Leroy Parris Arrested

On the 22 June 2020 the Nation newspaper published a story with the headline $35m ICBL deal in works.

#donvilleinniss

On the 24 June the media reported that former Chairman of CLICO Holdings was being questioned by police.  He has since been charged with fraud and released on bail.

#corruption

While some people love to do crossword puzzles, the BU blogmaster enjoys connecting dots!

 

307 comments

  • @ Miller June 26, 2020 5:47 PM

    Of course I know many background facts. But BU is not about the truth, its is about telling stories and animating the readers to laugh while artfully twisting the truth. The winner is not who tells the truth, but whoever tells the best story.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Hal Austin June 26, 2020 3:29 PM

    Germany is a big banana republic. The FT in London uncovered the case. The Germans have even started criminal proceedings against the Brits.

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    @WS
    I stated before, all 3 were charged and all 3 should have been before the court and long before 2020.
    I had no issue with the bail, likely because it is standard practice where I live.
    To delve into the social, the risk to a white person speaking on political issues in Barbados is high. They will branded, just as you claim you were as a young man. Once ‘branded’, whether accurate or not, shaking that brand can be near impossible, for Barbados has minimal tolerance, and ‘permissions’ in certain areas. Homosexual persons flee those shores regularly, because of the abuse they endure.
    I have spoken out on these pages about the operation of the NIS. If I had done so publicly in 2016, as a irritant, I would have been branded a B, and for those wishing to discredit anything said, likely a few other social matters, irrelevant to the NIS or anything said. This is simply a risk you accept IF you speak publicly?
    I am horrified at many of the penalties and procedures in the criminal justice system. The incarceration of persons with mental health issues, and for the smallest of infractions, is shameful. The time to get to court, can also be unimaginable.
    This a collective failure.
    No question, economic resources afford one the better defence. And access. And this is true across a broad spectrum of life.
    I will end on a personal opinion. I wanted all 3 to face a court. Why? Because there are too many hypocites. Who sing the praises of everything from the judicial system on down, UNTIL one them get caught in a corner. Suddenly the tune changes? The white population itself, is too soft and subservient to a small group of their own kind. They are fearful of being ostracised by their own, if they step out of line. They need a ‘wake up’ call.

    Like

  • Skinner nobody is saying corruption started in 2010 but up to now you have NOT MENTION MR THOMPSON, S ROLE IN THIS PARRIS MATTER WHY IS THAT SKINNER? . Then you get highly offended when someone mentions his name and his relationship with Clico and Mr Parris.Again why?You ease back on here and cannot rrfute anything i have said about Mr Thompson but go pfg on a tangent talking about Mr HerbertI thought this blog was about Mr Parris you are a real Dem spin bowjer in truth but you can get ss angry as you like i will call you out with the facts.As for Austin speaking about the regulstor that might he true but it does not change the role played by your so called great ex PM Mr Thompson.Why am i angry about this i hsve friends who lost all their savings in Clico and it is time persons are held accountable.who ever is held should be made an example of.

    Like

  • One of the other Lorenzos is back.
    The very last sentence is good. The rest is a B&D diatribe.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ Lorenzo
    When everybody is corrupt the Pandora Box opens and strange things jump out. I mentioned a few posts back that Thompson was wrong to take up taxpayers money to bail out his friend’s company. Now when you get a chance go into St.John Church yard and dig up Thompson. Go before the sun gets hot.
    I have said on this blog many moons ago that Parris and Duprey should have been brought to justice. It took eleven years and now Parris will face the music.
    Now this is what jumps out the box:
    What did Parris mean when he told them Prime Minister at a public function:“ I have given you what you want now give me what I want“. Tell the truth: Have you ever heard any corporate heavy weight speak to a Prime Minister like that? What did Parris give Arthur? What did Parris want?
    So we continue : Arthur took a check from CLICO or an affiliate or person connected to same. The check was for the Barbados Labour Party. It ended up in Arthur’s account. Now we just let that go by a party gets a donation it ends up in a private account and that’s that. Fantastic.
    Then we come to the COP in yesterday’s Nation trying to defend and pretend there is no racism in how the force deals with citizens. Imagine he said that the reason Parris was in handcuffs was because he could have abscond. I think that means get away. Ok then why was Charles Herbert not in handcuffs?
    Now none of this means anything to you because you only see and read BLP/Mottley.
    You see both parties are corrupt: Mark Stokes ; Victor Pele Parris.
    Now I done with you. You are obviously incapable of objectivity. And by the way just for fun: When Arthur took back the party from Mia, he said that thousands of dollars belonging to the party could not be accounted for.
    Oh well when thieves fall out the Lord smiles.
    Carry on @ Lorenzo – carry on.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ Northern Observer
    “To delve into the social, the risk to a white person speaking on political issues in Barbados is high. They will branded, just as you claim you were as a young man. Once ‘branded’, whether accurate or not, shaking that brand ….,”
    You are absolutely correct. Back in the 80s, I was doing some sales at a white owned establishment. I must say that the owner was a workaholic. One day he asked me if I am the Skinner who wrote letters and so on in the press.
    We had an interesting conversation and he said exactly what you said. I told him that as a Barbadian he should say what he had to say. Amazingly , he got more involved in his professional national organization and became its president. As I said the man was a bona fide alcoholic and he has prospered beyond measure. Also had a good track record with his employees.
    Good post Northern. Very enlightening.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    That should be workaholic not alcoholic. My apologies.

    Like

  • @ William

    You are such a gentleman that unlike me you tolerate fools. A thief from a thief, eh. Let us get serious. The Clico collapse could have been dealt with in a more appropriate way by an incompetent and stubborn government. Politics got in the way of competence.
    I would have established a good company and a bad one (forget Resolution). The good company, would have taken over any existing assets, and continued the company and deal with its policyholders would have continued paying for their policies and annuities to the good company. Retail investors and policyholders obligations would have been unwritten by government in a debt for equity deal.
    The bad bank would have taken over any corporate liabilities and wound the company down ie selling off the illiquid plantations, etc. and shareholders and corporate lenders would have taken a hit.

    Like

  • Why do you assume policyholders would have continued to pay? Is insurance a confidence sensitive business? What about the audit of the asset register which exposed a significant dollar gap?

    Liked by 1 person

  • as far as i can tell Parris is not in criminal court for running CLICO into ground. isnt he in Court for fraud , theft, tax evasion and ML as it relates to the 3.3 mil he claims is gratuity / compensation from CLICO?

    Regarding Thompson bailing out CLICO- what if Thompson had intended to bail out CLICO for the property it owned and to sell or use those properties for the benefit of bajans. fair exchange isnt it? i am not saying this was his intention. what i am saying is that we dont know. unless as suggested above we dig him up and ask.

    there is also some suggestion that Thompson signed off on the invoice that got Paris the 3.3. mil from CLICO, which, by the way, CLICO acknowledged from my recollection, was owed to Parris. this is absolutely not true from a reading of the forensic audit report. that report stated that invoice was signed by Thompson’s former law firm which had Parris as a client and that Thompson had resigned years earlier.

    like a commentator said above, corruption did not begin in 2008 and ended in 2018 as we are being led to believe: corruption in Bim is endemic in Govt. i will posit that the period between 1994 and 2008 was rife with corruption and some of the actors are ministers today.

    to date, and this is only one in our face example, what is more corrupt than in a 2 by 3 island having 28 or so ministers and assistant ministers, countless czars, czarinas, gurus, advisers and other hangers- on feeding off the tits of the tax payers when Govt has no money. what a neat legal way to secure sinecures for friends, family and yard fowls whilst tax payers eat cake?

    Like

  • Walking a handcuffed Mr Parris through the court yard was meant for the optics only, so the media could get pictures. It was symbolic humiliation.
    That a trained and experienced police chief could talk nonsense about protection against absconding is so laughable it makes me want to cry. I have written about this before, but that walk of shame is the weakest link in the escorting of prisoners to and from our prisons and courts.
    It has long been my measure of the level of criminality in Barbados and the bogus nature of so-called organised crime. In a nation with so many illegal high-powered guns, if gangsters had a member walking through the court yard they would come out with guns blasting and grab their man (or woman) and drive away.
    By the time the police get their act together they would be well hidden in one of the gated communities. They may get away with this nonsense with black traditional Bajans, but wait until the New Bajans, especially the Syrians/Lebanese get ready.
    I expected it with the Cuban/Colombian drug runner who turned artist and wanted to stay on in Barbados as a reformed criminal. To this day he has not told the state who he was shipping drugs to in Barbados. Those people are still about. In his case there was no need for violence. His coffee-coloured skin was a guarantee he would be freed.
    I was previously against the humiliation of the commissioner by the Mottley government. I am not so sure now.

    Like

  • Lorenzo June 27, 2020 5:59 AM #: “Skinner nobody is saying corruption started in 2010 but up to now you have NOT MENTION MR THOMPSON, S ROLE IN THIS PARRIS MATTER WHY IS THAT SKINNER?”

    @ Lorenzo

    Perhaps you should explain to Mr. Skinner what was “Mr. Thompson’s role in this Parris matter.”

    Let’s look at this situation reasonable and rationally. Thompson ceased being owner of the law firm “Thompson & Associates,” on May 22, 2008…….. 4 months after he became Barbados’ 6th PM.

    The invoice in question was dated December 30, 2008, 7 months after he gave up ownership of the firm.

    So, maybe you’re assuming Thompson facilitated preparation of the invoice, perhaps because of the close relationship that existed between him and Parris.

    But, although the CLICO forensic audit report revealed the invoice (allegedly) came from “Thompson & Associates,” there wasn’t anything mentioned therein to suggest Thompson was actually involved in or had knowledge of its preparation.

    To be fair, you cannot condemn the late gentleman as being guilty of committing anything based on assumptions.

    Like

  • @Hal,

    he is an embarrassment. either as a matter of policy you are going to handcuff all accused / arrested persons going to court or not and under what circumstances

    Like

  • @Artax

    Do you know what kind of relationship the late Thompson had with the young lawyers he sold the firm to? When did Mara resign as office manager? Was there an arrange in the sales agreement for Thompson law firm to retain Parris’ business. Artax we live in Barbados, we know how these off the book transactions go. Did Thompson offer back door counsel like most of the judges and ministers do to the law firm? Hopefully we will hear a lot about how these people operated when the case comes to trial. Barbadians are in for an eye opening if the script is played out.

    Liked by 1 person

  • To Austin, Skinner,and Greene as i stated before NOBODY STATED CORRUPTION STSRTED IN 2010. Let me repeat the no 1 actor in this Clico debacle was Mr Parris and the no 2 actor was Mr Thompson in my view.Let me redtate again MR THOMPSON WAS CLICO, LAWYER FOR YEARS AND KNEW IT,S OPERATION INSIDE OUT.ON BECOMING PM TOOK UP 10 MILLION DOLLARS OF TAXPAYERS MONEY AND PUT INTO CLICO. WHY?A CHEQUE FOR 3.3 MILLION DOLLARS PASSED THROUGH JIS LAW FIRM FOR HIS FRIEND MR PARRIS WHICH WAS MANAGED BY HIS WIFE AT THE TIME . REFUTE ANY OF THESE FACTS.It is unfortu ate in my view Mr Thompson is not arpund to defend himself because i believe he would do a better job than the piss poor job you all doing.Looking back through BU archives i realised something any time Mr Thompson, s name is mentioned in anything negative the first two people out of the blocks trying to defenf him were you guessed it Willliam Skinner and Hal Austin.The latter is a member of his fan club the former i don, t know if he is a relative or a member of his fan club as well but his feeble attempts at distractions cannot refute any thing i have stated.Therefore while policyholders were suffering these two were flying about on clico, s private jet and living large.It is time for nustice to be served in my view.

    Like

  • David,

    i would bet that you wont hear none or v little of that when it comes to court. tell me how would you get that in evidence? not saying you cant but give an example of how you think you could?

    Like

  • @Greene

    Sadly you will probably be proved correct. It is why things will never change. Same old same old.

    Like

  • ” Air Canada, WestJet to drop physical distancing policies as air travel ticks up
    MONTREAL — The country’s two largest airlines are ending their on-board seat distancing policies starting July 1, raising health concerns amid a pandemic that has devastated the travel industry.”

    ” Air Canada is to be the first commercial flight to touch down at the Grantley Adams International Airport (GAIA) since March, Prime Minister Mia Mottley has announced. ( First flight July 12th )

    I sincerely hope wunna got this.

    I understand that Barbados desperately needs to re start the Tourist industry and Air Canada needs to fly.

    And I continue to wear a mask when I go shopping and adhere to the reccomended social distancing rule and

    have been addressively managing my Asthma with a corticosteroid and Ventolin as prescribed by my doctor.

    I was going to avoid taking the ventolin until I was reminded by DR. GEORIGIE PORGIE THAT I SHOULD TAKE BOTH MEDICATIONS TOGETHER.

    Like

  • ” MR THOMPSON WAS CLICO, LAWYER FOR YEARS AND KNEW IT,S OPERATION INSIDE OUT.ON BECOMING PM TOOK UP 10 MILLION DOLLARS OF TAXPAYERS MONEY AND PUT INTO CLICO. WHY?A CHEQUE FOR 3.3 MILLION DOLLARS PASSED THROUGH JIS LAW FIRM FOR HIS FRIEND MR PARRIS WHICH WAS MANAGED BY HIS WIFE AT THE TIME . REFUTE ANY OF THESE FACTS.”

    @Lorenzo,

    i am going to be pedantic as you are being silly.

    show that Thompson knew CLICO’s operation inside out? and what is the point of so stating? no one is disputing that the invoice was signed off by the former law firm of Thompson which his wife managed or worked at. what is the point of so stoutly pointing this out?

    Like

  • @ David,

    You Could start a blog/post to dicuss the reopening of Barbados to Air travel and tourism. Don’t like displaying bad etiquette by straying from the posted topic of Leroy Parris.

    Like

  • @ David

    Information relating to your questions are not in the public domain. So, we’re left to speculate.

    However, I’m sure you remember a statement in the Press, on behalf of the attorneys comprising the ‘new’ “Thompson & Associates,” (who were, at that time, Jessica Ashby, Amiri Dear, Darrin Downes, Stephna Greenidge and Gale Prescod)…… in which they sought to dissociate themselves from the “Thompson & Associates” that existed during the period prior to May 11, 2010, when the ‘new law firm’ was constituted.

    Like

  • @Artax

    Thanks for reminding us of the disclaimer. It makes one wonder the thinking they could disentangle from the reputation of the name.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Then we come to the COP in yesterday’s Nation trying to defend and pretend there is no racism in how the force deals with citizens. Imagine he said that the reason Parris was in handcuffs was because he could have abscond. I think that means get away. Ok then why was Charles Herbert not in handcuffs?

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    THE DISHONEST CHIEF OF POLICE SAID IN THE MEDIA THAT THERE WAS NO POLICE BRUTALITY IN BARBADOS.

    NOW WE ALL KNOW THIS FOOL AND LIAR IS LIVING IN LA LA LAND.

    HE MUST STOP SLEEPING ON THE JOB.

    Like

  • Artax,

    my former campaign manager. expound on that submission above.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, indeed strange expectations of ‘disentangling’. Also strange the argumentation being offered above re Thompson’s involvement with the Paris check.

    I’ll let the fraud case evolve but as I recall from the evidence and pubic pronouncements of the time all of the senior attorneys at the PM’s former firm disavowed knowledge of the Parris check. That was an eyeopener… moreso, recall the check was payable to the firm for “fees or retainers related to various legal matters”. Said check was then endorsed by an officer of the firm and funds transferred to Mr. Parris, one assumes, who in his capacity as chairman had APPROVED the expense disbursement for retainers,fees and legal matters NOT salaries or gratuities!.

    That legal eagles can present here and agree that Parris was supposedly owed whatever astronomical remuneration his board approved but yet attempt to twist these basic FACTS as anything other than FRAUD is quite distressing.

    That the NON-ESTRANGED wife of the PM was the office manager and senior signatory to financial matters at the PM’s eponymous firm and yet we can so easily suggest that the PM would be so completely unaware of these activities is beyond amusing….

    In a rational world that was ‘crookery’… in a properly supervised world of law and order that PM would so badly ‘conflicted of interests’ that he would be ‘impeached/recalled/removed” and in a world governed by facts several BLP and the DLP politicians would have been investigated, indicted and some imprisoned.

    Anyhow, I hope Mr. Parris is incensed that he was so humiliated (if he actually has any emotional room for embarrassment left) and plots well the public denouement of his political adversaries …otherwise I could care less of his predicament.

    Alas,we believe and project whatever narrative works for us … so all good.

    Like

  • Members of the media have been barred from entering the courtyard and the courtroom of the Magistrates Courts at District A, Bridgetown, this Saturday.

    When they turned up this morning, a barricade had been placed across the access by the arch, and they were told they could not enter.

    Dwayne Omar Gittens, 35, of No Fixed Place of Abode, is scheduled to appear today. He is charged with two counts of murder – contractor Glenroy James and photojournalist Christoff Griffith – both incidents occurring on June 22, 2020 at Bishop’s Court, St Michael…..(Quote)

    Why was the press denied entry to an open court? Who authorised this? What reasons were given? Is this part of a world-wide attack on the press? This is not an issue for discussion with a police press officer. It goes further than that. The press should demand to know what is the policy.
    Where is the attorney general?

    Like

  • @ Mr. Greene

    An article published in the February 26, 2012 edition of the “Sunday Sun,” indicated the Deloitte forensic audit of CLICO revealed “Thompson & Associates” facilitated a payment of S3.3M to Leroy Parris.

    A paid statement in the March 2, 2012 edition of the “Weekend Nation,” on behalf of “Thompson & Associates'” attorneys Darrin Downes, Gale Prescod, Amiri Dear, Jessica Ashby and Stephna Greenidge, sought to dissociate the ‘new law firm’ from any such transaction.

    “The present complement of attorneys at law comprising Thompson & Associates was constituted on the 11th day of May, 2010, mere months prior to the death of the late Prime Minister, the Honourable David Thompson, QC, MP.”

    “We therefore wish to make it clear to the public that the firm of Thompson & Associates which existed during the period prior to May 2010, is not that which exists today.” The financial activities attributed to the firm Thompson and Associates prior to May 2010, and to which these recent articles refer, are therefore not to be ascribed to the operations of Thompson & Associates as the firm currently exists,”

    Like

  • (Quote):
    Let’s look at this situation reasonable and rationally. Thompson ceased being owner of the law firm “Thompson & Associates,” on May 22, 2008…….. 4 months after he became Barbados’ 6th PM.
    The invoice in question was dated December 30, 2008, 7 months after he gave up ownership of the firm.
    But, although the CLICO forensic audit report revealed the invoice (allegedly) came from “Thompson & Associates,” there wasn’t anything mentioned therein to suggest Thompson was actually involved in or had knowledge of its preparation.

    However, I’m sure you remember a statement in the Press, on behalf of the attorneys comprising the ‘new’ “Thompson & Associates,” (who were, at that time, Jessica Ashby, Amiri Dear, Darrin Downes, Stephna Greenidge and Gale Prescod)…… in which they sought to dissociate themselves from the “Thompson & Associates” that existed during the period prior to May 11, 2010, when the ‘new law firm’ was constituted. (Unquote).

    (Quote):

    show that Thompson knew CLICO’s operation inside out? and what is the point of so stating? no one is disputing that the invoice was signed off by the former law firm of Thompson which his wife managed or worked at. what is the point of so stoutly pointing this out? (Unquote).

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Dear David Blogmaster of BU:

    In the interest of clarity and to resolve the confusing statements quoted above, could you please reproduce a copy of that ‘well-circulated’ invoice which the Law Firm of “Thompson & Associates” allegedly prepared and sent to the ‘principals’ of CLICO demanding payment for legal services rendered?

    The details might show not only the nature of those legal services but also the time periods in which those services were delivered, allegedly.

    Then the BU household will see which ‘firm of lawyers were involved in these ‘legal’ fees transaction.

    Whether it was the Thompson & Associates prior to “May 22, 2008…….. 4 months after he became Barbados’ 6th PM” or only those ‘managing’ the firm of lawyers after the ‘dissolution of the partnership’ after May 22, 2008.

    Then we will be able to unravel this mystery surrounding the firm “Thompson & Associates” and its ‘business relationship(s) with CLICO Barbados bearing in mind the enduring principle that:

    “All partners are liable for contracts entered into and torts committed by any partner acting in or apparently in the normal course of business. This liability is personal and unlimited, joint and several…”

    Please don’t make it look as if Walter Blackman is not only unprofessional but also an idiot.
    The experienced gentleman is not only technically trained and but has the ‘hands-on’ knowledge and experience in order to comment competently and informatively in this matter.

    Like

  • What was the contractual arrangement between the older Thompson and Associates and the new Thompson & Associates, if any? Did the new firm buy out the old one, or just assumed the name or an associated name? Was permission sought to use the name? Did the new company take over any of the contracts and obligations of the old firm? If so, did that include being the attorneys for Clico?
    Can Clico bank indicate which account the Bds$3.3m was cleared through, naming the individual/corporation and bank and date? Is this not information that a properly constituted judicial inquiry, with powers to subpoena witnesses and documents, would have discovered years ago? Were these accounts properly audited? If so, by whom? Will the auditors’ regulatory body be investigating?

    Like

  • Thank you DPD these Dems think bajans got short memories.Exactly what point are you making Greene? Are you suggesting that Mr Thompson Clico, s lawyer for years would be unaware of Clico, s financial situation? Are you an idiot? Most bisiness transactions done by Clico would have done with Thompson, s knowledge as far as legal advice was concern.Therefore reel and come agsin.As for Skinner you asking questions i asked you why as PM Mr Thompson took up 10 million dollars of tax payers money and pumped into clico?Why Mr Parris was allowed to keep money in the central bank? Why was a cheque for Mr Parris passed through Thompson Associates while Mr Thompson ,s wife was office manager? Wss the 10 million repaid ? and lastly why was Mr Thompson flying about on clico , s private jet when he was PM?In my view Mr Thompson was highly influential in this saga and although he is gone his estate is still around.Let Skinner Austin Greene and the other Dems who like criticizinh Ms Mottley come and answer the above questions.

    Like

  • One of the partners was on the Central Bank Board when the assistance from the CB was provided to Clico. I cast no aspersions on the individual or any of the other individuals’ character.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ Lorenzo
    The taxpayers of Barbados has paid out the policy holders. The assets of CLICO are already on the market. I agree with you that Thompson was wrong to take our money and give it to CLICO. I did not agree with him for writing off the eight million dollars in taxes for the Barbados Turf Club either. Now let me shock you: I agree with a Mottley writing off over one billion dollars in taxes( according to Senator Caswell Franklyn; I agree with Mottley paying consultants over twenty million dollars; I agree with Mottley having twenty seven or so cabinet ministers; I agree with @ Tron that Mottley is our savior; I agree with every thing the BLP has done is doing and will do in the future.
    I can’t answer why Thompson flew on the jet or why his wife worked in his company. I can’t even ask why two big jobs gone one to the Speaker wife and one to a minister wife. Now how on earth can I explain why a man’s wife worked for him in his private company. That’s a real tough one buddy.
    Now let relax with my twenty five year old El Dorado Rum from Guyana.
    See ya.

    Like

  • @Lorenzo,

    those who assert must prove.

    you made certain statements of fact (to you) with regard to Thompson knowing the operations of CLICO inside out etc. i asked you to show how that is true and are now asking me to prove that that is not the case? man piss in muh pocket

    Like

  • @David,

    so CLICO approved the legal fees. who at CLICO? Parris? if not Parris, is that person a party to the fraud / theft of the 3.3mil? maybe the person was coerced or threatened. it may all come out in the wash

    Like

  • @ William Skinner June 27, 2020 2:12 PM

    I’m glad you’re going along government lines! Unlike in Guyana, elections in Barbados are not rigged because we have a one-party democracy that the people really want. 😉

    Like

  • @ David June 27, 2020 1:01 PM

    Thanks, Blogmaster, for the reproduction of that document reflecting the kernel of truth to support any evidence needed to prosecute anyone in the pursuit of Justice.

    If you believe that ‘doctored’ invoice is a true representation of ‘genuine’ legal services rendered which are subject to the rules of VAT, then, you can put your trust in God that the invoice for similar legal services rendered to the BWA and subject to VAT was not an integral part of a scam designed to bilk those two politically-compromised ‘commercial’ entities of their very scarce financial resources.

    Like

  • @Greene

    You should redirect your question to Thornhill, gatekeeper of CLICO secrets.

    Like

  • Greene i stand by my statement you cannot tell Mr Thompson as lawyer to clico did noyt kmow what was going on.You believe you speaking to a 10 year old? Try telling that to the angry policyholders.Perhaps you can answer the questions i asked ?Skinner at least you admit Mr Thompson was wrong perhaps you should admit he was the second major player after Mr Parris in this clico dehacle as well.I never question why Mrs Thompson worked for her husband i asked why was a cheque for 3.3 million passed through Thompson Associates while Mrs Thompson was office manager for Mr Parris? Perhaps you misunderstood the question since i got you under pressure as the Dem spin bowler you are.As for the rest of your response that is expected.

    Like

  • “Greene i stand by my statement you cannot tell Mr Thompson as lawyer to clico did noyt kmow what was going on.You believe you speaking to a 10 year old? ”

    @ Lorenzo June 27, 2020 2:59 PM

    if your responses are anything to go by…yes

    Like

  • @ Greene
    I once said that I believed if David Thompson had lived and served out his term he would have been a good prime minister. Some nutcase came out saying I was a Thompson fan. blah, blah.
    It saddens me that in 2020 we produce people who cannot understand basic reasoning. That’s life.

    Like

  • @ Hal Austin June 27, 2020 3:52 PM

    Thompson was a populist who massively increased taxes and fees. He had no knowledge of financial matters, since his father was a “reverse windrusher” who had to flee from Great Britain to the Caribbean. In this sense, Thompson reminds me of Manduro, the bus driver from Caracas.

    Like

  • @ Tron

    He was Guyanese.

    Like

  • Tron the bullsbitter from england stated on BU that Mr Thompson had he lived would have become a great PM something he long for as a young man.When i challenged Austin to produce any evidence of this greatness his answer was because he Austin had a conversstion with him.I looked back over Mr Thompson, s political life and cannot find anything that he did or said that could remotrly class him as good far less greatMy greatedt memory of Mr Tho.pson was running away from a third successive lost to Mr Arthur which would have ended his chances of ever leading the Dems again and becoming PM.As a matter of fact i heard a clip before the last elections of Dr Haynes clearly stating that Mr Thompson could not lead him anywhere when Mr Sandiford as he was then wanted to place Mr Thompson over persons like Mr Tsitt Mr Greaves and the said Dr Haynes.Therefore you are correct Tron Mr Thompson, s tenure as Finance Minister with that first budget stsrted the slide as in my view he had little clue what he was doing.As far as this clico debate is concerned i hope persons found guilty of this fraud with policyholders monies feel the full weight of the law.

    Like

  • @ Lorenzo June 27, 2020 4:37 PM

    There is only one G R E A T Prime. Remember that. Past prime ministers have treated the people like crap. Our leader, however, communicates regularly with the people. What a difference!

    They say great leaders emerge in great crisis. Our leader has already achieved three great things: debt reduction, meeting IMF conditions and defeating the Wuhan plague. I think that if she succeeds in installing a new government in Guyana, the time is ripe for “santo subito”, i.e. elevation to national heroine instantly.

    This would also solve the Nelson dilemma. It is perfectly clear that Mia Mottley must be put in Nelson’s place. Nelson will be transferred to a place where his statue has historical value. Of course we need a new sign for the right context.

    Like

  • I must say, the last page or so of posts have been rather entertaining. Good points, likely causing some specific readers to be alarmed, plus a few barbs, quite delightful to see such engaged sparring.

    No doubt some are reading with interest. Ahem.

    Like

  • @David,

    Not speaking about any specific matter or related matters, whether related to the titled blog or otherwise, however, I do perceive that things are about to get quite deep and encompass quite a wide variety of persons and activities.

    The next two years will be interesting and if what I perceive is correct, this government is going to come out of the next phase with tremendous accolades. I will not be straightforward, but will be worthwhile.

    Probably some should be getting their affairs organised with alacrity.

    Like

  • That should read, ”it will not be straightforward”.

    Like

  • Miller June 27, 2020 11:45 AM #: “In the interest of clarity and to resolve the confusing statements quoted above, could you please reproduce a copy of that ‘well-circulated’ invoice which the Law Firm of “Thompson & Associates” allegedly prepared and sent to the ‘principals’ of CLICO demanding payment for legal services rendered?”

    @ Miller

    You have an uncanny ability to make simple issues extremely complicated.

    Like

  • @Crusoe

    Politicians will do what politicians do to win an election.

    At this stage of the term it is highly unlikely the BLP will be able to mount a platform on good economic performance. Another item will have to fill the breach. Corruption maybe?

    Like

  • I see one of the baje canadian Dems on another yopic dtsting that the questions asked werr already answered many times already.Perhaps he can come on this topic and provide the answers not hiding on another blog topic.They sent out three nightwatchmen to try to distance Mr Thompson from this clico debavle and failed miserably.Therefore Sarge when you or the funy man comes i have some follow up questions for you some above the belt and some below with the permission of the blogmadter of course.One thing i never do is disrespect the blogmaster unlike some others who gives the latitude to blog.Sarge also stated my voice was absent from the nelson issue.I think he knows i blohg on what interest me i do not jump on bandwagons.As far as nelson is concerned whether he is moved or not is of little importace to me and i guess many bajans.Therefore Ms Mottley is quite correct to take it to the people to decide.As far as integrety legislation is concerned was this not part of yoir Dems many broken promises in 2008 with the revered Mr Thompson at the helm and for ten years did nothing about it?You could really hush you damn hyprocrite.

    Like

  • Well this certainly answered my question..

    “Verla Depeiza Also, no statute of limitations so go way back.”

    Like

  • @David

    it is instructive that prior to all this action re fraud (Parris), and stealing from Govt by the cursed former DLP, the AG who also served in the 1994-2008 BLP regime and who was the AG that contracted VECO (read all about it) to construct Dodds, was in the papers lamenting that he could not implement the promised Integrity Legislation because of COVID.

    Integrity Legislation was a campaign promise. shouldnt the Govt have been ready with it from the get go? the same Govt readily and voluntarily defaulted on debt repayments and right away pulled out of its back pocket, White Foaks, to negotiate its financial repayments. is that piss or rain running down my leg?

    Like

  • A look back at the Clico fiasco

    By Colville Mounsey
    Just when Barbadians thought that the CLICO saga had been finally put to bed, former chairman of the company, Leroy Coleridge Parris, was charged with defrauding the failed insurance giant, whose collapse left investors in a tailspin for almost a decade.
    Parris, who appeared before the District “A” Magistrates’ Court last week, was not required to plead to stealing $3.333 million belonging to CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd, between December 1, 2008, and April 28, 2009; conspiring with others to defraud CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd of $3.333 million by inducing CLICO to pay out the sum to Thompson and Associates between December 1, 2008 and April 27, 2009; conspiring with others, between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2010, to cheat the Crown in its rights of Government and the Commissioner of Inland Revenue by failing to submit tax returns to the Commissioner for taxes due from him upon his income for the year ending March 1, 2010, and engaging in money laundering in that he concealed $3.333 million, which was the proceeds of crime between December 1, 2008, and April 27, 2009.
    For many who have followed the fiasco since 2009, from the Supervisor of Insurances’ decision to halt the writing of new policies by CLICO to finally the end of the debacle in 2019 when taxpayers took on the burden of paying out $500 million in cash and bonds to 8 944 policyholders, the latest development could provide some answers to lingering questions about the management of the failed insurer.
    It became painfully obvious with each passing year since the collapse of the company that policyholders would be in for the long haul, and, in fact, more than 300 investors have died before a resolution was reached.
    The demands for answers grew louder each year, and in 2010, then Freundel Stuart administration established an oversight committee to look into the management of the insurance giant. This was headed by then Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Finance, William Layne. He red-flagged several things, including two matured deposits withdrawn by Parris from the subsidiary company CLICO Mortgage and Finance Corporation (CMFC) that were worth over a quarter-million dollars.
    (FP)
    Deposits withdrawn
    “. . . He withdrew two deposits in CMFC in the sums of BDS$129 827.74 and $136 776.58, respectively, when they matured on December 3, 2009 and January 8, 2010,” Layne said then.
    Layne explained that the Oversight Committee had written Parris on the matter since CMFC was in receipt of public funding from the Central Bank of Barbados and was not in a position to repay the money. Layne also said CLICO International Life Insurance Limited (CIL) had contravened an order of the Supervisor of Insurance made in August 2009 prohibiting it from selling new business.
    However, Parris insisted then that everything he had done was above board, noting that when the deposits matured, he asked the then CMFC’s chief executive
    officer, Andrew St John, if he could pay the deposits, and he responded in the affirmative and dispatched a cheque to him. Parris insisted that the CMFC was still functional as it was still giving loans to customers. In March 2011, after stepping down as executive chairman of CLICO holdings the previous year, Parris resigned with immediate effect from the board of management of all of CLICO’s subsidiary companies in Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean, including Rayside Company.
    This came on the heels of Parris filing a $10 million lawsuit against CLICO Holdings (Barbados) and CLICO International. He claimed the company breached contractual arrangements when it failed to pay him yearly payments of over $600 000 in bonus and management consultancy fees along with a $10 million gratuity, of which he received just over $3 million.
    High Court move
    In 2011, the then Democratic Labour Party Government applied to the High Court to have CLICO International Life Insurance placed under judicial management. In April 2011, the Supreme Court of Barbados officially appointed Deloitte Consulting Ltd, represented by Oliver Jordan and Patrick Toppin, as judicial manager of CLICO International Life Insurance Limited, pursuant to Section 57 of the Insurance Act.

    The Barbados Investors and Policyholders Alliance (BIPA), led by June Fowler, continued their pursuit to hold people accountable and to recover the investment of their members, bringing a $128 million lawsuit against 13 directors of CIL, including Parris back in 2013. Fowler said at the time that many Government promises had gone unfulfilled and neither of the judicial managers had taken the route of legal action to recover the funds.
    In 2015, following an ex parte hearing filed by CLICO’s judicial manager, Deloitte Consulting Limited, against Parris, first defendant, and Branlee, second defendant, the High Court froze $4.5 million belonging to the former CLICO boss. The claim also named the estate of late Prime Minister David Thompson, represented by his widow, Mara Thompson, the executrix as the third defendant in the matter.
    Two years
    It would take two years for this matter to be settled, releasing millions of dollars for the benefit of policyholders.
    Parris and his company, Branlee Consulting Services Inc., consented to the repayment of $4.43 million they had received from CLICO International Life Insurance Limited (CIL). This included the $3.3 million that was paid to Parris based on a controversial invoice issued by his attorneys, Thompson and Associates. The judicial manager alleged that this was false invoicing issued by late Prime Minister David Thompson and this was why the deceased leader’s estate was also a party to the proceedings.
    The monies were held in an account at the Bank of Nova Scotia and there was a garnishee order based on the action taken on behalf of CIL.
    As much as the latest development has given the public the sense that they are finally at the climax of an extremely long suspense novel, there are those who still wonder if there aren’t one or two twists to the tale left.
    Is there another shoe to drop?
    As details of the case come to light, the public is sure to query who knew what and when did they know it.

    Source: Nation Newspaper

    Like

  • @Greene

    Same old, same old.

    Like

  • Here come Mr Funny Man.
    You stated that you never jump on bandwagons, but there were several times you urge me to jump on one of your bandwagons and attack/condemn my leader.

    You may have noticed that I did not comment on the Parris affair as I would like to see it play out. I suspect it will take ages before it goes nowhere. Just a distraction. Mugabe can roll out one of these arrests every time the going get rough.

    A more interesting conversation would be ‘who’s next’. Did you see how she pulled and shielded Sinckler from any line of fire? Nice move, she is five steps ahead of her critics.

    Does this pass your funny test:
    Of course, you don’t jump on bandwagon, with the amount of kool-aid you imbibed I am surprised that you can even walk.

    Like

  • I was about to wish you a Good Morning and I read Mounsey’s column and fell asleep.
    A concise historical rehash of what happened.
    Anyhow, I am up again.
    Have a Great Day Barbadians.
    Have a Great Day Barbados.

    Like

  • “The judicial manager alleged that this was false invoicing issued by late Prime Minister David Thompson and this was why the deceased leader’s estate was also a party to the proceedings.”

    so the invoice was actually issued Thompson? or according to this report so alleged the judicial manager. i thought it was issued by his former law firm and that is why his estate was a party but i must have been mistaken. lol

    Like

  • Ah Lorenzo H, you overestimate your importance I wasn’t referring to you in my comments but if the cap fits you should wear it proudly. As for me being a Dem I’ve never paid a due, don’t even know where their HQ is, my only acquaintance with the building is what I see on Q and my first thought was that when the Dems were in power they should have spent some money on the building, they could have hidden it under urban renewal.

    Like

  • Get it straight…it’s STEALING FROM THE MAJORITY POPULATION…who fund both governents and the whole country….they have been stealing from you and yours and all the other Black people on the island for decades, how many times over the YEARS have we told everyone that…

    “and stealing from Govt by the cursed former DLP, the AG who also served in the 1994-2008 BLP regime and who was the AG that contracted VECO (read all about it) to construct Dodds, was in the papers lamenting that he could not implement the promised Integrity Legislation because of COVID.”

    Like

  • William Skinner

    The BS never stops:
    Where is the promised integrity legislation promised in the 2018 election by the current BLP administration ?
    Answer: The DLP was in power for ten years and it was promised by them too.
    The current AG: COVID delayed its implementation. We now know that COVID was around for two years.
    The obvious response: The BLP had from 1994 to 2008.
    Then some idiot will ask:
    How come since independence in 1966 to now 2020 neither the DLP nor the BLP could get Integrity legislation on the books?
    Answer: we had Ebola, War in Iraq, 9/11, plenty hurricanes, Gaddafi was assassinated, Sadam Hosein got overthrown, The Grenada Revolution, CLICO collapsed, Hal Austin used to write a column in BU, Pacha say the entire capitalist system going to collapse, stupid Skinner still dreaming about a United Caribbean, @ Piece cartoons ain’t good no more.
    In the name of Jesus Christ how any reasonable person could expect integrity legislation from the BLP or DLP with all of these damn things happening and we seem to forget that during this time America elected a Black president and man now living on the moon and we have the internet and IPhones.
    Some people so blasted unreasonable . All of this going on and went on and wunnuh expect one of the largest cabinets in the entire Commonwealth to get integrity legislation in two years because wunnuh don’t believe that many hands make light works. All you are a pack of damn hypocrites who hate Mottley and want she to do the impossible.

    Like

  • Good to hear you Sarge and funny man Gazzerts i notice neither of you answered the questions i posed.Not at all surprised i wonder if the clico policyholders would find you or this fiasco of their missing money funny Gazzerts.Perhaps you could wish them a hsppy dsy and all will be well.Even better they will be amused by the actions of Mr Parris and his sidekick Mr Thompson.

    Like

  • You may have noticed that I did not comment on the Parris affair as I would like to see it play out. I suspect it will take ages before it goes nowhere.

    PS: As to your questions? I just read you for your list and to see the B &D nonsense still lives. I pay no attention to your B&D questions.

    Like

  • “Lorenzo” if you come to me seeking answers about CLICO/Parris, alas, you will be sorely disappointed. Frankly the issue is too complicated for simple brains like mine and I leave the heavy lifting to the financial and legal savants that loiter on the blog.

    Here is a compilation of answers that I have provided over the years on this issue.
    1) Let the chips fall where they may
    2) When BU sage Bush Tea wrote that I was indifferent to the whole affair, I wrote that I would camp out in protest at the Parris mansion attired in sackcloth and ashes
    3) No one can argue that this isn’t an eventuality most of us hoped for although it is later rather than sooner….. That was the latest which was provided earlier on this very blog
    So find another tree to go bark up, I am going to spend the next few hours smelling the flowers in my garden.

    BTW do you have any answer on how to rid of the rabbits in the tiny space that I till that continue to eat my beans? In days of yore they would be Sunday dinner but my sensibilities have evolved and I have to live and let live.

    Like

  • since it is you, William Skinner, i will say this. one of my biggest disappointments with David Thompson as PM was not passing ITAL as promised. i know he didnt serve long but in that time he should have completed ITAL if it was the only thing he did.

    i have no doubt this government will pass some version of integrity legislation but it will do so just before the next election after which MAM will reduce the number of ministers and other hangers-on. (i hope you see where i am going with this). the spin will be that we are now out of the abyss and all hands on deck did the job as required.

    that will be part of a two hour address to the nation wherein there will be a lot of long talk and hand waving (a nod to Hal there) and the red paling cocks and those who want to be fooled will exclaim, “what a great speech, Viva Mia.”

    Like

  • @ Artax June 28, 2020 5:09 AM
    Quote:
    @ Miller
    You have an uncanny ability to make simple issues extremely complicated. (Unquote).
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You should really be referring to David the BU blogmaster.
    He is the one who put that lifeless fly (back) into the BU ointment of truth and justice by reproducing that ‘valid’ invoice demanding payment of gratuity on behalf of a client who was holding a ‘contract of services’ with CLICO Barbados.

    Maybe the ‘office’ of the big chief of coppers (acting upon the wise legal counsel from the office of the DPP) has finally turned a ‘simple’ issue into an extremely complicated affair which can result in law suits involving millions of taxpayers’ (instead of policyholders) money by ‘foolishly watching too many TV Police series.

    Should we say that it actually took the Bajan McGarret so many years since the assembling of evidence contained in the Forensic Audit report to say:
    “Book him, Typie”!!

    Just remember that:
    “The faintest ink is greater than the sharpest mind”.

    Here is a piece of the same ‘convoluted and complicated issue’ from your past.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    From: Artaxerxes February 9, 2015 10:47 PM

    @ ac February 9, 2015 at 10:32 PM #
    “But listen bro the Higher court is where the Facts are unfolded not like as in the making of a John grisham novel or a made for T.V. perry mason episode.the facts are cold hard and relentless with two sides battling it out, get real,
    you guys get up in the BU courtroom and build a case with limited and newspaper periodicals not good enough….”

    You are definitely having a hard time trying to defend the indefensible.
    No matter how you try to “spin” this issue and whether you like it or not, the TRUTH and FACTS revealed by the FORENSIC AUDIT “are cold hard and relentless”.

    So, if you are suggesting the forensic audit report is “in the making of a John grisham novel or a made for T.V. perry mason episode” or that what is contained therein is untrue, then surely you must agree that your assumptions are “A MONSTROUS PERVERSION OF COMMON SENSE.”

    I suspect Freundel came up with that phrase after reading your contributions to BU on behalf of the DLP.

    Like

  • @ Miller

    There you go again, complicating a simple issue.

    Could you please explain, in simple English, what I wrote in 2015 have to do with your June 28, 2020 11:42 AM contribution?

    Perhaps it would be much better if you presented your comments CLEARLY and DIRECTLY, and avoid archaic terms, repetition, metaphors and verbosity.

    Like

  • @ Artax June 28, 2020 12:28 PM

    It shows you to be speaking from different sides of your mouth.

    Please tell the BU household in simple and no uncertain terms what has transpired between your position on the evidence available in 2015 and what took place last week involving the charging of the man in question bearing in mind the position you took on the Money Laundering matter in association with Greene.

    What additional evidence or which complainant went forward to satisfy the CoP’s stated requirements for an investigation?

    Please speak directly to and tell the BU audience without verbosity and without any ad hominem targeted at the miller.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    From: Artaxerxes February 9, 2015 9:36 PM

    @ ac February 9, 2015 at 8:10 PM

    “Why no charges yet in CLICO fiasco? this was six years later the taxpayers of trinidad were asking, “Why hasn’t anyone been charged after a bailout that has cost taxpayers more than $20 billion; an $82.8 million Bob Lindquist forensic investigation; a commission of enquiry that lasted 24 months, involved 23 parties, 77 lawyers, 57 witnesses, 50 subpoenas, received five million pages of doc¬u¬ments and cost taxpayers $36.2 million; and the refusal of former CLI¬CO executive chairman and cen¬tral protagonist Lawrence Duprey and others to appear before the commission of enquiry.

    ”……………………….”

    Ok, you have mentioned the cost to the Trinidad taxpayers of investigating the CLICO fiasco and after six years no one has been arrested.

    From your 3 previous posts, it seems as though you are implying that after TT20B was spent in the Trinidadian investigation of CLICO and no one has yet been charged, it would be a waste of time and money for the Barbadian authorities to investigate the CLICO Barbados Holdings Ltd. debacle, and as such, those involved in the Barbados scandal should be allowed to go “scot free”, while the policy holders forfeit their claims to the company.

    You have been unwavering in your support of everything DLP, whether it is right or wrong, and have been using this forum to display what true “yard-fowlism” means………. blind and inexplicable support of a political party. So far, what you, the AC consortium, have seen unfold is that the forensic audit has implicated David Thompson in a fraudulent transaction and as it stands, DLP candidates and other key players of this political party may also be exposed for their involvement in the CLICO scandal.

    Therefore, based on your modus operandi, I’m of the opinion it’s not the Barbadian tax payers with whom you are concerned. Your main and only concern is the protection of the DLP.

    This is definitely a “monstrous perversion of common sense”.

    Like

  • @Miller,
    if you read the below you will see why Parris was charged for ML / proceeds of crime and why it was argued that Donville at the time of his arrest in the US couldnt be so charged in Bim.

    my bill via Thompson and Associates is in the mail for your immediate payment. as you know my rates are 1000 pounds per hour and although i spend 10 minutes on this, client care rules dictate that i must inform you that i charge in hourly blocks

    Government Moving To Tighten Legislation Dealing With Properties Acquired Through Crime
    14 March 2019

    The Barbados government says it will soon introduce amended legislation that allow law enforcement to confiscate the property of criminals who commit a wide range of offences.

    Attorney General Dale Marshall said that the new Proceeds and Instrumentalities of Crime Bill 2019 will also provide for offenders who got rich off those ill-gotten gains within the last 20 years not to be safe from prosecution.
    “It is intended to strike at essentially those assets that are in the possession of the criminal element of our country, where those assets are either themselves the proceeds of crime or are intended or have been used in the commission of crime or in unlawful conduct,” Marshall told Parliament as he outlined the government’s plans to tackle criminals who have accumulated wealth by illegal means.

    He told legislators that while there was a Proceeds of Crime Act which had been enacted in 1990 and had been amended in 1998 and 2002, there were still glaring deficiencies.

    Marshall said it allowed the Crown to confiscate proceeds of crime only in connection with drug offences and those related to terrorism.

    “So the Proceeds of Crime legislation that we have today in Barbados and that has been here for the past 29 years, was focused solely on proceeds from drug crime or terrorism-related crime.

    “So that the Proceeds of Crime legislation that we have, if you put terrorism associated issues aside, effectively we look only at proceeds of drug-related crime. Now that is a glaring deficiency,” Marshall said, adding that the amended legislation would cover proceeds from corruption, money laundering, and racketeering among others.

    He said also that 20 years prior to this new legislation being passed, criminals would still stand to lose their monies and properties if found guilty.

    “So the limitation period is a 20-year period, 20 years after you acquire the proceeds of crime. So while you have 20 years after the ill-gotten gains are acquired… that 20 years is not only looking forward, it also looks backward.”

    Marshall told Parliament that a portion of the monies confiscated from such proceedings will go towards a regional account to help in the Caribbean’s fight against crime, while the remaining would go towards helping to fund law enforcement in Barbados.

    CMC

    https://www.cbc.bb/2019/03/14/barbados-news/government-moving-to-tighten-legislation-dealing-with-properties-acquired-through-crime/

    now remember that Donville Inniss was charged in the US on March 15 2018 before this law was passed.

    https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/fcpa/cases/donville-inniss

    i have asserted before in a previous blog that Donville could not be charged with M/L or proceeds of crime in Bim because the law at the time referred to drug and terrorists offences as the predicate for proceeds of crime.

    with regard to Parris, he is caught by this amendment.

    how timely for Donville and unfortunate for Parris.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ Greene
    Thompson and Parris were buddy buddies and that was always going to be problematic. You note that Sinkler was the biggest failure and Mottley even called for his resignation; she now puts him on a committee. They cuss Richie said he was power hungry; he ended up chairing the QEH Commission and got a Knighthood His wife ended up in the senate.
    Lorenzo , Enuff , Tron and Mariposa are not going to change because they like the Bees and Dees.
    Like I said anytime you have Integrity Legislation and your assets on entering parliament are not publicly known by being published in the official gazette and then in the press, it can’t be worthwhile.
    What I can tell you is the great possibility that public discourse may soon be threatened because intolerance for anti-government positions are rising.
    Although I support BOSS, I was told that some civil servants decided to support it because they were afraid of victimization. Apparently they are some permanent posts to be filled and some public servants feared that if did not buy into boss they would be overlooked.

    Like

  • @Greene
    “So the limitation period is a 20-year period, 20 years after you acquire the proceeds of crime. So while you have 20 years after the ill-gotten gains are acquired… that 20 years is not only looking forward, it also looks backward.”
    +++++++++++++++
    Forgive me for asking if the law is retroactive (according to the statement above) why is Donville not subject to the amendment?

    Like

  • Well well none of the known Dems can answer the five questions i posed.First the three nightwatchmen Skinner , Greene, and Austin were sent and failed. Next up the funny guy Gazzerts claimed he don,t look for questions so no answer from him and now a staunch Dem Sarge suddenly does not know where the party headquartes are and never paid dues. Well well if these Dems cannot do any better i guess the Dems got what they deserved last election. For their benefit i will repest the questions.
    1 Why did Mr Thompson take up 10 millio dollars of taxpayers money to pump into clico
    2 Was this money repaid
    3Why was Mr Parris allowed to keep 5 million dollars at the central bank
    4Why was a cheque for Mr Parris sent through Thompson associates while Mrs Thompson was office manager?
    5Why was Mr Thompson flying around while PM on clico,s private plane?I await the answers from the Dems on here.

    Like

  • @Lorenzo

    Adding another question to the list- why did a Clico company pay $75,000 to Owen Arthur?

    Like

  • @ Miller

    RE: “It shows you to be speaking from different sides of your mouth.”

    Have you ever held a position on an issue and, in retrospect, take a different position? Are you suggesting you’ve never changed your mind on anything?

    You seem to be implying it’s immoral, unethical or dishonest for someone to say something in 2015 and subsequently change his/her mind 5 years later in 2020.

    I could understand your concern about me “speaking from different sides of my mouth,” if, this afternoon I changed my opinion on an issue I previously held this morning. For you to use comments I made FIVE (5) YEARS ago as proof, is not only folly, but also definitely “a monstrous perversion of common sense.”

    RE: “Please tell the BU household in simple and no uncertain terms what has transpired between your position on the evidence available in 2015 and what took place last week involving the charging of the man in question bearing in mind the position you took on the Money Laundering matter in association with Greene.”

    Firstly, you need to get over your silly obsession with trying to prove Mr. Greene wrong.

    Secondly, I never took any position on any “Money Laundering matter in association with Greene.”

    Thirdly, I read the Deloitte forensic audit report and mentioned therein was an invoice from “Thompson & Associates” dated December 30, 2008, describing, in detail, four different legal matters and fees totaling $3.3M.

    (1). The auditors were advised by CIL the $3.3M payment was actually to the benefit of Mr. Leroy Parris and related to partial payment of a “gratuity.”
    (2). The auditors did not find any reference to the payment in the Minutes of CIL or CHBL at or around the time it was made.
    (3). “Thompson & Associates” was David Thompson’s law firm.
    (4). It is a known fact a close friendship existed between Thompson and Parris.

    Taking the above information into consideration, I came to a similar conclusion as everyone, and assumed Thompson had knowledge or facilitated the preparation of the $3.3M invoice.

    But, as I wrote in a previous contribution to this post, the forensic audit report did not mentioned anything to suggest Thompson was complicit in any fraudulent activity as it relates to “Thompson & Associates” invoice.

    Unless, you’re willing to indicate to me where in the report it was mentioned Thompson actually prepared the invoice…….. do you believe it’s fair to condemn him as guilty, primarily based on SPECULATION?

    RE: “What additional evidence or which complainant went forward to satisfy the CoP’s stated requirements for an investigation?”

    I believe you should ask CoP Tyrone Griffith that question.

    Like

  • @ David June 28, 2020 3:17 PM

    This was a CONSPIRACY against OSA to discredit him as a corrupt politician. We all know that OSA is a bit too naive. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have taken the job at LIAT.

    Like

  • @Sargeant

    if you would re read my last submission you would see that Donville was charged in the US in 2018 prior to the amendment in Bim in 2019.

    does that stop him being charged in Bim now? no but you may run into the double jeopardy (non bis in idem) rule as the same information for his conviction in the US in 2020 would be the same used in Bim. essentially it would be like trying him again for the same crime.

    i dont know whether this rule still exists in Bim but i cant see why they would want to charge Donville with the same crime in Bim when he has been convicted in the US. but you never know.

    of course a barrister can try to argue that the 20 year retroactive law is unconstitutional as it is being aimed at political opponents or friends thereof. question is would that succeed?

    Like

  • @ Tron

    You are right. I cannot understand whey Arthur, with a 100 per cent pension, a desk and title at the UWI, and enormous experience, as prime minister and in CARICOM, should allow the president to play him like a toy. He should have been looking to history. First, writing a memoire about his life in politics; and second, writing about regional unity. Was it greed? Was it a search for a place in history?
    What is or could have been the reward for accepting the LIAT job? What could have been the reward to going off to Guyana to interfere with something of no concern to him?
    If Guyana cannot sort out its politics then it should have been suspended from CARICOM until it did. But, then again, I forgot the oil.

    Like

  • @ Mr. Skinner

    A similar situation occurred in 1991, under the Erskine Sandiford administration.

    Public sector employees were provided with ‘ballots’ and asked to vote for an 8% ‘cut’ in salaries. The ‘ballots’ were to be placed in sealed envelopes and sent to the substantive ministries.

    There were several cases of the envelopes being opened, especially at state owned enterprises. For example, employees of National Assistance Board were intimidated to vote for the 8%, with losing their jobs if they didn’t. The Board, under then Chairman, Dr. Farley Brathwaite and comprising of Richard Sealy, Derek Alleyne, Errington Massiah and Reggie Hunte, ordered the opening of envelopes to find out who voted for and against the 8%, before sending them off to the Ministry of Community Development.

    Those employees who voted against the 8% were eventually retrenched, including the Assistant Director, who openly said he wasn’t voting for the 8%.

    Like

  • @ Greene June 28, 2020 1:39 PM

    Come on Greene, stop with the red herrings and ad hominems!

    Besides the ordinary law we are discussing a matter dealing with the highest branch of philosophy and order of morality which is the highest Law of man.

    So you want someone to pay for some dodgy back-street legal advice which argues that Greenverbs was charged for an act of M/L which occurred in 2008/9 under a piece of legislation which was amended in 2019 to cover such illegalities?

    On what basis was the poor humiliated boy from St. John charged for fraud and tax evasion to consider the handling of the proceeds as money laundering?

    Was it the BRA which acted as the aggrieved party and complainant for the failure to file income tax returns and which- according to the very observant Walter Blackman- should have covered non-compliance with the Bajan VAT rules more than 7 years after the fact?

    Was it you or Artax or Walter or Lorenzo who formed that group of complainants in the matter based on your earlier erudite attempts at setting out the rules and steps to be followed ‘governing’ police investigations into matters of this nature and not involving drug dealings, murders, etc?

    BTW, are you still constipated because of your refusal to explain concisely, precisely and abundantly ‘pellucidly’ clear why would a man be charged in 2020 for an alleged crime committed in 2008/09 under a piece of legislation which could not convict Donville in Barbados but could be used to prosecute a ‘poor’ boy from St. John for M/L?

    Is the CoP going to bring retroactive charges against the Don and his still free alleged accomplices as the more level-headed Sargeant @ June 28, 2020 2:46 PM enquired about?

    Why are you, as a UK-based top class lawyer, supporting a position which appears (on the face of it) to be violating the human rights of the poor bagboy boy from St. John?

    Why not take advice from Michael Mansfield (QC) before trying to throw poor Greenverbs to the wolves to cover up your earlier ‘lawyering’ faux pas?

    As a self-proclaimed legal luminary, how does the recent event dovetail with the following:

    “Article 11, paragraph 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that no person be held guilty of any criminal law that did not exist at the time of offence nor suffer any penalty heavier than what existed at the time of offence.”

    Just a reminder for the sake of verbosity but certainly in the interest of clarity and justice what you said in a post earlier this year.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    From: Greene January 19, 2020 10:27 AM
    “if an employee steals from an institution and it is made public should the police investigate when the institution never complained? if someone steals from BRA and BRA does not report it or complain to the police and it is later made public should the police go to BRA and investigate? isnt that an indication that they dont want the matter investigated? so if neither ICBL nor the BIDC doesnt not complain what does that tell you?”

    Like

  • @ Hal Austin June 28, 2020 3:49 PM

    Those who had a little foresight knew what was coming in Guyana and at LIAT. OSA was blind. Very blind. OSA will go down in history as the old man who did not properly oversee the elections in Guyana and drove LIAT into bankruptcy.

    We must not blame our leader, however. She is a brilliant politician who always finds self-loving servants who burn their fingers instead of her.

    Like

  • @Miller June 28, 2020 4:56 PM

    If the complaint-theory were correct, every slave hunter could enslave entire native villages in Barbados. Once people are on the slave ship, there’s no more complaint possible. Argumentum ad absurdum!

    Donville’s crimes are crimes against the common good. You don’t need a complaint. I don’t know of any civilized legal system where that is so. If Barbados is different here, the law system is simply very, very inferior and substandard.

    Like

  • The Integrity Legislation Bill and Prevention of Corruption Bill will be passed this year. The government has little choice. Wunna need to start looking for new topics.

    Like

  • @enuff

    We need it passed AND operationalized.

    >

    Like

  • @ Enuff June 29, 2020 3:45 PM

    Of course the new legislation will come. We have never doubted it.

    Our leader wants to fight corruption and she is already doing it with powerful blows against the old DLP guard.

    Thank you, Mia!

    Like

  • A number of German investors are now planning to sue the government over an alleged failure in regulation. They are claiming the regulator should have pre-empted the accounting failure of Wirecard.
    I said earlier that there is a prima facie case of negligence against the regulator. I expect they will lose at first instance, even on appeal, but they stand a good chance at the CCJ.

    Like

  • At some point there must be an inquiry in to the quality of financial regulation in Barbados. As I have said, Barbados justice is also in the dock. We cannot give the regulator (nor auditors) a free pass..(Quote)

    Like

  • Hal AustinJune 30, 2020 9:07 AM

    Agree fully. But not only quality. Process. Though one may argue that is part and parcel of the same thing. Why should the regulator report to a minister and not to a judicial panel of three magistrates / judges. I say magistrates / judges, because judges are already overly busy and the Barbados magistrates are well qualified and experienced, like in UK.

    But surely, should not report to a minister and be at their whim and fancy. That is a joke.

    Like

  • @ Crusoe

    The regulator should report to parliament (not to a minister) ie the report will be lodged in parliament and fully debated and then be placed in the library.

    Like

  • Just like the Auditor General’s reports.

    Like

  • The blogmaster sends condolences to the family of Pat Hoyos. May he rest in peace.

    Like

  • @Mariposa was moderated (ie banned) for supposedly posting under the wrong blog What has Pat Hoyos got to do with Leroy Parris? In truth, @Mariposa was moderated (banned) because she was too disruptive.

    Like

  • @ David,

    I was at H C with Pat Hoyos. He was one of the good guys at school.

    Condolences to his family.

    Like

  • Was Pat Hoyos the medical Doctor?

    Like

  • The blogmaster takes the opportunity to extend sympathy to you too.

    >

    Like

  • @Hants
    I might know you as I was there at the same time as Pat Hoyos.
    He was different.
    His family has my sympathy.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Mariposa was moderated (ie banned) for supposedly posting under the wrong blog What has Pat Hoyos got to do with Leroy Parris? {Quote}

    ??????????????????????????????????????????

    HaI Austin, you got to tell we first what asking bout the Quakers and if dem did Anglicans and how much prominent Quakers had slaves got to do with the blog Caribbean Scholars Renew Reparation Call.

    You is nuff, nuff idiot.

    Like

  • Hants and Theogazerts:

    I may know you BOTH, as I was also a classmate of Patrick Hoyos at HC. Condolences to his family

    Liked by 1 person

  • Open Letter to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) about the CLICO (Barbados) Scandal
    Posted on July 1, 2014 by David | 54 Comments

    Walter Blackman – Actuary and Social Commentator
    Dear Mr. Leacock,
    I am a citizen and taxpayer of Barbados. I am also a pension actuary.
    My fundamental responsibility, as an actuary, is to provide services skilfully and competently, to operate with integrity, and to uphold and protect the public trust. I believe your chosen profession has imposed similar responsibilities upon you. By definition, therefore, whenever the public trust is involved, your objectives and mine are always convergent.
    For the past couple of years, I have watched in dismay as pieces of information doled out for public consumption revealed how a major life insurance company operating in Barbados was stripped of almost four hundred million dollars of its assets.
    Barbadian observers have recoiled in sheer disgust and anger as evidence from reliable sources suggest that our laws were systematically and disdainfully trampled by a group of persons, some of whom masqueraded as executive managers of the ill-fated insurance company, and some of whom pretended to be statesmen.
    Many citizens deeply believe that any villains involved in this sordid raid of a life insurance company’s assets should be brought to justice. They also believe that a serious effort should be made to recover as much of the diverted policyholders’ premiums as possible. I share the views and concerns of those citizens, but so far, I have noticed that the boisterous and unified cries clamouring for justice appear to be falling on deaf ears.
    Sir, I know that you are a very busy man, presumably dealing with far heavier legal matters than this one, who probably have not found enough time to tackle this problem as yet. Nevertheless, I have decided to construct and package some of the major arguments advanced from various quarters, which support the prosecution of this case before the law courts. I now attach and present them to you, along with the errors that would naturally flow from a mind with no legal training whatsoever.
    I fervently hope that your reply to me will give an indication as to whether you believe the ‘evidence’ in this case to be lacking in substance, or whether you think it is credible enough for your department to pursue legal action against the wrongdoers.
    We need to reach out to the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, our major international trading partners, to make them aware of the extent to which our traditional Barbadian values of respect for law, honesty, and hard work are being relentlessly eroded at the corporate and political level. We also must alert them to the fact, that, when it comes to combating white-collar criminality and corruption, Barbadian citizens currently feel that they will have to rely on international assistance in one form or another, since no help ever seems to come from the local governmental agencies.
    BACKGROUND
    In 2009, Mr. Lawrence Duprey, head of the largest regional insurance company in the Caribbean, approached the Central Bank of Trinidad & Tobago and asked for a loan to assist his company with paying its bills. That request, and the implied financial horror associated with it, emitted scandalous shockwaves that reverberated throughout the West Indian financial and retirement communities. By the time the dust had settled, Trinidadian taxpayers were forced to part with TT$22 billion to restore some semblance of stability to the Colonial Life Insurance Company (CLICO) of Trinidad & Tobago.
    Recognizing that the value and security of the life insurance policies purchased by their citizens from CLICO Barbados were now exposed to the dangers of systemic risk, the Prime Ministers of the other Caribbean islands became quite solicitous and agitated. Mr. David Thompson, on the other hand, as Prime Minister of Barbados and Minister of Finance, was actually enjoying a lucrative but shady relationship with the subsidiary CLICO Barbados group of companies. To safeguard whatever personal and financial benefits he was surreptitiously receiving through his unscrupulous business dealings with Mr. Leroy Parris and other executive members of CLICO, the Prime Minister of Barbados had to invent a charade which would also quell the rising fears and doubts of his fellow Prime Ministers from the Windward and Leeward Islands.
    In response to the nervousness and uneasiness coming from Caribbean leaders and citizens, the Thompson-led Barbados Government assured everyone that there was a qualitative difference between CLICO Trinidad and CLICO International Life Insurance Limited (CIL) of Barbados. CIL was being managed well, declared the government’s propaganda machinery. Most interestingly, the Governor of the Central Bank at the time went on to inform Barbadians that CIL had not asked for any assistance, but the Government of Barbados was going to “ put its money where its mouth is” by giving BDS$10 million to the insurance company.
    The charade had now masterfully crafted a one-way conduit so that $10 million of Barbadian taxpayers’ money could flow into CIL’s account. Generally speaking, once money entered the CIL account, Mr. Leroy Parris’ first step was to take control of it. Next, with the assistance and facilitation of executive management, he diverted it away from the insurance company and channelled it towards whatever uses he deemed fit.
    Of course, the whole narrative related to CIL being a well-managed insurance company was merely a convenient fabrication. So much so, that no one was really surprised when CIL, drained of significant amounts of its assets, eventually collapsed into the arms of Court-appointed Judicial Managers.
    At present, no one knows how much taxpayers’ money will be needed to bring some stability and confidence back to the Barbadian insurance market. What everyone knows, however, is that the despicable and horrendous behaviour of the principal actors in this scandal has caused irreparable damage to the international reputation and brand of Barbados.
    INFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN:
    In December 2008, an invoice for BDS$3.333 million was submitted for payment by the law firm of Thompson & Associates to CLICO Holdings (Barbados) Limited (CHBL) purportedly for the provision of legal services. The invoice, making its first public appearance on a political platform two days before the 2013 General Election in Barbados, was approved by Mr. Leroy Parris who was Chairman of CHBL.
    Mr. Leroy Parris used his corporate position to get CIL to issue a cheque for BDS$3.333 million dollars payable to Thompson & Associates. The cheque publicly appeared on the same date, and in the same fashion, as the invoice. One of the signatures on the CIL cheque belonged to Mr. Terrence Thornhill, an accountant by profession, and President of CHBL.
    Mind you, CIL was not involved in the transaction, did not receive any legal services, and therefore had no accounting or legal right to pay Thompson & Associates for the provision of such services.
    The invoice from Thompson & Associates showed a charge of $250,000 for some legal work done by Mr. Maurice King. Mr. King reportedly denied doing such work. In the face of such a denial, the $250,000 which was removed from the assets of CIL would have been removed under false pretences. This false claim would have been initiated by Thompson & Associates.
    It should be noted that in 2008, Mr. David Thompson, perceived head and owner of Thompson & Associates, was also Prime Minister of Barbados and Minister of Finance. Mr. Leroy Parris was the Chairman of CHBL and CIL. Mr. Terrence Thornhill was a professional accountant, and President of CHBL.
    All over the world, Value Added Tax (VAT) administrators have to struggle against the scourge of carousel fraud, a criminal technique used by groups of businessmen and their businesses to complicate, hide, erase and offset transactions as a method of evading payments of VAT.
    The transaction between CHBL and Thompson & Associates for the provision of legal services in 2008 would have attracted VAT at the rate of 15%. Therefore, the invoice from Thompson & Associates should have shown an amount of $499,950 as VAT due.
    It did not.
    Bear in mind that Mr. David Thompson, as Minister of Finance, would have also been the political head of the VAT department in 2008 and therefore had a legal obligation to protect government’s revenue. Furthermore, Prime Minister Thompson ought to have been concerned that money was being so easily diverted from a life insurance company to pay bills for another entity.
    Mr. Leroy Parris, when he approved the invoice as Chairman of CHBL ought to have known that the transaction would have attracted a VAT rate of 15%.
    Mr. Terrence Thornhill, as a professional accountant, must have known that an amount of $499,950 in VAT was due to the Government of Barbados as a result of the transaction.
    Collusion had now taken place among CHBL, CIL, and Thompson & Associates as companies, and among Mr. Leroy Parris as Chairman of CIL & CHBL, Mr. David Thompson as Prime Minister of Barbados and Minister of Finance, and Mr. Terrence Thornhill, as a professional accountant and President of CHBL. The effect of this collusion would have been to keep VAT revenue amounting to $499,950 out of the hands of the Government of Barbados.
    The way our VAT system works, the first transaction involving the invoice and payment for legal services was a terminal and independent transaction. There was no more value to be added once the company of Thompson and Associates was paid for its legal services.
    It has been asserted by others that, although the check was written to Thompson & Associates, the 3.333 million dollars ended up in the hands of Mr. Leroy Parris as partial payment of a gratuity.
    However, if the assertion is true, then it must be stressed that neither Thompson & Associates as a company, nor Mr. David Thompson as Prime Minister of Barbados, was in any position to legally pay Mr. Leroy Parris a gratuity. Under such circumstances, partial payment of a gratuity would have to be viewed as a false and illegal reason offered by Thompson & Associates, Prime Minister David Thompson, and Mr. Leroy Parris to cover up a multi-million dollar racket.
    One cannot help but notice the depth of planning and collusion as the second phase of this scheme was put into action.
    It must be emphasized that as far as VAT is concerned, this was a completely new transaction now taking place.
    Since there were no physical goods involved, VAT legislation would have assumed that a service was provided by Mr. Leroy Parris in order for Thompson & Associates, or anyone for that matter, to pay him $3.333 million.
    That service would have attracted $499,950 in VAT.
    Therefore, the two independent transactions aimed at diverting $3.333 million from CIL into the personal account of Mr. Leroy Parris, should have brought $999,900 of VAT revenue into the coffers of government. Unfortunately, the actions of the principal participants in these transactions left a VAT department too petrified by fear of political victimization to act.
    This information in the public arena shows clearly that Mr. Leroy Parris had no legal right to the $3.333 million of policyholders’ money that was paid into CIL as premiums.
    This leads us to the following question: How can $3.333 million dollars end up in an account belonging to Mr. Leroy Parris, with no credible legal or accounting explanation being given for its arrival?
    This feat could only have been achieved through one mechanism – money laundering. Money laundering is a crime in Barbados.
    How many illegal and fictitious transactions were conceived and entered into by the principal actors, in order to quench the insatiable thirst of Mr. Parris, and others, for the premiums paid by CIL’s policyholders? How much of these transactions resulted in a transgression of our tax and money laundering laws? How much of the premiums paid by poor hard-working Barbadians and other West Indians to purchase insurance protection from CIL ended up in Prime Minister Thompson’s estate as kickbacks? How much of it supported the lavish and jet-set lifestyle of Prime Minister Thompson, Mr. Leroy Parris, and other executive members of CIL and CHBL?
    It would be an extremely serious mistake for you to believe that these two transactions were random and isolated events. The truth of the matter is that, over time, significant sums of money (almost $400 million) were taken from CIL and diverted for the use of CHBL, its subsidiaries, and executive membership.
    I am sure you would be shocked if you were to discover that no advance Board approval was given or secured for the divergence of these funds from CIL. Recognizing that Mr. Terrence Thornhill was a professional accountant and an executive member of CHBL, I am also confident that you would be absolutely appalled if you were to discover that no accounting documents could be readily found or made available to support or explain the divergence of almost $400 million from CIL.
    Life insurance is a highly technical and esoteric business. At any point in time, the value of the total premiums paid on a policy by the policyholder, minus the total cost of insurance protection that he or she has received, represents a ‘reserve’ amount which must be calculated by an actuary and held by the insurance company. Insurance regulators worldwide establish levels of statutory reserves which insurance companies must keep on hand to ensure that benefits to policyholders can be paid as they fall due. These reserves are established by using extremely conservative actuarial assumptions which focus primarily on ensuring the solvency of the insurance company, and protecting the interests of policyholders.
    Additionally, an insurance contract protects the interests of policyholders by making non-forfeiture options available to them whenever they decide to terminate a policy. One of these non-forfeiture options involves the calculation and payment of the policy’s cash value.
    Establishing an adequate level of statutory reserves, determining when premium income is currently earned, and using policyholders’ premiums to pursue a prudent investment strategy aimed at matching the nature of assets with the nature of liabilities are some of the basic roles and responsibilities of the executive management of a life insurance company.
    By failing to timely file reports on the reserve situation of CIL to the accommodating regulatory authorities in Barbados, and by habitually and illegally diverting assets away from CIL to other accounts, Mr. Leroy Parris and the executive membership of CHBL effectively destroyed the viability of CIL as an insurance company. In doing so, they brought immense financial and economic hardship to bear upon thousands and thousands of policyholders and life insurance agents across the Caribbean. As CIL thrashed about spasmodically in its death throes, terminating policyholders, despite being protected under the law, could not get the cash value of their policies as promised by their contracts.
    There is one final twist to this strange eventful history.
    In August 2009, the office of the Supervisor of Insurance issued a cease and desist order to CIL aimed at preventing the life insurance company from issuing new policies. Believing that their unholy alliance with the Prime Minister of Barbados rendered them untouchable by the law, Mr. Parris and some of the executive management of CIL and CHBL chose to treat the order by the office of the Supervisor of Insurance with the same level of contempt with which they treated the tax laws, insurance laws, corporate laws, and money laundering laws of Barbados.
    In June 2010, Ms.Vernese Brathwaite, the Deputy Supervisor of Insurance, filed an official complaint urging the Commissioner of police to probe the illegal sale of over 800 life insurance policies which were sold despite the regulatory order issued the year before.
    Any policyholder resident in the USA, Canada, Britain or any other overseas jurisdiction who received solicitations from CIL by mail, e-mail, or any other means after August 2009 urging them to purchase a life insurance policy, should take the evidence to their respective governments. Mail fraud would have been committed.
    In February 2012, given the collaborative efforts between Ms. Vernese Brathwaite as Deputy Supervisor of Insurance, and Mr. Darwin Dottin as Commissioner of Police, charges were filed against Mr. Leroy Parris and Mr. Terrence Thornhill for violating the cease and desist order imposed by the office of the Supervisor of Insurance.
    Ms. Vernese Brathwaite as Deputy Supervisor of Insurance, and Mr. Darwin Dottin as Commissioner of Police, have been unceremoniously removed from their desks. Neither explanation nor reason has been provided to the taxpayers of Barbados for the termination of the careers of these senior government officials.
    As for the “cease and desist” case against Messrs. Leroy Parris and Terrence Thornhill, it has been adjourned without a set date after Mr. Parris failed to show up for his first scheduled court appearance.
    Is Barbados on the road to becoming a banana republic?
    RATE THIS:

    14 Votes

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s