No particular qualifications sadly; just a person a Prime Minister picks, usually for patronage purposes or to get a troublesome yet influential Party person out of his hair via physical distance.

People cant afford bread, cheese, milk, meat and electricity - but they are looking for people to spend hundreds for feathers and string.

He is a diplomat. Our Ambassadors and Consuls General enjoy such a status.

> And, time-out, I have to ask here, who invited Christie to speak to these young people anyhow, some of them very impressionable children under 18? Be ye warned; be very careful who you invite to your “party”.

This is the same question I asked. No politician from any political party who does not have a distinct or noted background in journalism or a noted personal track record in the deepening of press freedom and democracy in general, needed to be invited by a tertiary institution to address journalism students on the topic of journalism because what the students would have been more likely to get is a political speech rather than something that would enhance their course of study. We need to learn to stop allowing politics and political deference to play a role in the education processes in our country.

And look at where he makes this statement, at an event for **young Bahamian students.** Commentary not even necessary; this speaks volumes all by itself

An appeal doesn't prevent you from going to Fox Hill following a conviction, but can result in your release or re-sentencing if successful, so there was indeed time for lawyers. They decided to go their MP instead, who suddenly deemed himself a member of the Judiciary!

Well, I won't debate what level he is on or may perceive himself to be, but when it comes to the law, what is fundamental is essential, not incidental.

That is a separate matter from what Gray did. If the convict wished to appeal his conviction, the modality in law is there for him to freely do so. Not a single fact about the details of his conviction has been confirmed; his lawyer is hired to defend him so of course he or she is going to assert that his or her client has done nothing wrong. A Cabinet Minister cannot, in our system, order a convict freed or given bail, nor is a Cabinet Minister supposed to insert himself or herself into the judicial process on any level. Even if the convict was wronged, gray is not supposed to get involved on any level. That is the matter here.

Funny. Is it your opinion that Munroe needs to check the law too, since at no time did he assert that the Administrator did not have the powers he executed? Just wondering.

As a Magistrate, he does have such powers.