est. 2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Media Barred from Emma McManus’ Inquest

Caroner Graveney Bannister
Caroner Graveney Bannister

In December 2020 Emma McManus the former wife of John Paul McManus and the son of JP McManus died while holidaying at the plush Sandy Lane Estate at one of the villas. JP McManus is known to be one of the owners of the world class property.

Of interest to the blogmaster is the decision to stage inquest into the death of Emma McManus in camera. The high court had previously held that the case should be held in private and Caroner Magistrate Graveney Bannister upheld a request from McManus’ lawyers to remove the press from the room. Interesting the decision came at the point the toxicology report was about to be shared in the proceedings.

From all reports it seems the McManus legal team has a problem with Caroner Graveney Banister. The bane of contention with the goodly magistrate is a disputed phone call between John Paul McManus and Bannister after Emma McManus’ death, where it is alleged the partying group that included the late Emma McManus had been snorting cocaine. John Paul McManus latter clawed back from the alleged reported statement to Bannister. WHY THE HELL WOULD MAGISTRATE BANISTER MAKE UP SUCH A STATEMENT IS WHAT INQUIRING MINDS WOULD LIKE TO KNOW.

The saying that something smells rotten in Denmark seems very appropriate to anyone following the coroner’s inquiry into Emma McManus’ death. 

The blogmaster is all about transparency and justice. That a rich foreigner would accuse an officer of the local court of telling a lie is big news. This blogmaster has been patient since the news broke in December 2020 waiting for an outcome, however, it seems this is one of those matters that will be moved on the roster until the matter fades from public interest. What the blogmaster would do to secure a copy of the toxicology report. If the report identified cocaine or some narcotic traces in the body of Emma McManus at the time of her death it would support the contentious statement that illegal drugs were being consumed AND that alleged conversation took place?

One can speculate if the inquest involved a member of the blue collar community the decision to switch to in camera to shield proceedings from the public would be a moot consideration. The blogmaster is aware there is keen interest from the outside world in the matter and how it eventually turns out has implications for how onlookers will view the delivery of justice in Barbados. Hopefully this is not a case of a small country being bullied by the money class.

The other inquiry ongoing into the death of Stewart Mottley, brother of Prime Minister Mottley in June 2021 is also of interest. The fact the matter is being prosecuted by the Elliot Mottley, father of the deceased is also interesting. The blogmaster will reserve comment on the matter for now and take the opportunity to extend condolences to Prime Minister Mottley and family.

104 responses to “Media Barred from Emma McManus’ Inquest”

  1. African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved Avatar
    African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    William….look at this…that’s the only thing these THIEVING creatures for politicians do…..

    people are only eating one meal a day, am sure many millions and their children eat none, and these trash with titles, fake presidents and fake PMs STOLE ALL THE MONEY so they can admire it daily in their houses and were forced to RUN and leave it all behind for the people to find….only a noose around their necks in a public square as an event can cure the other thieves.

    https://youtu.be/KwXczP3Dxa0

  2. John Avatar
    John

    A future Sri Lankan philanthropist nipped in the bud.

    Clearly the guy needed the money to become a donator.

  3. David Avatar
    David

    @William

    Fighting social justice issues is a always on struggle, it will never end. We must commit to fighting the good fight.

  4. TheOgazerts Avatar
    TheOgazerts

    Message from a lightweight…

    I do not agree with all the Pacha has to say, but I would not put him in a lightweight category. For what it matters,
    I have found his views are always worthy of (my) consideration.

    It is always good to have different voices

  5. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    It is obvious that the death is a personal matter. The Police mentioned no suspicious circumstances.

    What would be gained by spreading details of the woman’s sad death, other than to satisfy the greed of some for salacious news?

    Leave the family alone to grieve.

    There is enough serious crime to read about, almost daily, that affects all of us and is not being solved.

    Ponder on that instead.

  6. David Avatar
    David

    How can the police mention no suspicious circumstances with the results of the inquest pending?

  7. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    David, come on. When a body is found, invariably the press reports a police spokesperson on whether the death was suspicious. No such here.

    On a further point, if there were compromising details, of a death that os accidental, do you really think that publicity of such would benefit Barbados?

    I suggest not, quite the opposite.

    Although, I am not sure how much more damage such could do, as the multiple gangland murders are already dragging the country’s name down.

  8. David Avatar
    David

    @Crusoe

    If this high society group was cavorting at Sandy Lane snorting coke as rumoured and as her husband allegedly communicated to the Coroner then yes, the public needs to know.

  9. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    David,

    Why? Who gives a flying monkeys?

    I care about the safety of my family walking about. About a job, about the health system, about the Auditor General report, because that tells me where tax dollars are going.

    The lives of the rich and famous are not my concern.

    Same reason I do not watch that Kardashian crap and never have.

    Nothing to do with me nor help me.

    As long as it is not a crime of violence, impacting the general Bajan populace, I do not care.

  10. David Avatar
    David

    You don’t care a crime may have been committed?

    You don’t care about the ramifications if a crime occurred?

    You don’t care our inquests of locals were made public?

  11. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    David, check the latest reports on the use of Coke internationally, including USA and UK.

    It is rife. And where the high flying are, whether stockbrokers or lawyers on Wall Street, or City of London, or the grand mansions in the Hamptons, there is coke.

    Yes, drugs ruin lives. But the current “war” is not working and cannot work when the very people who control the war, are users.

    Fight the battles that we can win. Not those where we are bystanders.

    That is different world. Has been so since Alexandra’s. Logically, just better hidden.

    Dem is dem and we is we.

  12. David Avatar
    David

    @Crusoe

    With respect you are making a point not being contested by the blogmaster.

  13. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    A whole lot of people in this world have more money than sense.

  14. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    @African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved July 11, 2022 1:11 PM

    “had someone close being chased down to do some work for this sleazy expat from UK…he finally found the time to do it but when time came to pay, could not find the fraud for his money, but caught up to him one day and asked why he was not paid….he allowed him to know that he knows the PM, they are friends and if he keeps harassing him….FOR HIS MONEY, mind you…he will have him arrested..”

    Your close friend or relative is an IDIOT. I would bet anything that if the job had been offered to him/her by a black working class old woman like me your friend/relative would have demanded most or all of the money upfront.

    I am surprised to learn that you have such an idiotic friend or relative.

    People have to understand that proximity to whiteness, to wealth or to power is NOT THE SAME as money in the bank.

    IDIOTS.

    If rich, white or powerful people want work done treat them EXACTLY the same as you trear black, working class black women.

    Who by the way ALWAYS pay their bills in full and on time.

  15. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/elon-musk-dad-child-stepdaughter
    Elon Musk’s dad has had a second child with his stepdaughter

    Rich, white South African man fooping and breeding his former wife’s daughter.

    Why am I not surprised?

  16. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    @Crusoe July 17, 2022 1:39 PM “As long as it is not a crime of violence, impacting the general Bajan populace, I do not care.”

    Since none of thes plants grow in Barbados:
    Erythroxylum coca var. coca
    Erythroxylum coca var. ipadu
    Erythroxylum novogranatense var novogranatense,
    Erythroxylum novogranatense var. truxillense

    And since it is unlawful to import any of them or their derivatives into Barbados does it not concern you that it is alleged that visitors were “partying” with the plants or their derivatives?

    Do you believe that only rich white foreigners allegedly use cocaine in Barbados?

    Have you ever met a paro?

    Was the paro not a BLACK BAJAN MALE?

    Take a guess about one of the primary drivers of gun violence in Barbados?

    Your children, grandchildren etc migh be safe now from the scourge of cocaine use,, but how do you know that it wall always remain so?

    So many, many questions?

    So few answers.

    I have a cousin. my maternal grandmother’s great grandson who is a cocaine user/addict and he [sadly too often a he] has used up a whole lot of your tax dollars already, and mine too, time in prison, time in the psychiatric hospital, time for a criminal trial. He does not support his Bajan daughter, hasn’t done so for more than a decade, does not work, receives a welfare grant [your tax dollars wukkin’ fah you] exploits his elderly parents, and I could go on and on and on. And when his parents die, as they will sooner rather than later [being well over 70] he will be coming through your window or mine or David’s to find money to feed his coke habit.

    I put it to you, that if people known or unknown, Bajan or foreigner, rich or poor, black or white or any other color, are importing cocaine into Barbados it is the business of all of us.

    Because even though cocaine may be imported by the idle rich, invariably some “falls offa de truck” or the plane and right into the laps or up the noses of our vulnerable young men, and when young men phuck up invariably their children are harmed.

  17. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    Yup a welfare grant which adds up to several thousand a year, for perhaps decades because he is “disabled” by his addiction.

  18. TheOGazerts Avatar
    TheOGazerts

    “he [sadly too often a he]”
    When not a he, a she?
    Hiya cuhdear. Always good to see you. I like your many contributions.

    Good night, all

  19. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    Crusoe July 17, 2022 12:36 PM “Leave the family alone to grieve.”

    How do you know the family is grieving?

    I put it to you that sometimes when a person dies, the family feels nothing except relief.

  20. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    G’night Theo

    And thank you.

  21. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    @FearPlay July 11, 2022 6:40 AM “CNN, NBC, BBC, FOX, ABC, SKY, WION. Any or all of the above should be invited to pursue these stories.”

    Maybe the daily Mail?

  22. David Avatar
    David

    Inquest into Mottley’s death adjourned
    THE CORONER’S INQUEST into Warren Mottley’s death had to be adjourned yesterday due to certain logistical issues, and will now resume on November 24.
    Mottley, the brother of Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, died on June 29, 2021. King’s Counsel Sir Elliott Mottley and Leslie Haynes, Senior Attorney Douglas Mendes, and attorneys Stewart Mottley and Faye Finisterre are
    representing the Mottley family.
    The law firm of Carrington and Sealy, represented by attorney Francis De Peiza, as well as King’s Counsel Michael Lashley and attorney Sade Harris, are representing the two doctors involved in the matter.

    Source: Nation

  23. David Avatar
    David

    Tribunal ruling against Sandy Lane
    Last month the Employment Rights Tribunal delivered a decision regarding a claim of unfair dismissal made by Alfred Branch against Sandy Lane Hotel Co. Ltd. It ruled that Mr Branch was unfairly dismissed when Sandy Lane summarily dismissed him from employment on February 4, 2014.
    Before you rush to judgement and say the tribunal always rules in favour of employees (which is not true), let me give you some context.
    This is the second unfavourable ruling Sandy Lane received this year regarding an employment claim made by former employees. Earlier this year, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) ruled against Sandy Lane and upheld the findings of the Barbados Court of Appeal and affirmed that three former employees – Cato, Johnson and Poyer – had been wrongfully dismissed from the hotel. The CCJ ruled it was unlawful for Sandy Lane to dismiss these employees without following its own disciplinary procedures, adding that it cannot arbitrarily choose when to adhere to or ignore its own procedures.
    Now, let’s speak of the tribunal’s decision. Mr Branch was summarily dismissed because of a letter he issued to the general manager, the tone of which the general manager did not like and which contained a statement the company deemed threatening. In 2010 Mr Branch received a written warning for poor performance, to which he objected on the ground that the company’s rules stated that in the first instance of poor performance a verbal warning (and not a written one) should be issued. Despite several efforts to challenge the written warning and have his concerns properly ventilated, no meeting was convened to allow this.
    As a last resort, Mr Branch decided to escalate the matter to the chairman based on a 2008 memorandum which advised employees “about any actions that might publicly affect the company’s good name” . . . that “if anyone has concerns they feel are not being dealt with, the internal procedures must firstly be followed, after which the director of finance, myself and the chairman are always available to resolve”.
    Mr Branch issued a letter dated January 27, 2014, advising the general manager of his intention to resort to the chairman and ended it with the words: “I intend to entertain the chairman’s plea to make him last resort before taking the good name of Sandy Lane Hotel into disrepute.” The company viewed this last sentence as a threat and instituted disciplinary proceedings against him.
    Not only did the company refuse to allow Mr Branch to discuss the written warning, which was the very reason he had written the letter for which he was now being disciplined, but it rejected his explanation that his last sentence was not intended as a threat, but that he meant he wanted to consult with the chairman rather than take the hotel’s name into disrepute.
    During the hearing, he was repeatedly questioned as to what action he would take if the chairman did not agree to his views and Mr Branch replied: “I am not prepared to go there. I have not met with the chairman as yet.” The hotel deemed this response unsatisfactory and terminated him on the ground that it had lost all trust and confidence in him.
    In its decision, the Employment Rights Tribunal rejected the submission of Sandy Lane that Mr Branch had been given a fair disciplinary hearing.
    “The tribunal does not accept the submission . . . that the formalistic ticking of boxes for the purposes of compliance of Part A of the Fourth Schedule meets the requirements of the Act. Certainly, the restriction on what could be discussed by the claimant at the hearing undermined the contention that he was provided with a full opportunity to be heard.” The tribunal found that Mr Branch’s letter was not a threat and that, as a result, the dismissal was unfair.
    Employers should be careful not to fetter what matters an employee wishes to use in his or her defence. The tribunal also included in its judgment some useful advice for HR professionals.
    Michelle M. Russell is an attorney with a passion for employment law and labour matters and she is a social activist. Email: mrussell.ja@gmail.com


    Source: Nation

  24. David Avatar
    David

    Heated exchange
    in Mottley inquest
    Coroner warns of arrest warrant
    A HEATED EXCHANGE between counsel for the doctor at the heart of the inquest into Warren Mottley’s death and the coroner over the absence of the doctor ended with the inquest being adjourned until tomorrow.
    Mottley, the brother of Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, died on June 29, 2021. The assigned coroner, Magistrate Graveney Bannister, is investigating the circumstances of the death.
    Sir Elliott Mottley KC; King’s Counsel Leslie Haynes, Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes and attorneys Stewart Mottley and Faye Finisterre appear for the Mottley family.
    The law firm of Carrington and Sealy which is represented by attorney Francis De Peiza, as well as King’s Counsel Michael Lashley and attorney Sade Harris, is representing Dr Sahle Griffith.
    Griffith was scheduled to be cross-examined yesterday on his statement. However, when the matter was called, the court was informed that Griffith was not available as he was out of the jurisdiction.
    Several adjournments
    “You all are not taking this matter seriously,” Magistrate Bannister then told attorneys De Peiza and Lashley.
    “I asked for cross-examination to be today (Monday). This matter has been adjourned several times – because of death, because of illness and I am about to proceed with this matter today. Unless you have a very good excuse I am going to issue a warrant for your client. It’s as simple as that,” Magistrate Bannister declared.
    The coroner said he had granted leave to Griffith with the understanding that he would be present for questioning yesterday.
    Not in island
    “Your client was present when I made the order. When he came and he gave evidence he was sworn and told he was supposed to be here today,” the magistrate said.
    However, Lashley explained that while the doctor was not in the island, he had always been present at the inquest.
    “He has been here on every single occasion,” Lashley told the court.
    The magistrate, however, noted that Griffith and his team had been given a week’s adjournment after he had given his statement.
    “So to come here today and tell me you’re not disputing that I said I want to start on Monday and he is not here, that means he is flaunting the authority of the court. He knows he has to be here. He thinks he can show up whatever time,” Magistrate Bannister said, as he declared he was willing to issue a warrant for Griffith’s arrest.
    However, Lashley objected strongly, saying that comment was highly prejudicial.
    “You do not have any record of non-attendance. When he came, he presented himself. And only one day? This is totally unfair and unreasonable,” the senior attorney declared before excusing himself.
    When he returned, Lashley informed the inquest that Griffith would be available for crossexamination by video link in the afternoon.
    The inquest was then adjourned for ten minutes and when it resumed counsel made further submissions.
    An undertaken was then given that Griffith would be present tomorrow after attorney Finisterre said she preferred to put documents to the doctor and cross-examine him in person.
    The inquest was adjourned until then.

  25. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    Don’t be surprised if they lock his donkey up…
    Nothing more dangerous than a doctor speaking the truth about the covid shiite.
    LOL
    ..imagine having to resort to the truth to save your own reputation.
    and..
    Don’t tell Bushie that intelligent doctors were unaware of these issues previously…. when little shiite Bushie has been in the know all along…

  26. Battle To Be Won Avatar
    Battle To Be Won

    @ Bushman
    As mentioned the seeds of doubt that the conspiracy theory posse grew would have been dispelled and killed like weeds if they had family members to query who were doctors and nurses working on the front line in the Covid battle

    [However some Government’s were complacent facing the danger and greedy business made massive profits manipulating prices and lobbying for Government contract bids is also a given]

  27. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    blame it on the Covid
    blame it on the Vaccines

  28. David Avatar
    David

    Full disclosure ‘not given’
    Surgeon says he took Mottley’s word on medical history
    by RACHELLE AGARD rachelleagard@nationnews.com
    PRINCIPAL SURGEON of Surgical Solutions Inc. Dr Sahle Griffith said that in hindsight, he never would have seen Warren Mottley as a patient.
    He made the revelation under cross-examination by attorney Faye Finnistere as the inquest into Mottley’s death continued yesterday in the No. 10 Supreme Court before Coroner Graveney Bannister.
    Mottley, brother of Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, died at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital on June 29, 2021, after undergoing a colonoscopy on June 22, 2021.
    Attorney Francis DePeiza, from the law firm Carrington and Sealy, along with King’s Counsel Michael Lashley and attorney Sade Harris, are representing private doctors involved in the inquest. Sir Elliott Mottley KC, Leslie Haynes KC, Senior Counsel from Trinidad and Tobago Douglas Mendez, and attorneys Stewart Mottley and Finnistere are representing the Mottley family.
    Griffith’s response came after a question from the bench as to if there was anything he would have done differently.
    “That is a hard one . . . . I am satisfied we offered him care that was in keeping with the medical standards from the beginning . . . . I would never have seen Mr Mottley. I don’t believe I was furnished with the entire story.
    I would have documented in the notes things that we did not document based on things that were propriety.”
    Griffith, who is also director of the Caribbean Colon Cancer Initiative, said Mottley did not have colon cancer and he was not aware that he had cancer as he would not have known at the time. However, he said that
    once a high-grade polyp was removed, the next step was cancer.
    High-grade tumour
    “If I may be specific, Sir, in the report offered to the court from Dr Connell, there was a discussion about a high-grade dysplacia tumour or polyp to the right colon. A high-grade polyp is specifically of concern because the next step is actually a colon cancer . . . and this is the reason why you have to review with colonoscopy,” he explained, adding that Mottley informed him he had a high-grade lesion removed five years prior.
    Griffith said he initially consulted with Mottley’s wife, Shawn, who had also underwent a colonoscopy, and who initiated a conversation about Mottley also having a colonoscopy, expressing concern about him not having one following surgery five years before.
    The doctor told the court the recommendation, after a high-grade polyp was removed, was to have a colonoscopy done about one to three years following the procedure. He added the risks of Mottley’s colonoscopy were no greater than that of his wife, all associated risks were discussed, and both patients were given the same advice.
    “In fact, every patient who has a colon removed for cancer must have a colonoscopy in Year 1, Year 3, Year 5, and every five years thereafter, and all such patients would be considered to have non-virgin abdomens,” Griffith said, adding that Mottley had a nonvirgin abdomen. The head of surgery at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital said Mottley had no patient records when he visited his office, nor did he ask who his doctor was, as he took Mottley’s word regarding all information provided, and did not get a referral letter from any medical practitioner. Griffith said in screening for cancer, patients could “just walk off the street”.
    He testified that Mottley’s findings during the colonoscopy were normal. However, he was never able to inform him of this at his scheduled appointment on June 28, 2021, as at that time
    he was fighting for his life.
    Under questioning by Finnistere and after an inspection of files, it was discovered that the patient information form and a letter usually written to the referring physician were not in the files handed over.
    Griffith indicated new patient information was recorded on a patient information form, and thereafter a letter was usually written for the referring physician. However, while the letter was created in this case, it was kept on record as there was no referring physician.
    He said all files would have been transferred to DePeiza after receiving a number of correspondence. However, he said he never read the correspondence, including one from High Court judge Justice Shawna Griffith for disclosure of all medical records on Mottley, as filed by Sir Elliott on February 16, 2022. Griffith said he could not say if Surgical Solutions was specifically named in any of the correspondence, but believed he and the medical institution were both parties in the civil suit.
    The doctor explained that all patient files were housed on an electronic server at Surgical Solutions, and that along with transferring the electronic copy, a matching hard copy was also delivered, which DePeiza stated was transferred to counsel for the Mottleys as received.
    He made it clear, however, that he was not suggesting in any way that DePeiza withheld any information disclosed, but as far as he was aware, all documents relevant to Mottley’s treatment and medical history in his possession were disclosed.
    Coroner Bannister informed Griffith that he could be found to be in contempt of court by Justice Griffith if all the documents were not included, as could DePeiza if he was found to be complicit in the matter.
    The documents were produced before the sitting concluded.


    Source: Nation

  29. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    I guess the QEH would be a better option than the Private clinic.

  30. David Avatar
    David

    In sone cases Hants. The private clinics are not equipped with critical equipment to respond to critical illnesses.

  31. David Avatar
    David

    Surgeon: Mottley could not be saved
    Principal surgeon at Surgical Solutions Inc. Dr Sahle Griffith said nothing more could be done to save Warren Mottley’s life, and if his surgery had been performed at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH), he would not have been in a better position.
    Griffith was on the witness stand for a fourth day as a Coroner’s Inquest into Mottley’s death continued yesterday in the No. 10 Supreme Court. Mottley, brother of Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, died at the QEH on June 29, 2021, after undergoing a colonoscopy on June 22, 2021.
    “In his case, knowing what I know now, he would have had significant problems had we done his surgery at the QEH, as we moved him to the ICU (Intensive Care Unit) at the QEH immediately post-op. Had we left him alone, he would have had ischaemia of the small bowel. His bowel was dying. I did not know at the time, but what I know now is that he had ischaemic bowel.
    “I am suggesting, as painful as it is, as difficult as it is, Mr Mottley had ischaemic bowel at the point when he was first diagnosed. The level of ischaemia seen at the end of his process was not compatible with his survival . . . . His ischaemic bowel was a process that was ongoing, and he would have died from ischaemic bowel regardless,” he told Coroner Graveney Bannister.
    Griffith said Mottley’s perforation was as a result of his ischaemic bowel because his entire small bowel was blue, and the laparoscopic procedure had nothing to do with the death.
    Sepsis
    Under questioning by Coroner Bannister, the QEH’s head of surgery said if he had known what Mottley’s true condition was, he still would not have administered antibiotics.
    “If I had known that Warren Mottley had a perforation of his bowel secondary to sepsis, I would have returned to the operating theatre and done as I did 22 hours after. We would have repaired the perforation, Sir, and achieve source control,” he said.
    Griffith stressed that to administer antibiotics at 1 a.m., 2 a.m. or at 6 a.m. when Mottley was showing signs of hypoxia and hypertension would have been dangerous.
    “The danger was his ischaemic bowel which was the cause of his sepsis. In fact, if we look at Dr Paul’s images, that level of ischaemic bowel was not survivable, unfortunately . . . . I saw the bowel at 36 hours (post operation) and that was also not survivable. It was not survivable from the beginning, Sir. There was nothing I could do to save Warren Mottley’s life.”
    “Had [Mottley] been administered antibiotics at 1 a.m., nothing would have happened because his bowel was already dying . . . No antibiotic could have helped him even if he was administered antibiotics every hour on the hour.”
    He said Mottley was being treated for shock after complaining of pain in the abdomen. However, at 2 a.m. on June 28, when he was contacted about Mottley’s condition, Griffith testified, he did not believe the patient had sepsis and there was no indication, at that time, that he had septic shock.
    He explained that a person could develop septicaemia as a result of bacteria
    growing in the blood, which would be treated with antibiotics.
    However, there was no need to give Mottley antibiotics at 1 a.m. as initial signs of shock did not start showing until an hour later. He added that the pain, as experienced by Mottley, was as a result of his ischaemic bowel, even though doctors did not know it at the time, and stressed that pain was not a sign of sepsis, but was a possible cause.
    “The treatment that we gave him was in keeping with the guidelines for surviving sepsis . . . . I did not believe at 2 a.m. that Warren Mottley had sepsis and there was no indication at that time that he had septic shock. It was not realised until 3 p.m. on June 28 that he had septic shock when we reviewed him at the ICU,” Griffith said.
    Attorney Francis DePeiza, from the law firm Carrington and Sealy, along with King’s Counsel Michael Lashley and attorney Sade Harris, are representing private doctors involved in the inquest. Sir Elliott Mottley KC, Leslie Haynes KC, Senior Counsel from Trinidad and Tobago Douglas Mendez, and attorneys Stewart Mottley and Faye Finnistere are representing the Mottley family.
    The inquest continues today.

    Source: Nation

  32. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    Those who cannot afford to go to a private clinic will have to go to QEH.

  33. David Avatar
    David

    Surgeon: Mottley misdiagnosed
    PRINCIPAL SURGEON at Surgical Solutions Inc. Dr Sahle Griffith says Warren Mottley was misdiagnosed.
    “Yes, Warren Mottley was misdiagnosed. The CT did not show any ischaemic bowel. I did not identify the ischaemic bowel. The bowel was ischaemic . . . [but] it was not reported. The diagnostic laparoscopy did not show the ischaemic bowel. The first time the ischaemic bowel was [seen] was at the laparotomy at which time it was considered within the segment of reversible ischaemia, secondary to pressers.
    “The final diagnosis came when he had entirely blue bowel. If Mr Mottley had not had a colonoscopy five days prior and had abdominal pain, he would have been sent home. He would have presented two days later at the point when all of his bowel was blue and at that point, we would have opened him and closed him, sir,” he told Coroner Graveney Bannister yesterday.
    Griffith was being cross-examined for the sixth day as the Coroner’s Inquest into Mottley’s death continued in the No. 10 Supreme Court. Mottley, brother of Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, died at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH) on June 29, 2021, after undergoing a colonoscopy seven days earlier.
    Under re-examination by lead attorney for the private doctors in the matter, Francis DePeiza, Griffith said he reasonably relied on the CT scan and blood results, adding that none of those reliances would have changed the manner in which he managed Mottley on June 27, 2021.
    “His bowel ischaemia was his primary, secondary and tertiary problem. It was the cause of his sepsis, sir. It was the cause of his death, sir . . . . If you look at the note made by Dr Chase, the pain began after a meal. Small bowel ischaemia presents with something called mesenteric angina . . . . While Dr Chase did not find significant tenderness, she did document his pain as being 8/10. The same thing persisted through the night.
    Absence of peritonitis
    “Realistically, pain in the sense of infection or sepsis is associated with peritonitis. This is when you touch the abdomen and get soreness or pain or discomfort. [Mottley] did not have that, and so at that point in time, in the absence of peritonitis, we are believing that there is no significant infection in the abdomen which was the scenario as per Dr Chase’s notes.”
    He added: “Subsequently, the CT scan showed features to suggest the bowel not acting normally, which would be something yet again at the time was considered to be linked to obstruction, but at the laparoscopy, the fact that there was clear fluid in the abdomen, the bowel itself appeared to be somewhat distended . . . . At the point he continued post-op to have pain out
    of keeping with clinical findings, but at no point in the post-operative pain was he found to have peritonitis.
    “Ultimately, he also began to show significant physiological deterioration. Ultimately, having gone to theatre, seen areas of patchy bowel and perforation, we assumed, as was logical, that the patchy bowel and perforation was due to sepsis. However, the gentleman had . . . none of the things that would have pointed to sepsis as a cause of bowel ischaemia, but he did have extensive area of ischaemic small bowel, both at the final laparotomy and at the autopsy. All of those things ultimately have led me to the belief that bowel ischaemia was the underlying issue and was not diagnosed on or before [June] 27 [2021], nor was it diagnosed up until the point where he was critically ischaemic,” he said.
    Griffith, who is also the head of surgery at the QEH, said the ischaemia could not have been diagnosed until the very end. He added Mottley was being treated for one thing but had something else, and it was not an unreasonable course of action.
    He also said to the best of his knowledge, he was satisfied that the post-surgery treatment was consistent with what a reasonable body of surgeons would have done. Moreover, he maintained that Surgical Solutions was the best place to have done the exploratory laparoscopy, as opposed to the QEH.
    Griffith said the laparoscopy was considered over the laparotomy because in Mottley’s context, he complained of abdominal pain, and had a number of features which on their own did not stand together to say he had a perforation, but added together suggested a perforation.
    “At five days, he was expected to have been sicker. At the point where we chose to do a laparoscopy, it was in the context that it would allow if anything was there . . . we’d be able to . . . achieve source control and manage his care with very little disruption,” he said.
    At the end of yesterday’s sitting, Coroner Bannister told all lawyers in the case to submit written submissions by noon next Monday, and gave an undertaking to return a decision by December 23.
    DePeiza, along with King’s Counsel Michael Lashley and Sade Harris, are representing the private doctors involved in the matter, while Sir Elliott Mottley KC, Leslie Haynes KC, Senior Counsel from Trinidad and Tobago Douglas Mendez, and attorneys Stewart Mottley and Faye Finisterre are representing the Mottley family.

    Source: Nation

  34. Sargeant Avatar
    Sargeant

    After reading some of the reporting from the inquest I admit being thoroughly confused, maybe someone could make hay of the whole situation, however I believe the hearing is a prelude to a lawsuit.

    One thing that stood out for me is that the medical facility and the professionals performing the procedure seem to have only a partial medical history of the patient which was supplied by the patient himself. I also wonder if Mottley’s death will deter other people from getting colonoscopies which are essential for early detection of colon disease.

  35. Sargeant Avatar
    Sargeant

    @David

    Were the findings of the McManus inquest ever made public?
    Is a cover up in effect?

  36. David Avatar
    David

    @Sargeant

    As far as the blogmaster is aware the matter hangs in abeyance.

  37. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, like the Bajan Sarge from the GTA I also find the reporting of the Mottley case quite ‘bemusing’ … but I always remember a friend’s favorite medical dictum: Doctors bury their mistakes!

    That’s to say many doctors play the game of obfuscation and confusion well. This is no different!

    Questions for you tho … was there evidence led by Mottley’s side to counter the surgeon’s remarks that #1) Mottley’s condition (bowel ischaemia) was going to be fatal regardless of whether it was properly diagnosed initially. And 2) was there evidence about the perforation? Is the contention that this was done during the recent surgery and is THE source of his bowel issues !

    I only read the reports just above so am unaware of prior details!!!

    Clearly the Mottley team do not accept that #1, otherwise this case would never have been birthed!

  38. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, I stand corrected. I said “case” when in fact this is a Coroner’s inquest!

    My queries re competing expert evidence may not be answered in this setting, I suspect!

  39. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    ” Surgeon Dr Sahle Griffith said on Tuesday that he treated Warren Mottley as best as he could with the knowledge that he had back in June 2021, but admitted that the patient had been “misdiagnosed” at one point.”

    ” the patient had been “misdiagnosed” at one point.”

  40. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    Sarge
    Months ago, the remains of the deceased were lowered into the ground and ‘covered up’ with several feet of earth.
    What else is being ‘covered up’? The official line, “she choked on her own food”. The only reason any report should be ‘made public’, is if it indicates homicide? The deceased woman’s family are not paupers. They can pursue several avenues if they suspect foul play?

  41. David Avatar
    David

    The word on the ground suggest frolicking got out of hand. We know those present will say nothing to compromise the reputation of the families. One suspects the inquest is to tick a box.

  42. Sargeant Avatar
    Sargeant

    @NO

    If the deceased choked on her own vomit ( a common enough occurrence) why the need for an inquest? An inquest does not mean foul play, it is a tool to determine the facts surrounding an incident causing death and choking on one’s own vomit does not rise to the level of an inquest. Perhaps someone jumped the gun and a “coverup” does not mean that the family is being protected, it could expose the ineptitude of the people responsible for authorising the inquest.

  43. Hants Avatar
    Hants

  44. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    Sarge
    You have me flat footed. For I don’t know who authorizes an inquest, nor what is the bar height for an inquest.

  45. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    @Hants
    I was amused
    “Dodds Prison, previously called Her Majesty’s Prison Dodds until the dissolution of the Barbadian Crown, is a prison in Barbados”(Wikipedia)
    Perhaps someone could whisper in the Minister’s ear, Buhbaydus is a Republic.

  46. David Avatar
    David

    Bannister hands down decision in Warren Mottley inquest

    https://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/12/motl-750×643.jpg

    Gross negligence by the doctors who were involved in the care of Warren Mottley.

    That was the decision of Coroner Graveney Bannister moments ago as he gave his decision in the inquest into Mottley’s death.

    In an hour and half decision, Magistrate Bannister said having reviewed the evidence – taken over six months – he found there was a failure to diagnose or misdiagnose and a failure to treat the infection.

    “It was breach of duty which gave rise to an obvious and egregious risk of death. The conduct was egregious . . . It was a gross dereliction of care. Looking at the evidence and looking at the parties involved in the care of Warren Mottley, I find the conduct of Dr [Sahle] Griffith and Dr [Nigel] Farnum was so bad in all the circumstances it would amount to a criminal act and omission and it was grossly negligent and concerned in the cause of his death.”

    Mottley, the brother of Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, died on June 29, 2021.

    The decision was witnessed by Warren’s mother Amor Lady Mottley and his sister Elan.

    Dr Griffith, his wife and his father were also present.

    Sir Elliott Mottley KC who was not present, as well as Queen’s Counsel Leslie Haynes, Senior Attorney Douglas Mendes and attorneys Stewart Mottley and Faye Finisterre appeared for the Mottley family.

    The law firm of Carrington and Sealy represented by attorney Francis De Peiza as well as King’s Counsel Michael Lashley and attorney Sade Harris represented the two doctors involved in the matter.

    Source: Nation

  47. Sargeant Avatar
    Sargeant

    Well that was quick! Who else is complaining about the tardiness of Court decisions or are Inquests a different kettle of fish? If some families had the clout and connections to demand an inquest after the death of relatives from questionable medical care the coroners’ office would be tied up for years.

    I don’t necessarily disagree with the coroner’s judgement but at least it could have taken a little more time so the patina of sober reflection could be maintained.

    Did anyone notice that the coroner rejected the opinion of one of the doctors that the patient’s death may have been due to the Covid vaccine that he received? However, a few days later the Chief Medical Officer in Barbados said that Covid vaccines cannot be ruled out as the cause of death of nine individuals in Barbados.

    Yuh can’t make this shit up

    Barbados just beyond anyone’s imagination

  48. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ Sargeant
    “Barbados just beyond anyone’s imagination”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Literally!!!
    Umm is actually beyond belief….
    It is common knowledge that the THIRD leading cause of death in the USA is….. doctors!!

    Steupsss
    When the truth fully emerges, it will be cat piss and peppa bout hay.

  49. David Avatar
    David

    Judge rules inquest can go on
    THE BID by Irish millionaire John Paul McManus to have the Coroner’s Inquest into his wife Emma McManus’ death at their palatial Sandy Lane home halted by the High Court, has failed.
    Ruling that the inquest can continue, Justice Shona Griffith found that allegations of bias by McManus towards Coroner Graveney Bannister were misconceived.
    In addition, she has left it up to the coroner to decide if he will hold the inquest in camera or in open court when or if it continues.
    It was back in January 2021 that Magistrate Bannister began the inquest into the death of McManus, the daughter of former Irish tennis player Peter Ledbetter.
    Emma, 40, a mother of three daughters and wife of John Paul, who is the son of Irish horse racing magnate John Patrick McManus, was discovered dead in the bedroom of their home Jane’s Harbour on the morning of December 30, 2020.
    The inquest had heard from John Paul, as well as several Sandy Lane staff members, who were at the property, before attorneys for McManus succeeded in having the media barred from the inquest.
    Judicial review
    Attorneys Satcha Kissoon and Maya Carrington then filed a judicial review in an attempt to have the inquest halted altogether.
    The lawyers for the millionaire claimed the coroner’s decision to hold the inquest was ultra vires the Coroner’s Act and was therefore unlawful; that various actions by Coroner Bannister demonstrated actual or perceived bias on his part against John Paul McManus; and that John Paul
    McManus’ constitutional rights as an interested party to the inquest were breached as a result of Magistrate Bannister’s failure to give him copies of the documents to be used at the inquest and to permit him legal representation during his testimony.
    The suit had asked the High Court to quash the inquest proceedings; to remove Magistrate Bannister on the ground of bias; and to remove all the proceedings and any records of it from the public domain.
    ‘Premature and misconceived’
    However, Principal Crown Counsel Jared Richards, who represented the coroner, had argued that the suit was premature and misconceived.
    He had argued that McManus and his attorneys had other remedies available to them and those should have been exhausted before a claim for judicial review was filed.
    Richards also submitted that since the nature of an inquest was inquisitorial, McManus had misconstrued his status, potential prejudice and, as a result, his rights in respect of the proceedings.
    In a lengthy judgement handed down last year, Justice Shona Griffith held that Magistrate Bannister’s holding of the inquest was not ultra vires the Coroner’s Act and refused the request to quash the inquest.
    She ruled that the scope of the investigation required to have been conducted by the coroner was not defined by statute, and the information obtained by or provided to the coroner at the time of the commencement of the inquest satisfied the requirement for investigations to have been conducted.
    “The allegation of apparent bias by [Coroner Bannister] against [McManus] by way of prejudgement as to his character is misconceived,” the court held.
    “[McManus’] interpretation of Section 14 of the Act that the inquest’s objective necessarily entailed a finding of criminality is rejected by the court. There was nothing in the face of the circumstances surrounding the inquest which suggested that [McManus] was the focus of the inquest’s inquiry for purposes of criminal responsibility. The complaints levelled against the coroner on account of apparent bias therefore had no relevance to the live issues of the inquest,” the judge said in her written decision.
    ‘No right violated’
    Justice Griffith further held that McManus’ status at the inquest, as an interested party in respect of whom there was no focus of criminal responsibility, meant there was no constitutional right violated when Coroner Bannister initially failed to provide McManus with access to the documents.
    She also said proceeding with the inquest, despite McManus’ request for counsel, was not a breach of his constitutional rights since he was neither an accused person, nor as an interested party, “the subject of the inquiry for purposes of affixing any criminal responsibility for the death of Emma McManus”.
    The court then ruled that the coroner was at liberty to continue the inquest and it was his decision whether it should be in camera or open court.

    Source: Nation newspaper

  50. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    In addition, she has left it up to the coroner to decide if he will hold the inquest in camera or in open court when or if it continues.

Older Comments
1 2 3
Newer Comments

Leave a Reply to Bush TeaCancel reply

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading