169 thoughts on “Kingsland!

  1. John
    Yuh right. That is what the +uckers do.

    This writer has such an experience.

    The Chief Town Planner himself, Cummins, told this writer that permissions will never br given for a parcel of land.

    So we decided to erect a “for sale” sign after years of trying.

    And CoW Williams called.

    Within days this writer happened to be passing by and witnessed COW and Cummins on the land.

    Concerned, this writer joined them and asked what was happening.

    COW said that he called Cummings to tell him what he would approve.

    A man, Cummings, who made us wait for over 2 years to get a meeting to discuss an application, and then told us it had to remain in an agriculture which it hadn’t been for 50 years, could have been so summoned spoke to the raasssoul snake pit which is Barbados. And rassoul idiots continue.to talk shiiiite about democracy. What a joke!

  2. The true definition of fraud democracy echoed by mimics..

  3. Going back to the Roots
    Going back to the scene of the crime
    Associated People (3)

    The dates listed below have different categories as denoted by the letters in the brackets following each date. Here is a key to explain those letter codes:

    SD – Association Start Date
    SY – Association Start Year
    EA – Earliest Known Association
    ED – Association End Date
    EY – Association End Year
    LA – Latest Known Association

    1749 [SY] – 1763 [EY] → Owner
    Tobias Frere II
    1763 [EA] – → Owner
    Henry Frere
    1832 [EA] – 1834 [LA] → Owner
    Samuel Ames Huson
    Associated Claims (1)
    Barbados 3340 (Kingsland)
    £1,969 2S 5D
    Estate Information (2)

    What is this?
    [Number of enslaved people] 140(Tot) 76(F) 64(M)

    Figures from a list of whites and blacks in Christ Church, c.1758. The exact date of the list is not given; but internal evidence places it in or soon after 1758. The figures were given as 2 whites, and blacks as: men: 38; women: 46; boys: 26; girls: 30. [It is not clear why only 2 whites were given nor if the figure for blacks was comprehensive.]

    Barbados Department of Archives. RB9/3/4
    [Number of enslaved people] 96(Tot)

    Return of Samuel Ames Huson, his own property. No previous return. The return shows the purchases from William Thomas Kirton (q.v.).

    T71/549 89-92

  4. “I never heard that argument.”

    The argument is very real, with evidence, seeing as all had the same origins.

    The greed, wanting to be and forgetting where they came from, got them in this.

  5. Pacha…am wondering if these are aware there now exists happenings that are not hitting the mainstream media. Not even in metropolis countries.

    No longer posting certain things, reached my limit. So they will have to figure it out.

  6. Wuh it int my fault they believe they are more than servants and employees..

    …when they get thrown out of office, dont they apply to these private organizations as EMPLOYEES…..eg Sinkyuh.

    So why have they spent all their lives inserting themselves in other people’s PRIVATE matters and pretending otherwise…

    They need gallons of COLD reality poured on all of them..

  7. @ Bush Tea,
    I’m afraid, I will have to turn down your offer. There are too many serpents and lions loitering around in Barbados for me to feel comfortable. The assets that I have are relatively safe in the UK. Would that be the case if I were to relocate to Bimshire?

    I would like to believe that you guys have reached the bottom. However, I believe you still have a long way to fall.

    I not certain if Artax and Donna would take too kindly to your offer that you have made to me. LOL!!

  8. TLSN on March 26, 2023 at 7:20 PM said:
    Rate This

    @ Bush Tea,
    I’m afraid, I will have to turn down your offer. There are too many serpents and lions loitering around in Barbados for me to feel comfortable. The assets that I have are relatively safe in the UK. Would that be the case if I were to relocate to Bimshire?


    Don’t forget the Privy Council’s part as the final arbiter in the Kingsland land scandal.

    “You will own nothing and be happy”

  9. @ David

    I read Hal Gollop’s ‘no-case submission’ and the letter presented indicating Leroy Parris was due $3.33M from CLICO as part payment of an agreed $10M gratuity and bonus.

    Gollop was reported as having said,

    (a). “The judge (Justice William Chandler), who is in charge of the judicial management, never gave anybody permission, neither was his authorisation ever sought to make any complaints to the Commissioner of Police.”

    (b). “That is significant because the investigator said the complainant was the Judicial Manager (JM). That is a lie. This questions the whole integrity of this case. The complainant should be CLICO.”

    Firstly, on April 14, 2011, the Supreme Court of Barbados appointed Deloitte Consulting Ltd., as Judicial Manager (JM) of CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd. (CIL) pursuant to Section 57 of the Insurance Act of Barbados […]”

    Also, recall on March 10, 2015, Justice Chandler issued a directive to unseal the CLICO Forensic Report, following an application by the JM, Deloitte Consulting Ltd., requesting it to be unsealed.

    As such, I’m questioning the rationale behind Gollop’s comments that Justice Chandler “was in CHARGE of the judicial management.”

    Secondly, I’m also questioning Gollop’s assertion that the complainant should be CLICO and not the JM.

    I’ll refer you to Civil suit 99/2016: CLICO Life Insuranace Co. Ltd. (UNDER judicial management) Claimant vs Leroy Parris (First Defendant); Branlee Consulting Services Inc. (Second Defendant); the estate of late Prime Minister David Thompson – acting through duly appointed Personal Representative, Marie Josephine Mara Thompson (Third Defendant)……

    …… “alleging that on January 16, 2009, Parris in breach of fiduciary duty and/or in breach of trust procured a CLICO cheque, number 92, in the amount of $3.333M to Thompson & Associates,” and seeking that the defendants “should account for those funds.”

    Please note, when that claim was filed, CIL was UNDER judicial management.

    And, when the JM was appointed, the company’s board of directors becomes ‘functus officio’ (i.e. of no further official authority or legal effect) and their functions and authority are TRANSFERRED to the JM.

    However, although I may “have the propensity to talk soft, runny shiite,” I’ll readily admit I’m not a lawyer and would probably need to be guided by the appropriate legal opinions regarding procedures of the law in relation to this particular matter.

    • @Artax

      There is a simple question to be answered, why was the method adopted to pay gratuity in the form of an invoice to Maurice King taken? Others have asked were taxes paid to government on the 3.3 million.

    • @ Artax
      The only thing ‘soft and runny’ about your assessment is the veiled assertion that something logical can be assumed when this ‘DLP HaG’ speaks…. or even that it is likely to make any damn sense.

      Bushie was once guilty of a similar assumption too… until the DLP put him on TV weekly, exposing him to the Maxim ;
      It is better to be silent, and be thought to be a fool, than to open your mouth and confirm it.’

      The ONLY thing Bushie wants to hear from him now is details of what he knows about the ‘Mrs Smith affair’….

      In Bushie’s world, he would be in the damn dock with LP…

    • @Bush Tea

      You have a good memory. This is a matter to be found in the BU Archive. Not many issues are left untouched but what is the point sometimes we have to ask.

    • Boss…
      Actually Bushie has a poor memory,
      but an EXCELLENT nose….
      It can smell shiite and rot for miles…

      ALSO, Bushie KNOWS (for a fact) that;
      WHAT A MAN SOWS – THAT ALSO shall his donkey reap.

      This is one of those cases that smell to high heaven of rot…. and Bushie is just waiting to observe the inevitable HARVEST…
      ..for ALL of the f$#k&%s involved.

      The Big Boss DON’T sleep….
      His patience is amazing… AS IS HIS JUSTICE.

  10. Bushman…aint it a thing when the usual suspects spent their WHOLE LIVES playing a dangerous game of poker….and LOST because they knew not that they knew not:

    the game is NOT checkers it’s chess

    it’s not poker, it’s chess

    due to playing the WRONG game, they always held the LOSER’S hand….and now that the rules have changed…will NEVER catch up..

    ..but they are only employees so i doan even know wuh dey would want to catch up fuh doh…..

  11. @ David

    As it relates to the $3.33M paid to Parris as part payment of an agreed $10M gratuity and bonus due from CIL.

    Although he was entitled to gratuity, by forging and submitting an invoice to CIL, in the name of an associated company and approving the disbursement of funds so as to faciliate payment to himself, Parris essentially defrauded the company.

    Under those circumstances, I cannot understand why would an experienced lawyer go into Court to argue that his client didn’t commit any crime.


    Seems as though the ‘Ms Nails’ is ‘missing in action.’

    • @Artax, as an experienced professional in business accounting and related law you know full well , as we say in Bajan, that these matters can be won or lost on very technical points of law! … Attorney Gollop is too long in the tooth as a lawyer, one must surmise, to make stupid and legally bogus statements.

      That to say, who are we (despite apparent evidence to the contrary) to say that Parris ‘forged the invoice’ to CIL. Furthermore, if he was ‘contractually’ entitled to the monies then it’s debatable (thus this long legal case) that he “essentially defrauded the company”.

      So yes as you note it is about the “technicalities”!

      And to the other point on Justice Chandler being “in CHARGE of the judicial management” there is no mistake there.

      Yes Deloitte were the operational JM at CIL during the period but the simple fact that the case was before the Justice who as a member of the courts (directly or indirectly) had “appointed Deloitte Consulting Ltd.” and thus their key acts REQUIRED his decisions quite indisputably means he was “in charge”!

      I am no lawyer brother, but that’s as crystal clear as can be!

      Technicalities, technicalities, technicalities … fitting reference for a real estate blog, not so!😎

  12. @ dpD

    You ‘said’ “there is no mistake and it’s crystal clear as it can be” Justice Chandler is “in charge of the judicial management.”

    I disagree.

    I’m not a lawyer either. I do not understand the logical basis of your argument, which I believe is flawed for several reasons.

    Applications to the High Court by the Judicial Manager were also heard and ruled upon by Justice Sandra Mason and Justice Pamela Beckles.

    So, according to your logic, then, both those Justices were in charge of the judicial management as well?

    It is “crystal clear” the COURT “is in charge.” It’s just a matter of who is the presiding Judge at the time.

    Additionally, since you’re versed in “technicalities,” are you suggesting CIL (under judicial management) had to seek permission from the Court to make a complaint to the police regarding the alleged theft of $3M…… bearing in mind this is an internal issue and the JM was responsible for the ‘day-to-day operations of the company?

    • @Artax, you are too intelligent to be so ‘pedantic’ -dare I say – as above.😎

      Obviously and clearly YES, YES re “… then, both those Justices were in charge of the judicial management as well? [and] … It is “crystal clear” the COURT “is in charge.” It’s just a matter of who is the presiding Judge at the time.”

      The issue is that it was a COURT matter and therefore final decision making was under their jurisdiction … that is the fundamental point which the attorney is making.

      And of course neither of us are trained in all aspects of law but one can read and understand the law regardless of spending years as a student… Nor am I “versed in ‘technicalities’” 😎🥳 just applying experience and common-sense

      … so NO … obviously no one needs to “seek permission from the Court to make a complaint to the police regarding [any] alleged theft”

      … however, in matters of this type which are under court direction unless there is an imminent and or immediate threat to human life by the alleged illegality surely any JM would generally have to report findings to the court prior to submitting a police complaint….

      So sir the issue is not about SEEKING permission to report a possible crime but simply what the legal rules of the JM process stipulate.

      As a certified accountant you know more of those stipulations than I, good sir…. so let’s cut the ‘semantics’.

      Gollop’s remarks were perfectly in line …they may have been just sweet phrasing to butter his client’s situation but were perfectly legal artful phrasing, nonetheless.

      I gone.

    • @Dee Word

      Talk about all the technicalities we want, Parris will loose in the court of public opinion given the demise of CLICO Barbados, losses incurred by investors/policyholders. We do not have to rehash but there is clear evidence of a questionable governance framework, one the regulator was ineffective in addressing. We have to build an equitable system.

    • Why do wunna fellas argue with Dribbles nah??!!
      The Dribbler is an excellent example of what Judas represented in biblical terms.

      I.e. a chap that had all the qualities needed to make it as a disciple, but who was so ingrained in the worldly (albino-centric) philosophies of life, that he was able to convince himself that the original Bushman was here to facilitate his materialistic fantasies.

      He therefore sought to ‘facilitate’ the process by betraying the master, with the expectation that this would lead to the kind of change that HE envisioned.

      In ACTUAL fact, the master’s objective is so spiritually advanced that the only term that can be used to explain Judas’ thinking is … lukewarm.
      One should either wax HOT or COLD, lukewarm gets spat out at an early stage in the argument.

      At least the COLD waxers (those focused on the here and now and on the materialistic) have no real long-term expectations beyond their ‘three score and ten’ and appear to be content with that.

      The HOT waxers understand that the ‘three score and ten’ is nothing but a period of learning and preparation for a timeless experience, and they bring a completely different perspective.

      ‘Lukewarm’ seeks to bring the two philosophies together… which is impossible – and it deserves to be spat out.

      Dribbles need to pick a side and keep his donkey off the fence in between, least he get his nuts squeezed badly…
      Of course he can also do like Bushie and JUMP from one side to the other – depending on how sweet the debate is….

  13. “Chairman of the NIS and a former director of CLICO Holdings Limited who served with Leroy Parris,”

    There was a lawsuit filed against the whole gaggle of them…think it was in the amount/region of 160 million dollars claimed over the Clico scam…that case will probably be called in the next 30 or 40 years when evabody dead or drooling into bibs..lol

  14. “You will own nothing and be happy”

    So you see John…we can probably treat the last 100 years as the test run with black faces tiefing everything for themselves, and their sidekick partners in crime, leaving the population barely surviving.

    ….just because the vote beggars were in a position to exploit, oppress and disenfranchise, depriving mostly the majority population of everything…setting the stage for what is likely to occur shortly.

    An already tested theory.

  15. Good question!!!

    Here is another one!!

    How many of its members have died waiting on our court to resolve the issue?

    100, 1,000, 10,000?

  16. John…many are happy to see the dangerously corrupt in their current positions. With everything they so RICHLY DESERVE…heading in their direction like a laser beam…they all need cutting down to their real size..

  17. John?????

    Maybe it’s time for security.


    In defamation Suit CV 595 of 2020 Sir David Anthony Cathcart Simmons v Maria Jane Goddard:-

    I take umbrage at the terrifying, rude and disrespectful way I have been treated by Mr. Leslie Haynes, King’s Counsel in the Barbados court while representing Sir David Simmons at the scheduled Zoom proceedings which took place on March 22, 2023 at 10.30 am, with full co-operation from Judge William Chandler.

    The serious threats that an order for contempt was being sought to have me committed to prison and he, Mr. Haynes, saying “I hope when the prison van is carrying her up the road, I don’t hear all sorts of wailing and bawling and everything while she is going up the road” has upset me terribly. I was in the first available plane seat out of Barbados on March 24, 2023.

    I fear for my life and safety if I return to Barbados and believe an immediate apology is due to me by both Senior Counsel Mr. Leslie Haynes, King’s Counsel and His Lordship Judge William Chandler for the horrible treatment which has been meted out to me.

    An application for leave to appeal has been filed.”

The blogmaster dares you to join the discussion.