Dr Valerie Stoute

I was barred from entering the O’Meara campus yesterday [15 November 2-18] by security staff. The staff was professional and courteous, explaining that the orders had come from the President that I was not allowed to enter O’Meara.  No reason was given. I have no complaint with how the security handled this sensitive issue.

But there is one aspect to note. That one aspect involves a Property Protectors pick-up pulling up and positioning itself at an angle to provide maximum blocking the car in which I was a passenger. This was extremely offensive. We had already pulled to the side for a couple of minutes before this nonsense happened. It was particularly and unnecessarily foolish because we would not have raced ahead to a second gate, at which we would undoubtedly have been stopped.

This was just too Hollywood. Frankly, part of my irritation came from the name on the pick-up van and the fact that this driver acted in this garish fashion as if he were protecting President Al Zubaidy’s property from a dangerous interloper. (You have it backwards. Sir.)

It was obvious that the others were reluctant but needed to do their job. Nobody wanted to block a Professor, whom they know as very decent and very hard working, from entering a tent on the grounds of the O’Meara campus in order to see research students graduate. Yesterday, I had 3 research graduates to whom I devoted years of hard work, and in some cases, had to fight off attempts to obstruct the candidate. Nothing was easy about pushing these candidates in the last year, when the UTT work context took such a nasty and dramatic turn.

I told the first security guard that I had a bona fide invitation, showed it to her, and told her I wanted to record her refusing me entry, both for her protection and for mine. I emphasized that nowhere on the invitation did it state that the University reserved the right to refuse admission. (Maybe if this president is still here, they will put it next year.) She immediately decided to consult her supervisors. This dragged on for many minutes with the supervisors, contacted by phone, unwilling to ‘give directives.’ The next offer they made was that the driver could continue but I would have to get out of the car. I think that may have been one of the directives which came down.

Of course that was preposterous. My own car was nowhere within walking distance, especially not in the rain, which had started falling when that ‘offer’ was made. Finally, the driver got a telephone call and I overheard clearly the head of security telling him that I had no right, no right!!! to be on the campus, that I should not have come, and that I could be jailed! Now I want to emphasize that what I overheard was that I could be jailed!!! Jailed. Not arrested but Jailed!! There is a marked distinction. Not all arrests lead to jail but apparently my attempt to enter Al Zubaidy’s ‘premises’ constituted trespass of such a level of seriousness that I would be jailed if I proceeded.

The driver of the car I was in was told to get off the campus immediately with me, by order of the President. Note that this officer did not tell this to the security guards, whom he knew would be going on record and who would probably have detailed exactly what they were told but I heard him very clearly. He didn’t seem apologetic. He seemed righteous. Misplaced rigor.

The driver acted immediately to obey but I asked for, and was able to record  the exchange because I wanted it articulated clearly and on record that I was being removed from the campus. I recorded one security officer, after saying clearly that I was recording, giving me instructions to leave. They did not know what the head of security had told the driver so they could only repeat on record the orders they were given earlier.

Several questions arise from the above. This directive, blocking a professor from graduation ceremonies, is supposedly justified because of the terms of my administrative leave. But the terms of the administrative leave are not written in stone. The person being ‘investigated’ should not be at work, if their presence could impede the investigation.

The documentary investigation was completed on July 18. This yielded the silly, yet still false, charges of academic breaches, the most recent of which is 2015. The disruptive and insubordinate behaviours were all emails. This search of the UTT servers, with or without a staff member’s knowledge or permission, certainly was not campus bound and certainly could not be impeded by me. So the restriction from access to the campus was never warranted.

So here are my questions. What happened yesterday was a very serious incident both from my point of view and from the viewpoint of the main head of UTT Security. I see it as infringement on my civil rights. He sees it as infringement of Al Zubaidy’ s right to protect his property. Whichever, this is now an inarguably serious issue for UTT. Further, it is NOT internal to UTT. It raises the question of when an institution has the authority to dismiss a civil right of an employee?  Is there ever a scenario for which this obtains in Trinidad and Tobago? This is really the context- TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. So what is next?

Is this what the UTT Board of Governors believes to be management strength? This? More importantly, how will this impact the experience of UTT’s brand new Chancellor, President Paula- Mae Weekes? Was the UTT President acting in the best interests of the University? How? What value did my absence bring? What damage would my presence have done? These are questions which need answering. Going back even further, what happens if this serious outcome came about from a condition which should never have been part of administrative leave because it did not apply, given my charges?

What will happen when it turns out that the administrative leave itself was never justified? What will be done when it is found that the charges are 3 years and older, are either not charges at all, or are patently untrue, or have already been judged by prior administrations with no conviction of wrongdoing so that they never should have been used to send someone on administrative leave? What happens if and when the charges turn out to be

preposterously silly, even if valid, and it is judged that they should have been countenanced by no thinking individual? Given the seriousness of today, the removal of my rights as a citizen, as a supervisor, the embarrassment caused to me, the damage to my reputation, to what base agenda will this be connected?

Some people, the very foolish ones, will say I am bringing the University into disrepute with my very selfish action of wanting to attend my students’ graduation is a tent? They would say that I had a right to stay away. At least one or two of the zealous will say I should have been carted away and jailed. I defy all of them to come up with the good of the action in blocking me not the bad of my taking the risk that I would be blocked.

One cannot bring the University into disrepute by revealing truths. The lie damages when it is told not when it is revealed. Similarly, abuses hurt when they are perpetrated not when they are exposed and stopped. The University cannot be brought into disrepute by a victim, only by the victimizer. People need to make sure the characterizations in this danse macabre are clear.



  • Talking shite as usual..I never listened to anything teachers said, SAW THE CRAP for what it really is at age 12, same CRAP still exists today


  • WARU

    So you never listened to any teacher since age 12 (lol)…so when and where were you raised … certainly not in Barbados some four to five decades ago … or else you spent most of your schooling in the headmaster’s office…?

    Man listen! We were schooled in an environment of sheer fear and intimidation some five decades ago … and you are asking me to believe that amidst this moral evil you were fortunate enough to disregarded what was told to you by a teacher of that era…? Man I wouldn’t want to see what your backside did look like during your time in school back in the day…


  • WARU

    Some of the teachers back in the day came to school just to beat people innocent children for sport, and wunnah of that generation have the audacity, the temerity, and unmitigated gall to regard them as some of the best teacher every … man of some of wunnah really want a psychological evaluation because wunnah thinking is twisted…


  • WARU

    I had this teacher from Dominica my second year in secondary school … and everytime this man came to teach us Religious Knowledge … I evisioned Loin Man or Dirty Harry coming to get me … because he took pleasure in beating us with strap as long as Bush Tea mouth …


  • “Man listen! We were schooled in an environment of sheer fear and intimidation some five decades ago ”

    Never got expelled, never got suspended, was never taken to the principal’s office, never listened to one teacher..always an A student….there is a lesson in there somewhere, ya should try to find it..

    yes, the Caribbean am told had some psychotic, manic teachers who beat and beat and beat, some should have had both their hands removed…


  • WARU

    Boy I frightening fah you … you talkin bout cutting off people hands and ting … man I glad me and you is friends … cause I don’t like de way you does dish out punishment…


  • Is it possible to frame a discussion without being informed by a personal or I experience?

    On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 12:30 PM Barbados Underground wrote:



  • There is a place for the personal reference if it is related to the topic but agree it can get out of hand.


  • Gotta give those who compile crap all month long, something to come back with during their psychotic break next month..lol

    Ah think they got enough material to make themselves look silly..


  • de pedantic Dribbler

    A hearty LOL David Mr Blogmaster re “Is it possible to frame a discussion without being informed by a personal or I experience?”

    Isn’t every blog opinion discourse really about the “I”! 🤣

    Of course you get opinion pieces that offer deep research with other references but realistically as soon as the author gives the benefit of his/her reason for the essay then boinggg it’s their personal view on show…generally all good.

    On the other hand the ‘my teacher this’ or ‘when I was a boy that’ from some of us falls into two categories: 1) total BS of bluster and fabulation and 2) want to show we had some jot of real life hands-on… its our opinion after all!

    How would blogging survive if not for the spectrum of ‘nansie’ stories to the accomplished essays…there is an ‘I’ in idiot but too in Intelligent, Informative and Interesting 🤣🤣


  • Since we’re being entertained by this morning by “total BS of bluster and fabulation” and the “I experiences,” according to Chaucer, I “thoughte (I) wolde amenden al the jape.”

    Want to see a “VILLAGE IDIOT” rant and rave all day long?

    Observe closely what happens after I post the random number:



  • lol..Artax.. after Jackie had worked her magic on ya, we missed you yesterday, thought you would come out stronger, but that is the best ya can do, come on you can do better, one thing we knew for sure, you did not miss not one post..


  • BOOM!!!!!

    See wuh I tell wunnuh???

    It does not take much to rile up the idiot!!!!

    And I did not have to make this up just to make things interesting.


  • So what do you think about Jackie???


  • Pingback: UTT Staff Retrenched | Barbados Underground

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