I had no intention of returning this soon to a discussion of the law relating to freedom of expression, even if indirectly as I propose to do today, after last week’s excursus on that topic and its contemporary broadening. However, some items in another section of the print media during the past week might conceivably have led to a woefully confused public on a topic that is of clear public interest import currently.
In my perceived role as a public scholar of law, I therefore thought it important for me to clarify the matter in the best way I could and to thereby provide some general learning on the matter.
On Tuesday, October 31, under the headline, “Money for Mia after lawsuit”, a section of the press other than the Barbados Advocate reported on page 5 of its edition the outcome of a defamation action filed by the Honourable Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, Ms Mia Mottley against the publishers of the online newspaper Barbados Today and its editor, Ms Kaymar Jordan, in respect of two articles published in the newspaper whose imputations are by now doubtless in the public domain and not of current relevance to this essay.
The report in the newspaper suggested that there was a hearing before a named High Court judge and that Ms Mottley’s eminent counsel, who were also identified by name, had “successfully argued that Ms Mottley was qualified to practice law in Barbados since December 1987”, the date of her admission to the local Bar.
Doubts as to the authenticity of this report began to surface almost immediately on a Whatsapp thread to which I subscribe, although owing to the sensitive political nature of the matter and the possible implications of one being mulct in damages through defamation by repetition, no details were given.
Nevertheless, on Friday last, in a letter to the Editor of the same newspaper, Mr C. Anthony Audain, attorney-at -law and one of those reported as appearing on behalf of the defendants in the matter, averred that in fact “there were no arguments before the court…” and that “a consent order was agreed between the parties and the actions were withdrawn”.
This would understandably have left readers and the general public nonplussed as to how a matter as serious as this could have been reported in such a horribly incorrect manner to the extent of inventing a court hearing with arguments advanced and all. However, that is a matter for the organ to address and no concern of mine, either immediate or at all. My present remit extends solely to helping the public to understand how it may be possible under Barbados law amicably to resolve a defamation action without a court trial and what might have happened in the instant case.
Barbados, in its Defamation Act 1996, does not expressly include it as one of the desiderata of the statute as does Jamaica, for instance, but both pieces of legislation include provision for the offer of amends that is intended, as the Jamaica Defamation Act 2013 states as one of the principal objects of its Act “to promote speedy and non-litigious methods of resolving disputes concerning the publication of defamatory matter…” Indeed, Part III of that statute is captioned “Resolution of Defamation Without Court Proceedings” and includes, in addition to the offer of amends (called there an offer to make amends), the apology in mitigation of damages.
The corresponding Barbados statute, the Defamation Act, Cap 199, also makes provision at sections 16 to 18 for the offer of amends. According to section 16 (1) –
A person who has published a statement alleged to be defamatory of another may, if he claims that he did not do so intentionally, make an offer of amends under this section.
The subsection further establishes a presumption of unintentional publication, while section 16 (2) provides for the circumstances in which a defamatory publication will be deemed to have been intentional.
In Barbados, as in Jamaica, the offer of amends contemplates three elements. First, an offer by the defendant “to publish or join in the publication of a suitable correction of the statement complained of and a sufficient apology to the party aggrieved; second, where copies of the statement have been distributed by or with the knowledge of the person making the offer, to take such steps as are reasonably practicable on his part for notifying persons to whom copies have been so distributed that the statement is alleged to be defamatory of the party aggrieved; and third, and perhaps most crucial, to pay compensation to the party aggrieved.
The procedural details for making the offer are set out in section 16 (4) –(7), but it is further stipulated in section 17 that on acceptance of the offer by the aggrieved party “no proceedings for defamation in respect of the publication concerned may be brought or continued by him against the person making the offer, but he is entitled to enforce the offer of amends…”
If there is any dispute as to the adequacy of the compensation to be paid, then the matter is referred to a judge for determination. If however, the offer is not duly accepted, then section 18 provides that the defendant may rely, if it so chooses, on the offer of amends by way of defence and, in any case, in mitigation of the damages that may be payable in respect of the defamation.
“A defendant in proceedings for defamation may rely in mitigation of damages on an offer of amends not relied on, or not successfully relied on as a defence.”
Of course, not having been privy to these confidential proceedings or, as it is more crudely put, not having a dog in that fight, I cannot assure the reading public that the above is precisely what occurred in this case, but I trust that it may now be appreciated that not every case of defamation needs be resolved by court action and that the local law makes adequate provision for amicable resolution through an offer of amends that is accepted by the putative claimant.
And Mr Audain’s letter would certainly comport with such a procedure, especially when he affirms, …[t] here could therefore have been no “winning” of any lawsuit as suggested in your article. There was no determination and/or adjudication upon any of the issues before the law court on that day or at all. There was no determination of any matter whether procedural or substantive. The parties themselves agreed on the manner of disposing of the court actions…” [Emphasis added]
“……..there is a presumption that acts done through the court are rightly and properly done.”
Mottley is a qualified lawyer .
@ Cumberbatch November 5, 2017 at 5:05 PM
“The Qualification Granted by the Council of Legal Educatiun
Established by the Caribbean Legal Education Agreement
A person is qualified for admission to practise law who has pursued the
course of study and professional training in law provided by the Council of
Legal Education established by the Caribbean Legal Education Agreement
and has obtained the certificate, diploma, licence, or other status or form of
recognition awarded by the Council of Legal Education.”
Jeff you have hit the ‘practising’ nail on the ‘legal’ head by referentially ‘elucidating’ on that ‘catch-all provision “or other status or form of-recognition awarded by the Council of Legal Education”.
That ‘clearly’ imputes that a UK trained barrister with a few decades of practice under his or her belt and with good “QC” standing with the “Law Society of England and Wales (Leges juraque servamus)” can apply directly to the CLE for recognition and be granted (without the 6 months classroom boredom) more than status of ‘amicus curiae’ similar to what some universities do in awarding honorary doctorates; n’est-ce pas?
There seems to be a clear distinction between joining the Inns and being accepted to the Bar. Law students are allowed to join from their 2nd year, and the date Mottley gave in Parliament points to her applying to join in 1984. Being called to the Bar is described as “successful completion of the Bar Professional Training Course and attendance at the required number of Qualifying Sessions.” Furthermore, Barbados is signatory to the Council of Legal Education Treaty, that states:
“The Government of each of the participating territories agrees that the following persons shall be recognised as professionally qualified for admission to practise in its territory, namely-
any national who, prior to 1st January, 1985, had undergone or is undergoing or has been accepted for a course of legal training leading to a qualification such as is referred to in paragraph 2(b)(i) of Article 4 of this Agreement and obtains that qualification.”
It seems obvious that the intent of SI 1985 24 was to capture the intent of the treaty as it relates to transitional provisions.
Adriel, George Pilgrim and Fractured would have to tell Barbados and the court what “joining” the Inns means and if our amendment accords with the Treaty.
Hal Austin November 5, 2017 at 5:29 PM #
Country Life magazine has agreed to pay substantial damages and legal costs to the former deputy prime minister of Barbados for falsely suggesting that she assaulted another woman.
Mia Amor Mottley QC, former deputy prime minister of Barbados, launched a libel action against Country Life publisher IPC Media after the glossy weekly magazine ran an article, Treading the Boards in Barbados, in its April 3, 2008 issue that referred to a Barbadian calypso song that suggested Mottley had assaulted another woman.
The remarks were made as lawyers working on behalf of Mottley withdrew her case for libel against the magazine’s publisher after it agreed to a settlement that would see it pay her legal costs and damages, which are believed to run to a five-figure sum. Lawyers working on behalf of IPC apologised to Mottley in court.
Maybe that explains the lack of contribution by M to the Sexual Harassment Bill……….
Kevin, I’m sure you’re aware the DEMS “have a lot of explaining” to do as well.
While you’re attending the lunch time lecture this coming Friday at DLP headquarters, perhaps you could ask the DEMS to explain:
• Why Cabinet agreed to hire DLP goon and FORMER Acting Director of the Financial Intelligence Unit, Guyson Mayers and pay him a consultancy fee of $300,000 for 15 months to “oversee the National Risk Assessment and Mutual Evaluation Exercise of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Financing of Terrorism Regime of Barbados,” when the current Director of Financial Intelligence Unit should have been the appropriate person for the job.
• Why Hal Gollop included payment for “Preparation and Regularizing of title with respect to Lot E, Pine, St. Michael,” including in his invoice to the BWA, especially when the land was bought over 15 years ago under the NHC Act.
• How come the SSA Baord at the time was unaware of the CAHILL project, but Michael Yearwood was allowed to charge the Authority $1.5M in legal fees for project.
• How a lawyer charged the Caves of Barbados $19,550 to give a legal opinion on a loan agreement of $33.7M, and Richard Byer charged a $766,855.24 fee for providing a legal opinion on a $25.7 million loan from the Caribbean Development Bank.
• Why Blue Horizon Hotel was sold to Bjorn Bjerkham for a paltry $5M.
• Why over 1,500 NHC houses remain unoccupied and rotting.
I have to go work this Friday, but maybe you can go ahead and ask those questions for yourself. I would like to know the answers as well.
If you feel ‘ aggrieved ‘ about your ‘ alleged ‘ infelicities……then don’t go to George Street or try to send someone over there – this Friday !!!
You need to find yourself over to the DPP with your ‘ file ‘. !!!
But I suspect there’s a very good reason you want Kevin to take up your – Fire 🔥 Rage !!!
You have a big problem on your ……..crooked hands !!!!
Surely Friday, November 10, is not the only Friday in the year………… there are at least 8 more…… and then there are the constituency branch meetings.
“Don’t panic”………. remember, “patience is a virtue…..”
Files will DEFINITELY be PASSED on to the DPP!!!!!
Make sure walk with the ones for GREENLAND
Dodds prison too !!
The taxpayers still paying the debts for those ill fated projects !!!
On point….my thinking as well……the issue is a distraction.
You are just as silly as the other DLP yard-fowls who are paid to troll BU…….. and I’m going to indicate to how your stupidity “knoweth no bounds.”
During the 2008 election campaign, David Thompson and the DLP’s mantra was “CORRUPTION and cost over-runs.” You mentioned Greenland, HM Dodd’s Prison, SSS contract, Owen Arthur and a $75,000 cheque, etc.
On page 46 of your 2008 manifesto stated: “The Democratic Labour Party has selected a team of CLEAN, caring, COMPETENT and committed politicians who have SIGNED on to a CODE of CONDUCT that promises GOOD GOVERNANCE.
On page 48 of the same manifesto, the DEMS promised that IMMEDIATELY after being elected, they would INTRODUCE INTEGRITY LEGISLATION requiring:
• a declaration of assets by public officials,
• a Code of Conduct for Ministers,
• a new Freedom of Information law,
• amendments to the Defamation laws and
Why should I or any rational thinking Barbadian mentioned Greenland and Dodd’s, especially knowing the BLP paid the ultimate price when they were “OVERWHELMINGLY REJECTED” at the polls by the electorate in 2008?
If any individual of REASONABLE and RATIONAL thought takes the above information from your manifesto (and today’s date) into CONSIDERATION, they would CORRECTLY conclude that you are a “shiite-hound, jackass yard-fowl”……………..
…………. who should be ASHAMED to CONTINUE making any REFERENCES to Greenland and Dodd’s when you and the DLP had NINE (9) YEARS and NINE (9) MONTHS to PROPERLY investigate these issues and bring those individuals responsible for perpetrating acts of financial improprieties to JUSTICE.
But, after nine years and nine months, you and the DLP have been UNABLE to PRESENT to Barbadians, any EVIDENCE to SUBSTANTIATE your ACCUSATIONS of BLP corruption…………… and amidst those accusations, as at today’s date, I have read that criminal charges were filed against any member of the BLP relative to corruption…………
………….. therefore, I can reasonable assume that you and the DLP have also been UNABLE (or REFUSED) to present any “files” to the DPP as well.
As such, your mentioning of Greenland and Dodd’s, at a time when elections are IMMINENT, is SHIITE and basically a WEAK ATTEMPT at political grandstanding (pretentious display to impress people) and political expediency (wanting to advance yourself politically).
………………and amidst those accusations, as at today’s date, I have NOT read that criminal charges were filed against any member of the BLP relative to corruption…………
You could like it or lump it you cannot set the agenda for the DLP !
Since you so anxious to walk wid files !
Walk with the one George Payne got against Edmund Hinkson in the High Court of Barbados !!
You introduced the idea already – ask MAM to step down !!!
BLP set of Lilliputians !!
With you at the very….top !!
Hmmmmm……….. seems as though you’re unable to “handle the truth” and has resorted to writing more shiite than usual.
I am NOT a MEMBER or SUPPORTER of the BLP………… so I don’t care what you call them. However, the BEES and I have one thing in common………… I would like to see the back of this inept DLP administration.
And you are of the mistaken opinion that mentioning a court case involving George Payne and Edmund Hinkson would upset me………….. I cares nuffing ‘bout dem either.
But I am VERY ANXIOUS to “walk with the one JOHN GRIFFITHS had against MICHAEL CARRINGTON in the High Court of Barbados,” to CONSTANTLY REMIND you and Barbadians of Carrington’s DISHONESTY.
Whereas the matter between Griffith and Carrington has been adjudicated, the outcome of Payne’s and Hinkson’s matter remains speculative. So……… Payne versus Hinkson is SHIITE when COMPARED with “GRIFFITHS versus CARRINGTON.”
How could the DLP refer to selecting “a team of CLEAN, CARING, competent and COMMITTED politicians who have SIGNED on to a CODE of CONDUCT that promises GOOD GOVERNANCE,” and Michael Carrington REMAINS the Speaker after ILLEGALLY with-holding (a fancy word for stealing) money belonging to his former client, the wheel-chair bound, SENIOR CITIZEN, John Griffiths.
Surely Carrington’s dishonest actions meant he DID NOT READ the following statement on page 17 of your 2008 manifesto, under the caption “(8) Treasuring Our Seniors In Their Golden Years,”: “The Democratic Labour Party is COMMITTED to CARING for all Barbadians in their SENIOR YEARS.”
Under these circumstances………….. your REFUSAL to ask Michael “to step down” is a clear indication you are SUPPORTIVE of his dishonesty.
Sorry to hijack this post.
“What are the Paradise Papers and what do they tell us?
The leak of 13.4m documents shows the scale of the offshore empire and involves everyone from the Queen to Facebook”
Maybe the focus should be cleaning up the corruption in government, in the opposition and across the island, even the disliked Saudis are working on cleaning up the corruption amomg their own princes, family members and government officials, ministers, all of them are under arrest……since they love to keep women oppressed on these shitty little piles of sand, it’s only men arrested…lol
……give up the corrupt politicians, ministers and minorities, name them, shame them, get rid of them, they are a blight on the island.
“The day before the helicopter crash, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman ordered the arrest of 11 of his royal cousins, as well as nearly 40 of the country’s most powerful military officers, influential businessmen and government ministers – some of them potential rivals. No connection has been drawn between the events.
On Saturday, Prince Mohammed, 32, arrested billionaire Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, one of the world’s richest men, with major holdings in Western firms, as well as two of the late King Abdullah’s sons.
The crown prince said the unprecedented mass roundup is part of a larger crackdown on corruption targeting senior royals and their business associates, who have long been seen as operating above the law.
“The homeland will not exist unless corruption is uprooted and the corrupt are held accountable,” a royal decree said.
Alwaleed is accused of embezzlement, hiring bogus staffers and giving contracts to his own companies – including a $10 billion deal for walkie-talkies and bulletproof military gear.
The arrest of senior princes and 38 others upends a longstanding tradition among the ruling Saud family to keep their disagreements private in an effort to show strength and unity in the face of Saudi Arabia’s many tribes and factions.
The apprehended men were being held at the Ritz-Carlton in Riyadh, which recently was the site of a major investment conference that the crown prince attended with global business titans.
A Saudi official said other five-star hotels across the capital were also being used to hold some of those arrested. The men in custody have all been blocked from leaving the country, according to reports.”
The Mantra on BU for the last seven years states Leaders Lead
Maybe it is about time the Opposition leader gets the Memo
For if it is with a given certainty that as the blp yardfowls gleefully belives Mia would become barbados next PM then it is about time she lays a foundation of firmn leadership with an exemplified boldness to speak the truth
“sociologically, rather than young women looking across their age cohort, they look beyond
their age cohort because the men of the ’70s and the ’60s are educated and you want your
equal in conversation, in earning capacity.”
If Mia cannot take care of sensitive issues that borders on accountability character and integrity.
How on Gods earth would she handle matters that are if concern to the Nation
Mia made a promise to deliver on the issue of LEC and so far all that populace has heard is a reaction clouded in suspicion dealing with a lawsuit pretaining to the LEC
Hmmmm……Brasstacks today very interesting…..Elliot has just disagreed with Audain’s interpretation of the resolution of the case…..futhermore he has sought to lay to rest all the matters relating to MAMs qualifications,thanks to the prompting of the trinidad lady.
He is quoting from various documents as well and showing that the documents used by the T&T lady to arrive at her conclusion were of recent vintage which had no bearing on the docs of 30 years ago.
Brasstacks’ moderator Ellis has been provided with more docs and has broken for the 12.30 news and has invited Elliot and the T&T lady to return to finish this discussion with the new evidence out of the UK.
Keep your eyes on the Clinton saga and understand that the three words Integrity Accountability and bad character has denied. Clinton the presidency. The same three words that are being placed as a forefront in Mia wanting the job of PM
This going down going to be real interesting…..an inept govt shooting itself continuously in the foot,charging its opponent with its own short comings of ……Integrity,Accountability&bad character…..wuhloss…..only in Bim.
lol….Angela Yardfowl will get sued….hahaha
PM Stuart does not carry that kind of baggage. In a two man race for PM Stuart beats Mia hands down.
From all accounts the issue of MAM has been resolved as far as it can be in the peoples court and as all have agreed the only other avenue if doubt persist will have to be in the Supreme Court of Bim.
Hahaha…..Angela….how could you say that about your PM…….that he does not carry that kind of baggage….wuhloss……he is devoid of the baggage of integrity,accountabilty and bad character…..nice to know……thanks for the info.
Quot homines :tot sententiae. The important thing is not to be distracted from the important tasks at hand. There are many diversionary tactics that are being played out. BU household, be aware.
Some people have become irrelevant on the blog.
All of Barbados now know that Mia was admitted to the temple before the cutoff.
Gollop is a Ja.
Adriel Brathwaite is a Ja.
Now that this LEC matter has been frontally addressed by Elliot Mottley and Vere Brathwaite can we refer to Hal Gollop as a jackass and yardfowl?
Lil Man have you read the George Payne Edmund Hinckson files that are lodge in the court docket and the sworn testimony that have negative implications attached to Mia illegalties . Nowhere can anyone find such dirt attached to PM Stuart.
Lil Man you better do your homework
Hahaha…..wuhloss…….cheep,cheep,cheep…….you ez de body dah mek de statement dah he ain got no integrity,accountablity and bad character.
Chuckle ….how can someone lack integrity and accountability……and still have a good character…..the mind boggles.
David November 6, 2017 at 2:35 PM #
All of Barbados now know that Mia was admitted to the temple before the cutoff. Gollop is a Ja. Adriel Brathwaite is a Ja.
And so too is Angela Cox/Skeete/ac
@ angela Skeete
…In a two man race for PM Stuart beats Mia hands down.
We gotta accept Mia…., but what EXACTLY qualifies Froon Stuart to be in such a race?
When has he ever ‘manned’ up?
…or is this some kinda secret between the two o’ wunna?
David Ellis prove once again that he is a cut above the rest in seeking out the chaff from the wheat.We were given all kind of opinions by some Stuart and DLP supporters whose one intention is to have Stuart returned to the corridors of power come next year’s general election.
It would seem based on what we heard today that ‘perish the thought’ is a more likely thing to say.The bottom line is as the Sr Mottley put in the public domain .The only way one can lawfully challenge MAM’s admission to practise her profession is the High Courts of Justice of Barbados and in so doing be prepared to challenge the public record of the late Sir Denys Williams.Who will bell that cat!It reminds me of the late Harry Wills’ boast…Not a man move,…..’down taw,nuh brush’.Gaul blimmuh!Brasstax today worth a repeat for all those who were taken up with having to leave work owing to lack of potable water.
Didnt Jeff also opine that all who want to challenge MAM’s qualification to practice in the local court must seek redress in same?
Artax we also know that Mia character and integrity is questionable as filed in court papers stated by one of her members
Doesnt such illegalities not bother you one bit given that she inspires to be leader and chief as PM for barbados
Cant see how such revelations would not be of concern to you when you always quick to remind the BU classroom about the court order lodged against Carrington even after he did what the court asked if him
Yet you continue to bury your head in the sand in grand pretentious actions as if Mia illegalties should not be recognized or made to mention
You know you are one bold faced hypocrite.
@David November 6, 2017 at 1:38 PM “Now that this LEC matter has been frontally addressed by Elliot Mottley and Vere Brathwaite can we refer to Hal Gollop as a jackass and yardfowl?”
i would say an extremely loyal DLP partisan.
@Artax November 5, 2017 at 7:48 PM ” Why over 1,500 NHC houses remain unoccupied and rotting.”
Maybe they hate poor black women and their bastard children?
Refresh my memory….did not this AC consortium praise MAM when OSA ousted her and painted a glowing picture of the lady?
Clearly she was admitted under the old rules, which are just as valid as the new rules.
Yard-fowl Angela Cox/Skeete/ac or whatever you choose to call yourself…….
I or any other individual can refer to John Griffiths’ case against Michael Carrington’s because it was adjudicated and it is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that Griffiths WON the civil suit, because he was able to provide the court with enough evidence to prove Carrington illegally with-held his (Griffiths) funds.
I’ll prove you’re the “bold faced hypocrite” and the one burying your head in the sand, mainly for political reasons.
Okay, now let’s assume that a BLP member filed a law suit against Mottley.
How can you accuse Mottley, make mention or ask for a recognition of “illegalities,” when, at today’s date, the matter you referred to involving her, HAS NOT BEEN HEARD BY THE COURT?
And until such time the case is called and the plaintiff is able to present enough evidence to convince the court to rule in his/her favour………………those “illegalities” are mere ACCUSATIONS and Mottley remains INNOCENT until proven guilty.
Unless of course, you can present information to BU that a court case was heard and the plaintiff won the law suit.
Vincent Haynes November 6, 2017 at 4:07 PM #
“Refresh my memory….did not this AC consortium praise MAM when OSA ousted her and painted a glowing picture of the lady?”
Read the following contributions……….. and this yard-fowl had the gall to “tell” me “You know you are one bold faced hypocrite.”
ac March 16, 2011 at 8:16 PM #: Truly Mia has arisen from the ashes . The gang of five must be having sleepless nights trying to find ways to take the spotlight off Mia. I saw the shortman delivering his speech but hardly paid attention to much of what he was saying. Simply put “He needs to give it a rest” Mia speech was excellent! Seem to be speaking to the issues of now and necessary resolutions. You go girl!
ac March 18, 2011 at 6:33 PM #: Liberal and Prodigal the two of you are conspiracy theorist or what? Mia didn’t create the problem within the BLP . The good old boys club did it themselves. Now she doesn’t have to get along with them. They need Mia now. She doesn’t need them.
ac March 18, 2011 at 11:54 PM #: @Prodigal: Did you hear Mia rebuttal to the proposed amendment. She spoke on behalf on the people those whom would agree with her point of view Mia seems to demands respect from those who might have thrown her overboard. Her rebuttal tonight even though I disagree with her had delivered a sense of integrity into the debate more often having the ability to engaged the viewing public. Another stellar performance!
ac March 19, 2011 at 6:14 AM #: @AdrianHinds: “Mia the latter day statesman was thrown out of the house for conduct unbecoming of a FEMALE let alone a Statesman” in part she was thrown out because she was a FEMAle who had the guts to take no nonsense from those who wanted her out . Nevertheless not to forget that the men of Parliament had fist fights and gun fights in parliament and still are members of the club. Being a FEMALE gave her not such priviliges. However With all the pitfalls and innuendos she has endured Mia is standing head and shoulders above those who did her wrong like the Owen Arthurs and his loyal court the Gang of Five
ac February 19, 2013 at 5:29 PM #: Balance have you consider the woman vote those are the people that the note was intended for most men would not understand what it feels like to be mistreated publicly. But most women can identify which her humiliation and there is where the power of the vote lies.”
ac February 18, 2013 at 6:56 AM #:look no matter how far back the note goes it goes to his character and the many calculating or in this case miscalculating devious ways and methods he would use to get his way even if it means using his opponents. this guy is EVIL and cannot be trusted. TOO much POWER in the hands of one person is not good . 14 years is more than enough. SAY NO TO OSA he is corrupt ! CORRUPTION has no place in politics, First MIA next COUNTRY> BYE ! BYE! OSA! ENUFF is ENUFF!
ac February 18, 2013 at 9:21 AM #: With an issue as sensitive as the divide between OSA and MIA it was not only poor judgement on his part but it also help to exposed his hypocrisy and now again open up wounds that OSA said that are healed which again makes him look like a LIAR.
“ac February 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM #: most people must have to the conclusion having reading that note that OSA is not normal. Something got to be wrong with the brain. For such actions are out of the realm of normalcy. To think he would give the opposition that kind of ammunition is mind boggling.”
Yuh see why I don’t like yard-fowls?
cheep,cheep,cheep….cum fuh yuh scratch grain…hahahaha…..lookah muh crosses doh……bole face fuh truef.
So when was it not necessary to opine on a case in the court.
You and other blp yardfowls did not wait for the Clico case to go forward by due process when all the frenzy and accusations were levelled at Parris and David Thompson
So how now it should be so different for Mia in light of the fact one of Mia members made the accusations and also took a step to file those damming and damaging accusations against her
Lol….oh what a tangled web…lol
Yes Jeff made the same point yesterday @5.13p…….Omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta.
You seem to be suggesting because “one of Mia members made the accusations and also took a step to file those damming and damaging accusations against her,” even in the absence of a court case and evidence to substantiate the accusations………. Mottley “character and integrity is questionable.”
Therefore, based on your line of reasoning………. the fact John Griffiths made accusations that Michael Carrington with-held his funds and subsequently “took a step to file those damming and damaging accusations against” him……….. even before the case was heard, Carrington’s “character and integrity was (likewise) questionable.”
A forensic audit of CLICO’s operations revealed a number of financial irregularities including a questionable invoice for $3.333M, provided enough proof in the minds of the public for them to make certain assumptions.
As stands, in the absence of a court case, it’s merely the “member’s” word against Mottley’s.
This is turning out to be a bloodbath. “Trini woman” is that you? hahaaaaa
The Trini woman got popup today. every argument was licked down. She kept referring to the LEC.
That tangled web, that tangled web….haha haha.
Bro it all boils do to court evidence as filed AS with the Clico case before any court action was taken it did not take the blp long before the running of the mouth to assumed theft and even up to present while the case is still in court their have been no evidence brought forward as prove that their was fraud done by Thompson or Parris . However with the Payne Hinckson case the evidence filed bodes well and as stated to several illegalities attached to Mottley many of which were all named Now yes as a defendant she has a right to pursue legal avenues to prove innocence but until such is done and as you have stated the public can form assumptions and yes public would do so as in the case with Payne and Hinckson where Mottley character comes into question .. NO!
As i said before Carrington paid his dues and he at present has not thrown his hat in the ring to become PM of barbados
Still my question goes unanswered by You as it applies to accountability integrity and character and for good reasoning when it applies to Mottley
I expect you to go down this line, because it is the plan of DLP, you and the other yard-fowls to use any means necessary to discredit Mottley in her quest to become PM of Barbados.
It’s part of the political game.
You have admitted that Carrington “has not thrown his hat in the ring to become PM of Barbados” because of his dishonest deeds. But I’m sure if his civil suit was still lingering the courts, you would have a different spin on the issue and endorse his ambition to become PM.
However, I would like you to name ANY of the 30 members of parliament, to whom “accountability integrity and character and for good reasoning” can be applied?
Your and David’s comments caused be to log onto VOB’s web-site and listen to a recording of today’s “Brass Tacks.”
Artax November 6, 2017 at 6:51 PM #
You have admitted that Carrington “has not thrown his hat in the ring to become PM of Barbados” because of his dishonest deeds. But I’m sure if his civil suit was still lingering the courts, you would have a different spin on the issue and endorse his ambition to become PM.
Your words not mine
However be that as it may The accusations and illegal allegations level against MIA already filed in the court did nor dissuade her not to enter the political ring with an inspiration to be PM
BRO you go figure
Wait is this the same VOB 929 that dispense FAKE NEWS What de fk after that debacle who in their right minds would believe any thing coming out their vocal cords PHEW !
@ Artax who wrote ” I expect you to go down this line, because it is the plan of DLP, you and
the other yard-fowls to use any means necessary to discredit Mottley in her quest to become
PM of Barbados.”
The DLP and their yardfowls indulge in salacious gossip and innuendo but……..
The one person who has done the most damage to MAM’s political journey is former BLP
leader and former Barbados PM Owen Arthur.
@David November 6, 2017 at 6:41 PM “The Trini woman got popup today”
It seems as though the Trini woman and a few others, a very few others were misled by certain people in the DLP, certain people who really ought to know better.
Today I felt sorry for the Trini woman.
@Hants November 6, 2017 at 8:22 PM “The one person who has done the most damage to MAM’s political journey is former BLP leader and former Barbados PM Owen Arthur.”
Nobody ain’t really taking on Owen and his innuendo. If he got something to say, as man, let him come out and say it.
Or shup up.
Fractured dunce I hope you heard Brasstacks today with Sir Elliot Mottley and the DLP ass licker the Trini Dem every argument she come with was calmly blown out the water just like you so as Mr Mottley stated you want to challenge Ms Mottley then challenge the ruling of Sir Denys Williams in the Law Court.No more innuendo put your money where your mouth is but the coward you are I know that you are not man enough to do so,therefore game over umpires have left the field Next,bring the Canoaun or Pegassus Tapes moron.
the same VOB that misled the populace with fake news supposedly from ” reliable sources”
@Lorenzo November 6, 2017 at 8:44 PM “Next,bring the Canoaun or Pegassus Tapes moron.”
Fractured is not a moron. He is what we Bajans call a half a idiot. And all Bajans know that a half a idiot, is a bigger idiot than a whole idiot.
Dr. Simple Simon Phd November 6, 2017 at 8:43 PM #
“Nobody ain’t really taking on Owen and his innuendo. If he got something to say, as man, let him come out and say it.”
I agree………. rather than spew pejorative statements and innuendo about Mottley……… he should be man enough to say what really wants to say. Similarly to him not having any difficulty in saying exactly what he thinks about Jeptar Ince, he should not have any difficulty with Mottley.
And the fact that Mottley has refused to respond to his outbursts and has continued to show him respect, clearly discredit Arthur.
I was just listening to “Brass Tacks” on VOB’s web-site and heard the exchanges between the “T&T Woman,” Elliot Mottley, Vere Brathwaite and David Ellis.
Based on the information presented, this LEC issue and implying Mottley is not qualified should now be put to rest.
Hal Gollop is definitely a DLP yard-fowl.
Barbadians HEARD what was said today on Brass Tacks and Angela Skeete is accusing VOB of MISLEADING the public with “FAKE NEWS.”
A real, real yard-fowl!!!!!
Wait not accusing VOB of an untruth BU has Vob reporting a news story which turned out to be Fake news A lie?
Jeff Cumberbatch provide the most credible explanation when he wrote “To the best of my knowledge and belief, Ms Mottley has been duly admitted to the local Bars, both Utter and Inner.
Unless and until she is removed therefrom or otherwise disbarred by appropriate procedure she remains duly admitted. Omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta [Apologies for the Latin] It means that there is a presumption that acts done through the court are rightly and properly done.
…….there is a presumption that acts done through the court are rightly and properly done.
How come the debt strapped CBC is refusing to broadcast PAID BLP messages and at one stage refunded a percentage of their payment……………
………… but the DLP can OWE that station the SECOND HIGHEST AMOUNT of $109,609 (perhaps for broadcasting services on credit)?
How does it look that the DLP owes a state owned corporation $109,609?
…there is a presumption that acts done through the court are rightly and properly done.
Unless and until the CCJ says otherwise.
Given recent trends, it may be better not to ask them.
However after Mia was challenged by Dr. Lowe to show proof of LEC Mia response to LOWE was that she would produce documentation as proof . Furthemore did not Mia and her handlers not pursue legal challenges against Barbados today in an effort to make Barbados Today prove she did not have an LEC
Now what transpired today on brass tax was more of the same the blp operatives playing defense however given the Lowe Challenge to Mia and the legal pursuit which Mia and her handlers took to Barbados today it beehooves how can any one speak out on this issue to clear the air other than Mia
For certain she has all but boxed herself in a corner by first stating she can produced documentation in parliament and then using the long arm of the legal system to defy any one who says she did not have a LEC
“BU has VOB reporting a news story which turned out to be Fake news” and for the past two years you and the DLP have been spreading “fake news” about Mia Mottley.
But…… I’m sure you are aware that Barbados Underground and its facilitator have much more CREDITABILITY than the you and the Democratic Labour Party.
You should have allowed George Pilgrim to proof read your 9:28pm contribution before posting it to BU.
Against the background of proof that was presented, even by former DLP candidate Vere Brathwaite, who explained she practices law in Barbados under circumstances similar to that of Mottley and verified Mottley is a qualified attorney…………
Angela Skeete wrote that shiite………………you are worst type jackass yard-fowl……… I can’t believe anyone can be so stupid.
Similarly to how Donville Inniss told Denis Kellman to give social media a rest because of the shiite he posts on facebook………..
……………..yuh mean dey en got nuhbody in de DLP dat cud tell you the same thing?
Bro where does my Credibility come into play here? for certain i am not in the running to become an anchor in the political field Boy you got to be joking pointing in my direction on issues pertaining to credibility when all the teas leaves being read in reference to credibility and integrity points in the direction of Mia a woman who rather than “man up” against a tidal wave of suspicious illegalities send her foot soldiers in the line of fire.
Mia is the one who set herself up for all the innuendo and controversy surrounding the LEC when she could have done the proper and correct thing after being challenged by Lowe in Parliament for documentation
No but she pursued a path which most often leads to deception and suspicion
The fact that Mia would use legal avenues in defiance to close the mouths of any one who dares to question her call to the bar speaks of a character flaw driven by privilege and a lack of integrity
@ Bush Tea,
CCJ ? forget it. dis done. life as it should be……
The DLP made the accusations and the onus was on them to prove if they were true…… and no matter how you are trying to spin the issue…. you and the DLP were unable to so.
So, the Mia Mottley thing is finished…………. end of story!!!!!
However, since you’re the DLP’s representative in this forum…………you should explain why the DLP and Doug Hoyte refused to give the BLP airtime on CBC for which they were prepared to PAY for……………..
…………..yet the DLP is INDEBTED to the same CBC in the amount of $109,609.
One can assume the DLP, in its capacity as the ruling administration, used CBC to broadcast, ON CREDIT, the DLP’s political propaganda.
It begs the question as to how MANY other state owned agencies the DLP is indebted to.
CCJ ? forget it. dis done. life as it should be…
Wuh It NEVER started.
Always was a lotta shiite…
…so why not let us send the damn fools further…?
By the time these DLP jackasses finish with Mottley, every damn man jack will be voting for her…. and only Froon and Stinkliar easily outdo her as a poor choice for PM.
Talk about a CURSED people!!??
Hants – they SHUDDA NEVVA built that shiite at the Garrison….
Satan will probably do dixie bout there on independence day……
@ Bushie who wrote “Talk about a CURSED people!!??”
A brutal early morning beating and robbery, which left an elderly woman hospitalised, has rocked the feeling of safety in a normally quiet St Philip neighbourhood.
Reports reaching the DAILY NATION indicated that 83-year-old Colleen Jackman, of Harmony Hall, was attacked by two men around 3:40 a.m. Sunday.
This is a story many cannot comprehend. To contemplate how a society would have conspired to produce two idiots with minds to rob and beat an octogenarian is mind blowing.
At least Fractured and Muzzled has the decency to feel ashamed and stay away….but Angela Yardfowl…lol
No shame at all, at all….hahaha
This is a story many cannot comprehend.
Surely you jest, Mr D.
So which stories do you comprehend?
…how a young boy could shoot up a kadooment crowd …and it just fades into history?
…how the Speaker of the house is a known crook and criminal? …and continues to be ‘honourable’?
…how our road fatalities have sky rocketed …since the monument?
…how an idiot could be adding tax upon tax ..and we getting poorer and poorer (well- wunna..)
…how two prominent lawyers could visit an elderly woman, cause a disturbance – and the woman ends up kidnapped and murdered – and it just fades into history?
…how a prime minister could calmly lie about the CAHILL scam – and have the nerve to show his face in public after?
…how our coming ‘political saviour’ is best known for eating raw meat ….and missing LECs?
etc etc etc…
Do you comprehend ANY of the above ….or any of the other endless litany of shiite, that is currently occupying the brass bowls of this cursed land…?
The two demons who beat up that old lady were probably guided by the fact that the Speaker beat up publicly on an old man in a wheelchair …and BOTH the DLP and BLP shiitehounds in parliament STILL call him ‘honourable’.
….and it probably took TWO of them to do it …just in case she put up a fight…
Ugly, lost, crooked leadership…
Inert, mindless, sheep-like, brass bowl people.
A kind BBE must surely be seriously contemplating the option of putting us out of our abject misery….
A Lawrence Rowe like late cut for four pass gully!
“…how our coming ‘political saviour’ is best known for eating raw meat ….and missing LECs?”
“Country Life magazine has agreed to pay substantial damages and legal costs to the former deputy prime minister of Barbados for falsely suggesting that she assaulted another woman.”
“Mia Amor Mottley QC, former deputy prime minister of Barbados, launched a libel action against Country Life publisher IPC Media after the glossy weekly magazine ran an article, Treading the Boards in Barbados, in its April 3, 2008 issue that referred to a Barbadian calypso song that suggested Mottley had assaulted another woman.”
And you know the results of the DLP, Barbados Today and the LEC shiite………
So, based on the above information, one of your “Lawrence Rowe” shots appears to be a “swipe and miss.”
Boss, why don’t you keep your panties on..?
Country life magazine Bushie’s donkey!! …THAT is exactly the point.
Bushie said that she is BEST KNOWN for these things…… not that they are true or false.
Mia’s propensity to resort to legal bullying tactics to get her way is downright scary….. even when she has a good point….
Why the hell don’t you advise her that it would be FAR MORE POLITICALLY savvy to come to the public with the whole story …in simple English, and clarify things? …Caswell style…
e.g. …. Why should I go to do a LEC with other plebs who are dumb as shiite
…when there was a clear loophole available for me?
…and “what bite what??!!’. You see somebody get bite…?
Name another shiite for which she is well known …. Edutech, VECO and Dodds aside…!!
………..Bushie……. yuh still swiping……… and bowling “spin.”
You wrote a comment within a particular context and when yuh get uh good ball…….. yuh blame the pitch…. now yuh come on trying to bowl “off spin.”
Bushie……… you is de best………..
Bushie is an all rounder skippa…
You did bowl a good ball at the bushman, ..but all Bushie did was drop the bat, rush behind the stumps – as wicketkeeper ….and dived to third slip to collect your wide….
Good ball … but wide of the off…. 🙂
….and by allrounder Bushie means ALL….ROUND.
Yuh lucky the bushman did not rush down by the bowlers end, and call a no-ball yuh… as umpire…
ha ha ha
@Bush Tea November 7, 2017 at 7:44 AM “best known for eating raw meat”
You know very well that you, and the rest ‘o wunna does eat raw meat too.
So you could really STFU.
@angela Skeete November 6, 2017 at 9:28 PM “However after…was challenged by…Lowe .”
Ha ha ha.
@ Simple Simon
Boss, if you cannot follow SIMPLE English, then at least drop the ‘Dr and PhD shiite.
What does the fact that Vincent ‘eats raw meat too’ have to do with our next leader BEING BEST KNOWN for doing so….?
Vincent eats raw meat, but he is BEST KNOWN for talking shiite about pelaus ent it?
You of all people…… 🙂
Lol….our African brother Vincent, on pelaus and raw meat, hahaha. .
Good morning David:
Can you please ask Carson Cadogan, angela skeete, ac and the other DLP yardies to please, please come back. We missing DEM real, real bad!!!
And while they are out can you please ask them to research and report back to the BU bloggers to whether the doctoral degree possessed by the Honourable Dr. Lowe is from a university from this list of accredited American universities:
And if it is not from one of these can they explain why not.
Thanks a million.
We missing FracturedBLP too can you please ask him to come back.
Jeff is to be congratulated for adding some bite to the FTC by holding the utility companies to a higher standard of service to the consuming public which from time to time have expressed the view that the monopolists hold all the cards.Some even view them as economic terrorists.
Lol…..Fractured and Gone…lol
At least he or she has more sense than Angela Yardfowl….we had to chase Angela Yardfowl away…..she still wont get it, although it smacked her in the face..
@ Simple Simon
….whether the doctoral degree possessed by the Honourable Dr. Lowe is from a university from this list of accredited American universities:
Have you ever listened to the man Lowe?
To which accredited university could he gain acceptance? …far less graduate?
Lowe is so retarded that he probably has no idea of the concept of ‘accreditation’.
Everyone knows that the USA is an equal opportunity society where practically anyone can acquire a ‘degree’ that suits their particular needs….
Unfortunately for the ‘slowwitted’ among us, only ‘real-real’ universities manage to get themselves properly accredited.
@ Gabriel November 8, 2017 at 11:26 AM
Jeff is doing a good job. If only we can get the likes of Dr. JR to follow suit there should be a marked improvement in the quality of public administration and governance.
We are surprised Jeff has not yet been ejected from that regulatory chair for doing what is ‘fair’ after throwing the spanner in the works of that botched BNTCL ‘premature’ deal.
Keep it up Jeff. The BU family is behind you (even the yard-fowl angela Skeete (ac) and that quacking duck with the broken webbed-foot called Fractured).
Lowe the lowlife said in 2008 on CBC TV for all the public to see and hear……”we have set up a unit at the Water Authority so that when a pipe BURSES,we will respond very quickly” lawdhaveitsmercy.Look what Buhbaydus come to.
Pingback: The Prime Minister, Attorney General and Gollop the QC | Barbados Underground