Sandals has recently been charged with bribery in Turks & Caicos. I wouldn't be the least surprised if they did the same thing here and that's why they're being protected by the PLP. Something stinks about this Noli, and I think Turks & Caicos holds the answer:
http://www.fcpablog.com/blog/2013/1/30/…

The competing sides in the PLP inner circle are taking shape for November???? ........ it will be an interesting run-up to the convention .......... the AG will not be seeking a nomination or a Cabinet post next time around

Perhaps she has to recoup her losses on the retail space for her and her family at Bahamar. There is no reason why her decision should not have been shared with at least the Min of Tourism

Yep ........... they are all nose-deep with their hands in the country's cookie jar

Now they know how the Bahamian public feels always being kept in the darkvwhile they do their shady deals. Secrets will always surface, though.

Comrades! The right of the private individual to bring prosecution against a corporate's representatives must be protected as a constitutional safeguard.
When you have the AG meddling to stop a private prosecution, are you not removing the private individual's constitutional right to seek justice. if they feel the law that should protect them is being abused?
The same authority that gives the AG the right to stay a private prosecution, also extends the right to the AG to take over and conduct the private prosecution against the bigger corporate identity or individual, on behalf of the little individual, where the interests of justice so require. To stay or take over a private prosecution are equally fundamental parts of our justice system.
The pubic has every right, not to be left in the dark, that in staying the private individual's prosecution, that the evidentiary standard and the public interest test were in fact applicable to the public's right to know that transparency was not interfered with.
At minimum, shouldn't the AG have to explain, why the dates listed on the stay of prosecution - do not correspond?

*When you have the AG meddling to stop a private prosecution, are you not removing the private individual's constitutional right to seek justice. if they feel the law that should protect them is being abused?*

Sounds a lot like the Bahamar mess to me!!

Comrade Gangof4, what a disappointed to the many thousands little people who back in 2012 looked to the major PLP players like "Brave", Allyson, Jerome, Freddy and Obadiah as a means of achieving some meaningful improvement in their lives. What a shameful letdown tossed upon the laps of the so many thousands of little people who trusted them with their families futures and paychecks.
I want to be fair to the AG as there is no evidence of engaging in any underhandedness, but for heaven's sake, how many times can your government crush the little peoples Cabbage Beach Vendors, and the 600 little people's workers who were being summoned to be sent home, and why in the hell would you pick that day of all days to issue a stay of the private prosecution?
The entire PLP Cabinet would have be medically brain-dead, not to understand why this is not looking good for the PM's chances of staying on the job?

Repeat: I refuse to believe the AG went Lone Ranger on ALL of them.

Comrade ThisIsOurs, I can honestly believe the AG may have acted without inviting input from her cabinet colleagues - but every action requires some kind of mechanism to kick-start it. I mean, did the AG just arrive at the AG's office one morning to grab the private prosecution file without some one or thing's mechanism kick-starting her decision to halt the private individual's prosecution? Don't you think that's the one question which the public would really like their AG to have to answer?

TalRussell that is the bigger issue,what prompted her decision. I am not surprised that the cabinet did not know,that's hgow this crew rolls . The right hand don't know what the left is doing

AG is a very arrogant person, she thinks she is in charge and they're all idiots.
After all....Why ask them? she Is in charge, this is her call to make!

Comrades! Of important note. Allyson is the prime minister's unelected to the House, serving as an appointee to the Crown's portfolio of attorney-general.
Knowing this as I sense the PM is about to reshuffle his cabinet, the Crown might soon have a new Crown AG at the Cabinet Table and a new Chief Justice? Maybe even a new Governor-general in place to be entertaining the PLP privileged political elite and their 'honoured' party guests up atop Mount Fitzwilliam?

The AG acted in an effort to safeguard all parties involved based on the precedent that has been set. I don't know HOW that equates to some deep calculated secret, but it seems a diet of conspiracy theory is all some people feed on. Having said that, it is embarrassing that the convention of collective responsibility escapes so many within the Cabinet, and those outside. I would expect that both Mr. Gibson and Mr. Wilchcombe would have been much more reflective and politically astute in their comments. But maybe that is what has contributed to problems in the past (one person referred back to Bahamar).
The batsman who bats for himself only has no problem running out his partner, and its only when the last wicket falls and leaves him stranded does be realise his failure. I see no dark secrets in the AG's actions, however I see others concerns that must be addressed.

Your use of a Caribbean analogy gave you away. . .you would not see. . .as we say here in Bahamas. . ."fishman don't call he fish stink". . .I hear ya there. . .

@Theobserver1
Sure you're not the AG or a family member of the AG posing in this forum as just another citizen??? It is interesting that you signed up a month ago when this issue got started. And the only comments you have written is about this matter and your comments leans in favor of the AG? Hmmmm....

**.. We Can Start Trusting The PLP After A Forensic Audit Of The Office Of Prime Minister ..**

Never mind the wicked witch. Focus on the dancing clown!

Big Bad Brad issued a press statement of support for the AG's Nolle decision, now party leaders are saying that they are in the dark about the same thing. Are the Chairman and the "kept in the dark leaders", in the same party? How is it that he is not complaining about being "kept in the dark"? Is this just another party front by those claiming to be "kept in the dark", to appease the unions? Would someone please turn on the lights.

Comrade Alfalfa, there's no denying the contradictions are strikingly the opposite when it comes to what members of this PLP cabinet say they will do for working class workers and don't. You'd think when they talk of doing right for the working class that brought them back to power, they'd choke on their vain words. What they've done to is to wake-up every morning to assault the working class, by underestimating their intelligence to figure out what in the hell is happening to our Bahamaland.
Vain sounds more balanced than to call them outright damn liars, who are far better at downgrading the middle class to the ranks of the poor, than the better way that the late Pindling and Milo, went about transferring many thousands up and out of the ranks of the poor class up into the middle class.