Millar told the court that in August 2015, she attended a meeting with former chief executive officer (CEO) of ICBL Ingrid Innes and former senior vice-president with responsibility for business development and marketing Alex Tasker.
Following that meeting, she said Innes instructed her to make “an urgent payment” of a referral bonus to Inniss.
She said she was uncomfortable with the request made by Innes as he was “politically exposed” and she enquired if she Innes had cleared such a transaction with the company’s chairman John Wight, to which Innes responded, “It’s fine”.
Donville Inniss GUILTY as Charged
Discover more from Barbados Underground
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
724 responses to “Donville Inniss GUILTY as Charged”
-
@ Artax
You wrote:
“And we come to this forum “talking” about “regional unity?”
Holness has always been anti-CARICOM. I wrote that those leaders sitting outside the office waiting on Trump was the most embarrassing photo taken in the post independence
era. Those of us who understand the importance of true regional integration will continue our quest in the interest of future generations. We cannot be blamed for the inferior leadership with which we are now unfortunately saddled . -
Jamaica has always pursued opportunities in the North. Forget Hollness.
-
Doesn’t Holness lead a Conservative Party? The JLP is not the Party of Michael Manley
-
@ Piece the Legend,
Your next poster could show Donville and link to Tasker and Innes and ICBL.
There will be no prosecution of any bribers or bribees in Barbados..The bribers are usually a lighter shade of pale and untouchables.
-
I would be very careful with Barbados’ FAKE leaders who OPENLY promote Black people’s ENEMIES on the island.
https://www.facebook.com/24530951263/posts/10158203384246264/
-
@ Artax January 20, 2020 10:01 AM
But, Miller, it’s amazing that, during our “discourse,” you went from Donville, to illegal vending, the gun slinging event in Parliament, CLICO forensic report, strip clubs and moonlighting policemen. I’m sure if you approach your driving similarly, the police would pull you over for a breathalyzer test.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Put it down on old age while writing under the influence! A ‘senior hour’, if you please!
Just to point you in the “correct” direction of the law enforcement agencies’ ‘CONSISTENT’ failures to enforce the laws of the banana republic.
What then can you expect if the Americans have to do it for you as in the case of the poor DI?
Didn’t the current AG make a ‘complaint’ to the Bill about the gun pulling and threatening who passed the buck to the speaker who swept it under the carpet in that honourble chamber. Was the man’s licence to carry arms subsequently renewed?
BTW, would you pass the test if you were smoking 3 spliffs of pot instead of 3 beers?
What a nice way to kill off the local rum business and make it for ‘export only’ like the imported deadly chemicals while promoting the use of mary jane while driving?
Or can’t you see the ‘consistency’ of the double standards?
-
@ Hal
You should click on the nationnews link below taken from their Online website.
Can you believe these brain dead idiots who are walking around telling people that they are ‘punching above weight’ still have people going to get water from water tanks?
Something I have never seen in most countries visited.
The only punching above weight in Barbados is Politicians both B & D collectively fooling and stealing taxpayers funds.
xxxxxxxxxxx
Hundreds of people in the central and eastern parishes of Barbados will be without water after low reservoir levels forced the Barbados Water Authority (BWA) to shut down two reservoirs.
The BWA says they were forced to stop pumping at the Bowmanston and Golden Ridge Pumping Stations and this may result in low levels and water outages to customers in districts across St John, St George, St Joseph, St Andrew and St Thomas.
The Authority apologised to customers for the inconvenience and said water tankers will be dispatched to the affected areas and the community tankers will also supply water as a temporary measure
https://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/243554/water-outages
-
@ Piece
Many thanks. The chairman still tolerates my rantings. As to Donville Inniss’ criminality, I will give an hypothetical example drawn from financial services and inheritance law. But first I must remind you I am not a lawyer.
Here we go: a newly married couple – both for the second time with children from both marriages – were on their way to their honeymoon when the place crashed, killing them both. In the probate, the big question was who died first?
Common sense may say that it does not matter, they are both dead and both died at the same time. That is why common sense is usually wrong. It is important to the children who died first since it would determine which set of children will inherit the family estate.
Remember this as we discuss Donville’s unethical behaviour.
Donville was convict ed in the US of money laundering, but that was a secondary offence. The substantive crime, what lawyers call the core crime, was committed in Barbados by a minister of the Crown.
The onus was on the US to inform the Barbados authorities at the earliest opportunity the moment they realised that a senior politician was corrupt. Instead, it appears as if the US authorities waited until Donville was travelling on an ordinary passport and entered their jurisdiction to arrest him. Two wrongs do not make a right and the US criminal justice system is as dishonest as the people they prosecute.
The not so smart will say that had the matter been reported to the Barbadian authorities it would have led to stalemate, with the case being dropped for lack of evidence or not in the public interest.
There is a long list of suspected offences that Donville could have been arrested and charged on, from corrupt motives (ICBL could have reported the approach, if it was made by Donville, or Donville could have reported it, if the initiative came from ICBL). Then there is abuse of power, using the power of office for personal advantage for a job he was already paid to do; malfeasance in public office; there is solicitation (if Donville made the first move); or bribery (if ICBL did); dishonest/corrupt intent.
In the case of ICBL, the regulator should be having conversations with them and subpoenaing papers relating to the New York trial and to the offences.
Further, the accountants association should be talking to the 2015/6 auditors of the ICBL books. There is a lot to explain there. What about the insurance supervisor and the senior civil servants in Donville’s ministry? -
@ Baje
The BWA is still allowing golf courses to water their courses, at least the Barbados Golf Club; there is no evidence that hotels are having water problems; there is no evidence that there are water problems in the Hight and Terraces; there is no ban on filling swimming pools.
In short, the president should have called an emergency long ago, but of course only ordinary people are suffering. A belated Happy New Year to you. -
@ Hal
The great joke here is that although Inniss has paid for his transgressions ; the bigger cover up in the country continues. The Duopoly will do all in its powers not to bring this case to a local court because it runs the risk of involving others. They are hoping that it just now goes away. Of course the cool aid drinkers would not accept this reality because of their blond loyalty to the corrupt Duopoly. -
@Donna January 19, 2020 9:44 PM. “My my mother’s father was a fisherman so if I am royalty mixed with fisherman what would that make me?”
Good afternoon Donna.
That makes you a REGAL angel fish The REGAL angelfish (Pygoplites diacanthus) or ROYAL angelfish, is a species of marine angelfish of the family Pomacanthidae, and the monotypic genus Pygoplites. [Wikipedia]
And if auntie Mia is you family, then she too is angelic and royal.
Oh dear I beginning to sound like Tron now.
Lolll!!!
-
Golf courses watering their courses is not the issue if you know the water source.
-
@Artax at 5:59 a.m. “lengthy extradition trial involving Gaskin, Scantlebury and Hawkesworth, who were indicted in 2004 by a Washington, DC grand jury for conspiracy to traffic cocaine? They challenged the extradition, which lasted 9 years and the charges were subsequently dismissed, without prejudice, on December 2013. They were released from Barbadian custody on January 9, 2014.”
Perhaps Hawkesworth should have thrown in the towel and gone ‘long with Uncle Sam. If he had done so perhaps he would be alive today, instead of being found, dead, dead, dead in a field at Bakers, St. Peter.
In any event was the “case dismissed, without prejudice” or did the United States withdraw their extradition request?
-
@Hal A
Common sense may say that it does not matter, they are both dead and both died at the same time. That is why common sense is usually wrong. It is important to the children who died first since it would determine which set of children will inherit the family estate
+++++++++++++++
I thought from a legal point of view the question would be did either have a will? The law in most areas presumes that the older spouse died first.I am not a lawyer
-
@David January 20, 2020 2:03 PM “Golf courses watering their courses is not the issue if you know the water source.”
you mean likwe somebody watering their golf course with imported bottled ater?
Otherwise as far as I know aall of Barbados’ water comes from OUR common acquifer, or from the Atlantic Ocean.
-
@Mariposa January 20, 2020 6:02 AM “However 36 thousand measly dollars none of which came out of tax payers money and all up in arms.”
Because who knows whether ICBL was charging the taxpayers the best possible rate? Perhaps their rates were higher than they should have been because they had to charge the government agency more than they should have in order to give the Minister “his cut.” $72,000 Barbados for doing NO work at all is a lot of money. I need to remind you that most Bajans work for less than $72,000 per year. Of course we are resentful that the Don got paid $72,000 for spending a few minutes sending emails and making a phone call or two, while the rest of us have to go to work for years in order to earn that much. A Bajan working for $350.00 per week, perhaps minding our infants or looking after our elderly parents, or cooking our food, or mopping our homes, hotels and offices have to work for 205 WEEKS/4 YEARS in order to earn $72,000, and the Don got that amount for a few minutes “work.”
So for us $72,000 is not a measly amount, for us that represents years of sweat and toil. That is why we are resentful.
We are NOT sheeple.
We know that we were unfaired.
-
@ Sargeant
A Will will be useless in the circumstances. If it is declared that the husband died first, then his spouse inherits everything and as she is dead, then her heirs will inherit the estate ie her children. And vice versa. A Will will not answer the basic question: which set of children will inherit..
-
@ Silly Woman,
You must learn to let the billy goat prance up. Do you remember bank holiday goat racing?
-
@Mariposa January 20, 2020 6:02 AM “However 36 thousand measly dollars none of which came out of tax payers money and all up in arms.”
In addition many of us have been ICBL customers for decades. We had no idea that the company was paying the Minister money out of OUR premiums, because all of the insurance company’s money comes from the customers. The company does not have a back room in which it manufactures money. The company could not/cannot exist without its customers.
So if the company was charging us their customers more than they should have because they had to pay the Don money, then that was OUR money. We would have been happy to pay even $5 less per year on our premiums. But “no” after paying our taxes which were used to pay the Mnister’s salary, then we had to pay enough on our premiums so that the Minister could get “his cut.” and in the meanwhile we scrunting and some months can only pay half our light bills, can’t buy enough food for our children, can’t afford to pau their school shoes.
So for us $72,000 is not a measly amount, for us that represents years of sweat and toil. That is why we are resentful.
We are NOT sheeple.
We know that we were unfaired by Donville and by the company.
That is why we are resentful.
-
No Hal. Country girl. Only went to town to get new shoes at Christmas. Did not wear shoes to elementary school. But once at “big” school also went to town in August to get new high school shoes. So going to Bridgetown when I was a child was like going to the mystical Promised Land.
So “no” sadly, no goat racing for me.
-
@ Silly Woman
Really? Whatever is happening to our culture? I propose Elombe Mottley to write about the subject.
-
“In any event was the “case dismissed, without prejudice” or did the United States withdraw their extradition request?”
Simple Simon (I prefer to use Simple Simon, because you’re certainly not a “Silly Woman”).
Read the following informaion:
United States Court of Appeals: FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia:
(No. 1:04-cr-00285-3)
(No. 1:04-cr-00285-4)Opinion for the Court filed by Senior Circuit Judge EDWARDS:
EDWARDS, Senior Circuit Judge: In 2004, Appellants, John Wayne Scantlebury (“Scantlebury”) and Sean Gaskin (“Gaskin”), who are residents of Barbados, along with another Barbadian resident – Frederick Christopher Hawkesworth (“Hawkesworth”) – and two Guyanese residents, were indicted by a grand jury in Washington, D.C., for conspiracy to traffic cocaine. Scantlebury, Gaskin, and Hawkesworth (who is now deceased) all challenged extradition to the United States. The disputes over extradition lasted for over nine years. Finally, in December 2013, the U.S. Government moved to dismiss the charges against Scantlebury, Gaskin, and Hawkesworth without prejudice, citing “the age of the case, government resources, and other factual and legal issues which indicate the case is no longer viable.” Joint Appendix (“J.A.”) 41. The District Court granted the Government’s motion to dismiss on January 9, 2014.
-
Well…at least Hal is being quite consistent, still living in LaLa Land.
-
@Hal Austin January 20, 2020 1:09 PM “a newly married couple – both for the second time with children from both marriages – were on their way to their honeymoon when the place crashed, killing them both. In the probate, the big question was who died first?
Common sense may say that it does not matter, they are both dead and both died at the same time. That is why common sense is usually wrong. It is important to the children who died first since it would determine which set of children will inherit the family estate.”In some jurisdictions it will be assumed that the older person died first, since as my father used to say, a green lime may drop, but a yellow lime WILL drop.
In some jurisdictions the minor and/or disabled children will be given precedence.
In some jurisdictions if all of the “children” are healthy adults, they will al inherit equally.
-
@ Silly Woman January 20, 2020 3:18 PM
“In some jurisdictions the minor and/or disabled children will be given precedence.
In some jurisdictions if all of the “children” are healthy adults, they will al inherit equally.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Bingo!
We all knew you had that bagatelle of commonsense lying somewhere in the valley of human rights.We are not disappointed that you have left your feminist shoes at the door and have not proposed that the entire estate be shared only among the female offspring since it would be wasted on the ‘young males’ in buying guns, hitting dope and banking their shares in the hairy purses.
-
David BU
The information I provided Simple Simon reminded me about an opinion being persistently promoted in this forum re: the “Barbadian authorities set up the DEA to arrest Hawkesworth so they could steal his land and money.”
Information from the Court indicates otherwise.
BACKGROUND:
The U.S. Government began investigating Hawkesworth for cocaine trafficking in 2000. The Government suspected that Raphel Douglas (“Douglas”) and Terrence Sugrim (“Sugrim”)
were supplying cocaine from Guyana to Hawkesworth. And Appellants were suspected of assisting Hawkesworth in an international drug trafficking operation that distributed cocaine
in Barbados and transported cocaine from Barbados and Guyana to the United States.As part of its investigation, the Government worked with an unnamed confidential informant. The informant allegedly spoke with Appellants and Hawkesworth on several occasions and made plans to help them transport cocaine to the United States.
In 2004, a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., returned a two-count indictment against Scantlebury, Gaskin, Hawkesworth, Douglas, and Sugrim. The first count alleged that all five defendants had conspired to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. The second count alleged that Hawkesworth and Douglas distributed 500 grams or more of cocaine. With respect to Appellants specifically, the indictment alleged that they “obtained false identification cards and documents in order to travel to the United States to facilitate the importation of cocaine from Barbados, Guyana and elsewhere into the United States.” J.A. 35. The indictment stated that Hawkesworth was the leader of the organization, which had allegedly shipped 184 ilograms of cocaine from Guyana to JFK Airport in New York City. The indictment also alleged that Scantlebury and Gaskin met with the informant to discuss whether contacts were in place for a test shipment of cocaine and that the informant provided Scantlebury and Gaskin with fake identification cards.
In support of its requests for extradition from Barbados, the U.S. Government submitted affidavits written by a Senior Trial Attorney in the Criminal Division of the Department of
Justice (“Trial Attorney”), a Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) special agent, and the confidential informant. The Trial Attorney’s affidavit stated that the evidence against the
defendants included the testimony of the confidential informant and of DEA agents, audio and video recordings of conversations, photographs, telephone records, passport records, airline records, and seized cocaine. The DEA special agent’s affidavit stated that 184 kilograms of cocaine, packed in a shipment of frozen seafood, was seized at JFK Airport on September 20, 2003, and that, later that day, the confidential informant met with Sugrim and Hawkesworth, who said that they had lost a load of 180 kilograms of cocaine that had been shipped to JFK. The DEA affidavit also noted that the confidential informant “was told that nobody was arrested.”J.A. 132. In addition, the DEA affidavit noted that the confidential informant had worked with the DEA for approximately five years and had proven to be “completely reliable.” Id. at 129.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, based on the above information, I’m finding it very difficult to believe the US government, Justice Department, DEA……… would allow themselves to be deceived (or set-up) and forced into a situation where they lost value time and resources over a 19 year period, so that some Barbadians politicians could steal Hawkesworth’s land and money.
-
The onus was on the US to inform the Barbados authorities at the earliest opportunity the moment they realised that a senior politician was corrupt. Instead, it appears as if the US authorities waited until Donville was travelling on an ordinary passport and entered their jurisdiction to arrest him. Two wrongs do not make a right and the US criminal justice system is as dishonest as the people they prosecute.
The not so smart will say that had the matter been reported to the Barbadian authorities it would have led to stalemate, with the case being dropped for lack of evidence or not in the public interest.
There is a long list of suspected offences that Donville could have been arrested and charged on, from corrupt motives (ICBL could have reported the approach, if it was made by Donville, or Donville could have reported it, if the initiative came from ICBL). Then there is abuse of power, using the power of office for personal advantage for a job he was already paid to do; malfeasance in public office; there is solicitation (if Donville made the first move); or bribery (if ICBL did); dishonest/corrupt intent.
In the case of ICBL, the regulator should be having conversations with them and subpoenaing papers relating to the New York trial and to the offences.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@ Hal Austin
You have been living in England/UK for way too too long.
Barbados does not work how the developed world operates.
The system is way too corrupted to include DPP office and the Baygon evidence planting Police Force.
If Donville was like the local couple who last week was charged with using false information to getting a loan and then money laundering in disposing of the cash in terms of them having no status or strings to pull re connections.
Makes no sense taking potshots at the US since left on its own Donville and all the other crooked BLP and DLP Politicians would have continued stealing and fooling the taxpayers of Barbados UNABATED.
Now the cat is out the bag and shows the level of contempt and disdain the MANIPULATED system has for the poor people who make up the majority of voters.
-
@Silly Woman
You are aware for example that Sandy Lane manages a desalination plant onsite?
-
Poor you!
-
@Miller
A bagatelle of commonsense- you do have a way with the language.
Good one!
-
@Austin, on what legal, govt to govt, international law or even rationale basis do you make the point that: “The onus was on the US to inform the Barbados authorities at the earliest opportunity the moment they realised that a senior politician was corrupt. Instead, it appears as if the US authorities waited until Donville was travelling on an ordinary passport and entered their jurisdiction to arrest him.
I can readily appreciate and understand your statement if this was a matter of national security i.e for example the US intel folks discovered that a govt minister was inappropriately consorting with China (and accepting bribes) to let’s say inappropriately allow Huawei local govt contracts !
And in that regard that type of inter-govt national security interaction becomes pertinent because the US may also be affected by the bad acts. (As they have so accused Huawei)
But generally, why would anyone prejudice their case by alerting the same govt in which the alleged bad actor is performing. That makes absolutely no sense.
Furthermore and much more importantly, your remarks clearly belie the clear understanding that criminal investigations are NOT under the purview of politicians and cannot and should NOT be in any way prejudiced based on political considerations. I am totally perplexed.
Also clarify your point about the Auditors Asscociation. What have we heard in public about this matter that brings that forward?
There was a suppoedly valid invoice for the expenditure and there was authorization from the CEO and sign off (grudgingly we are told) by the CFO. So when the Auditors sought to validate that years financials what exactly would have been the warning lights fo prompt their concerns.
@Artax, I don’t recall that Hakwesworth case so quick question for you. Why did the US not just WAIT until the defendants entered their jurisdiction with the false documents !
That extradition request seemed bit odd in that sense.
-
Let’s be clear Mr Innis was not a diplomatat of Barbados living in US and thus entitled to diplomatic immunity.
I would leave it to the Dean if he were here to further clarify what rights a travelling govt minister (under diplo passport) who is also a Green card holding RESIDENT of the US would have.
I would surmize, however, tnat one cannot be fish or fowl to suit one’s legal jeapordy!
-
@ Pedantic
The substantive, or core, crime was committed in the jurisdiction of Barbados. That is why I illustrated it with the hypothetical case abut inheritance. Money laundering only became an offence after the malfeasance in office offence.
Donville had an opportunity to explain to the New York and New York jury why he had set p a company in the City and had money paid in to it. He failed to do that, either on his own volition or on advice from his defence lawyer and Bajan supporters. It was to my mind, bad advice.
The only justification was that the prosecution had to prove their case against him. Theoretically true, in reality nonsense. He should have taken the stand.
As to the proposed investigation by the accountants’ association, you are anticipating the outcome. Th justification for the inquiry is the bogus invoice, so should the tax man: was taxes paid on the ‘income’?.@ Baje
I believe that Barbados is world class, and that includes in terms of the integrity of our public servants. We can punch above our weight (bless Kofi Annan in his grave).
Seriously I do not believe it is just our police and the criminal justice system or even politicians who are incompetent and liable to corruption; I believe it is the culture, the Bajan Condition, from the car park attendant who charges $5 for parking, then adds that is US dollars, to the doctor who charges patients Bds$1500 a visit and recommends six more visits. When the patient jumped on a plane and returned to London to see an NHS doctor he received brilliant treatment with half the visits.
What about teachers who fail to teach children competently in class then recommend private tutorials for their children? -
@ Hal
I agree with your above comments %200.
A great place to visit but not to live as a young person with dreams and ambition.
-
Then bugger off the blog.
-
Then bugger off the blog.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxYou are an genuine idiot.
Do you think that you can control everyone’s thoughts or put them in a box to play a part in your own personal backward thinking?
Grow up and stop behaving like a 5-year-old.
-
HYPOCRITICAL PHRASE
JOIN IN THE DISCUSSION, YOU NEVER KNOW HOW EXPRESSING YOUR VIEW MAY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
-
Let us understand you lot, Barbados is a failed state, you wouldn’t recommend any one to visit or stay on the island BUT your asses or logged on to a Bajan blog day and Rh night. Piss in the blogmaster’s pocket do.
#idiots
>
-
Ya will never see this happening under any of the DUOPOLY corrupt governments..because:
bribery comes first,
ripping off taxpayers and pensioners come first,
selling out the majority population comes first.
-
@David… come now. Be a hospitable host!
@Austin, you continue to shroud this matter with disjointed reasoning.
1.The substantive or core, crime having been committed in Barbados is therefore NOT under US jurisfiction and they had NO interest in that….. The hypothetical case about inheritance is a lovely law class moot and I’m sure if the Dean was still available we would learn much from your example …. The issue of what came first (who died first) is difficult to determine in your example whereas in this case it’s clear the US ONLY got interested when their ML LAWS were broken.
2.He should have taken the stand. you said but you also said you are NOT a lawyer. Lawyers DO NOT generally expose a client to a ‘cross’ from a prosecutor when the client very easily can incriminate himself.
What explanation do you see as acceptable for a supposed busy, hard working govt minister (equivalent to a US Cabinet secretary) to have set up a US Dental services company (despite having his important day job) and having an insurance company (over which he has governance control) pay funds to said company?
You would put your client before a jury to ask that and the related devastating series of questions … how many companies did business with your company; how many years were you servicing clients for ICBL…this was a service to insured clients of ICBL correct; what were the services rendered…etc, etc, etc ???.
SERIOUSLY. @Hal. The only reason his attorney would have such a brain freeze is possibly to set up a strong ground for Innis to appeal: attorney malfesance!
3.The prosecution did NOT HAVE to prove the case really… they had to present it for prosection! It was done and dusted (as @PLT or @Sargeant noted) from the moment the parent company presented the full accounting of the affair to authorities in seeking relief themselves from sanctions.
Unless you are reading a very different narrative or have an absolutely better grasp of the law than I may have then your analysis still leaves me totally perplexed.
And last one..
4.No, I am not anticipating the outcome re the accountants’ association. I am ASKING you why you are suggesting that the Auditors work based on public knowledge thus far should be questioned because of this conviction.
All that we know says the invoice (which did NOT have Innis’ name on it) aooeared valid…and the CEO approved it. If the chief officer of a company signs off on a document that looks real (nothing bogus at that point) why would an auditor question such an inconsequential sum?
As someone said begore if not for Innis’ arrogance in doing this in the US there is nothing that would have flashed a warning bell from on a standard, cursory review of a seemingly standard transaction .
You may be right that all concerned needed to be more diligent and maybe the CFO needed to challenge her CEO and the minister but then she would have been likely terminated for some bogus reason and the malfeasance still done !
-
@Dee Word
Did you read Tony Best on his why Donville was advised not to take the stand by his high price lawyers? Emphasis on Lawyers.
-
David BU i commend you for tolerating the self important jackass baje This idiot feels he alone has educstion and is an expert on every topic especially in pulling down Barbados.If this was my blog he along with Austin , Piece and Waru would long have been banned and told to form their own blog to see how popular they truly are would not last a month.
-
@ Lorenzo
You would love that so that you and your dishonest local mates would keep the ongoing stranglehold on the Bajans living on not so paradise on the island.
Fortunately, for some of us, we escaped the rock/mental slavery and speak freely without being hindered or being ostracised.
JOIN IN THE DISCUSSION, YOU NEVER KNOW HOW EXPRESSING YOUR VIEW MAY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
-
Actually @David no, I did not. I will.
-
@Hal Austin January 20, 2020 1:09 PM “The onus was on the US to inform the Barbados authorities at the earliest opportunity the moment they realised that a senior politician was corrupt. Instead, it appears as if the US authorities waited until Donville was travelling on an ordinary passport and entered their jurisdiction to arrest him. ”
Question 1: Do authorities typically inform suspects that they are about to be arrested?
Question 2: Why do you believe that the U.S. authorities did not inform the Barbados authorities that they suspected Donville of corruption?
I don’t know what sort of passport Donville was travelling on, but certainly once he lost his seat in the May 24, 2018 election he was no longer a Member of Parliament and as such no longer had diplomatic immunity, and was no longer entitled to a Barbados diplomatic passport
-
@Artax January 20, 2020 2:56 PM ““In any event was the “case dismissed, without prejudice” or did the United States withdraw their extradition request?” Simple Simon (I prefer to use Simple Simon, because you’re certainly not a “Silly Woman”). Read the following informaion: United States Court of Appeals: FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia: (No. 1:04-cr-00285-3) (No. 1:04-cr-00285-4)Thanks Artax.
-
@David January 20, 2020 4:01 PM @Silly Woman. You are aware for example that Sandy Lane manages a desalination plant onsite?”
And Sandy Lane imports its water to be desalinated from Mars then?
Stupssseee!!!
-
@David
I didn’t have the opportunity to read T Best, would appreciate if you could provide a link or copy
-
Wunna still talking about Donville
In meanwhile govt has transferred millions of dollars in vat to the wealthy
Also getting reading to give big pocket investors a chance to buy barbados in exchange for barbados citizenship
Well well keep wunna head buried like stork
As Errol barbados once warned
One day coming soon they will be no more barbados
But Wuh wrong wid wunna doah
Stay the RH off the koolaid
Wunna cant be so friggin drunk.not to see when wunna being played for fools
But looka muh crosses
Millions out de door just like dat
Govt extending a long arm for outside investors to buy barbados for the price of citizenship
And not a man give a dam
But the best laugh Granville for the past three weeks talking about demolishing like he can stop it
Belly laff if ever there was one
Lol.and hard -
@Silly Woman
You are aware desal plants use brackish water read water that is not for potable use. When you are wrong Ste o back and stop prancing like a billy goat.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.