establishment from disclosing what contagious or sexually transmitted disease a patient has.

    Like

  • What does the PM’s comments got to do with due process? We cannot always excuse our collective failure on ‘that is the way we do things in Barbados’.
    But there are still failures of the system: if Clico had sold unauthorised policies, the regulator should have the authority to close the business down; then there is re-insurance, since these policies would have been high risk; then there is the actuarial involvement, is there a disciplinary body for actuaries? And, as I have said, who was/is the listing officer? Should s/he be also disciplined.
    It is cheap and basic to pick the low hanging fruit – Mr Parris, his legal advisers and colleagues – and not the system.
    The problem is that financial regulation in Barbados is hopeless, no matter who the individuals are holding the positions, who the politicians are or how close they are to business people.
    It is the system. Get over it.

    Like

  • @Hal

    This is a debate you will struggle to win support everytime on the merits. Yes the regulator has a role to ensure safeguards are followed, however, under the Company’s Act the officers of any compnay have a fiduciary responsible to engage in behaviour that protects the interest of said company. This is why the CL Financial/Clico debate is so interesting because of the catastrophic failure on many fronts by the players.

    Like

  • David,
    Insurance companies do come under Company law, but the most important are the regulatory and supervisory regimes, under which insurance companies must not only obey the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law.
    That is why you cannot have rules-based regulation, the lawyers would make mince meat of you. But under principles-led regulation, the spirit is as important, even more so, than the letter of the law.

    Like

  • @Hal

    And the FSC has guidelines outside of the law that should govern how individuals operate as officials of insurance companies Anyway this is a murky issue, lot of grey.

    Like

  • Hal does so well when asking questions…
    It baffles the mind how he is able to so smoothly go on directly to talking all kinds of shiite right after good questions.

    Take his 6:29 Am for example.
    Good questions right up to the point where he defines Greenverbs as ‘low hanging fruit’.

    How could a man who was able to pay himself millions of dollars in salary and commissions; bribe prime ministers; intimidate a slate of Board Members who represent the “who’ who” of Barbados (despite himself being a poorly educated ex-driver by profession); and remain free as a bird eight years on …. be a low hanging fruit?

    Does Hal not yet understand that the ‘System’ in a place like Barbados is DIRECTLY related to the quality of the individuals holding power at the time?
    …is the man daft?

    …then to complicate matters, he goes on to promote “principles-led regulations and the ‘spirit’ of the law” at 6:56 AM.
    Boss, it is based on EXACTLY this concept that everyone else thinks that Parris is a low-life thief ….who should be treated like the common thief that he is….
    The same goes for those individuals who failed the ‘SYSTEM’….. and perhaps even more so to those like you who seek to make excuses for them all….

    Like

  • David,
    Key officials are also regulated. It is not murky, our regulators do not understand their roles. The other problem is that regulation is not a legal regime, it sis multi-disciplinary.
    Tell you a little story. Shortly after the global banking crisis I attended a financial regulation course, there were twelve of us – ten in-house lawyers and the majority of solicitors from what we call the Magic Circle (top law firms) one housing barrister and one non lawyer (me).
    It was a course in how lawyers (nay, solicitors) capture financial regulations and force out all others. They are clever. We must not allow that in Barbados.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Hal will beat himself to death on that subject before realizing he can never win that argument. …on the merits…not as it pertains to incestious practices and corruption….between all involved.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    But he will keep trying and we will continue to assist him in beating himself to death…lol

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington.

    @ Simple Simon at 9:35 PM

    “Justice delayed is Justice denied”. Congratulations .You got that one right.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Leroy Parris should be locked up for fraud, he still can be.

    800 million dollars of taxpayer’s money to underwrite the CLICO fraud.

    how much more damage to the people woukd Parris and Thompson had done, if Thompson had not been taken out of the equation.

    https://www.barbadostoday.bb/2017/07/11/not-out-fault/

    And of course it’s never Fruendel and Sinckler’s fault.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Because Fruendel and Sinckler have no powers of parliament and cannot call up the chief justice or have nuisance, useless Adriel Nitwit Dimwit Jackass have the chief justice pressure the greedy judicial managers, or master of documents or whichever idiot is holding up closure of the CLICO matter.

    Like

  • Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger

    Carson….Someone posted to Facebook just now, David Simmons’ 2016 confession of corruption in Barbados, it came straight from the mouth of one who should know, directly corrupted by your masters the Kutappa-Harris clan as he was, he just could not keep silent anymore, he is however, lying about not having proof of corruption.

    The strange thing is, it’s an interview he gave to barbadostoday, wah happen, none of you can sleep at night anymore or what, guilty conscience…

    ….all that nasty stuff yall did to your own people for bribes, trips, luxury cars, abortion pills, viagra and cialis will fester inside you, bubble up and kill most of you, you know.

    I am sure he also has proof of your corruption with your masters….he just needs a little nudge to tell all.

    Finally…..a start…lol

    “Democrat files first articles of impeachment against Donald Trump

    Mr Trump ‘has acted in a manner … subversive of constitutional government,’ Mr Sherman writes.”

    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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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