The media is crooked in this. The indictment says that Official 8 (a Board member) was appointed by J Barrie Farrington to oversee the tender process for the generator contract. So, in all that talking that Farrington did, why didn't the media ask him who was the person he appointed, since the indictment says that the appointee is Official 8? The media can also just go and get the Board meeting minutes to find that out. And secondly, why hasn't the media asked Frank Watson WHY the Cabinet overruled the decision of the Board in this matter? That Cabinet decision is key, but continues to be sidestepped.
The media is crooked in this. The indictment says that Official 8 (a Board member) was appointed by J Barrie Farrington to oversee the tender process for the generator contract. So, in all that talking that Farrington did, why didn't the media ask him who was the person he appointed, since the indictment says that the appointee is Official 8? The media can also just go and get the Board meeting minutes to find that out. And secondly, why hasn't the media asked Frank Watson WHY the Cabinet overruled the decision of the Board in this matter? That Cabinet decision is key, but continues to be sidestepped.
Is there a particular reason that Tribune refuses to make clear to the public that Official 8, as the indictment states twice, was in fact a BEC Board member? Farrington's statement is clearly just to attempt to make it clear that Official 8 is not him, and the indictment indicates that is not him anyway, but I guess he still feels the need to put this "righteous indignation" statement out so as to drive home that point.
I am not suggesting that only one person may have received money. My statement is confined to the Tribune's claim that the documents do not say that Official 8 is a Board member. That is untrue. The indictment states twice that Official 8 was a BEC Board member. I also pointed out that Official 8 is a man because there were women on the Board, so I pointed out the distinction from that standpoint.
And the payments to Official 8 ended in 2003, not 2013 as the Tribune erroneously states in its second to last paragraph. The Tribune is a bloody wreck. And why didn't the Tribune ask Watson why he and his government overruled the Board? He was the Minister. Why interview him but not ask him that obvious question?
The Tribune is beyond worthless. The court documents explicitly say that Official 8 was a board member of bec. Guess the Tribune did not read the court documents as usual? The documents also indicate that Official 8 is a man.
The news media did not edit his article, he claims the port's lawyers, etc did. That's between them if they chose to send an edited version to the paper. The paper can only run what is sent to them. Once he saw what he claims was done to him, he could have simply sent out the "real" version himself, without it going through the people he claimed have done this to him before!
Publius says...
Everything this government touches it tarnishes or destroys
On Junkanoo cut to a single lap
Posted 31 December 2014, 3:59 p.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
The media is crooked in this. The indictment says that Official 8 (a Board member) was appointed by J Barrie Farrington to oversee the tender process for the generator contract. So, in all that talking that Farrington did, why didn't the media ask him who was the person he appointed, since the indictment says that the appointee is Official 8? The media can also just go and get the Board meeting minutes to find that out. And secondly, why hasn't the media asked Frank Watson WHY the Cabinet overruled the decision of the Board in this matter? That Cabinet decision is key, but continues to be sidestepped.
On Find the BEC bribe ‘traitor’
Posted 31 December 2014, 3:05 p.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
The media is crooked in this. The indictment says that Official 8 (a Board member) was appointed by J Barrie Farrington to oversee the tender process for the generator contract. So, in all that talking that Farrington did, why didn't the media ask him who was the person he appointed, since the indictment says that the appointee is Official 8? The media can also just go and get the Board meeting minutes to find that out. And secondly, why hasn't the media asked Frank Watson WHY the Cabinet overruled the decision of the Board in this matter? That Cabinet decision is key, but continues to be sidestepped.
On Deputy PM 'does not know' if BEC bribe probe will be launched
Posted 31 December 2014, 3:02 p.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
Is there a particular reason that Tribune refuses to make clear to the public that Official 8, as the indictment states twice, was in fact a BEC Board member? Farrington's statement is clearly just to attempt to make it clear that Official 8 is not him, and the indictment indicates that is not him anyway, but I guess he still feels the need to put this "righteous indignation" statement out so as to drive home that point.
On Find the BEC bribe ‘traitor’
Posted 30 December 2014, 8:19 p.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
true
On VAT rules ‘nightmare’ slammed by business
Posted 27 December 2014, 12:15 a.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
I am not suggesting that only one person may have received money. My statement is confined to the Tribune's claim that the documents do not say that Official 8 is a Board member. That is untrue. The indictment states twice that Official 8 was a BEC Board member. I also pointed out that Official 8 is a man because there were women on the Board, so I pointed out the distinction from that standpoint.
On $300,000 bribe paid to win BEC contract
Posted 24 December 2014, 10:16 a.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
And the payments to Official 8 ended in 2003, not 2013 as the Tribune erroneously states in its second to last paragraph. The Tribune is a bloody wreck. And why didn't the Tribune ask Watson why he and his government overruled the Board? He was the Minister. Why interview him but not ask him that obvious question?
On $300,000 bribe paid to win BEC contract
Posted 24 December 2014, 12:20 a.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
The court documents say Official 8 is a board member, not that the Tribune actually read the documents so it seems
On $300,000 bribe paid to win BEC contract
Posted 23 December 2014, 11:45 p.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
The Tribune is beyond worthless. The court documents explicitly say that Official 8 was a board member of bec. Guess the Tribune did not read the court documents as usual? The documents also indicate that Official 8 is a man.
On $300,000 bribe paid to win BEC contract
Posted 23 December 2014, 11:33 p.m. Suggest removal
Publius says...
The news media did not edit his article, he claims the port's lawyers, etc did. That's between them if they chose to send an edited version to the paper. The paper can only run what is sent to them. Once he saw what he claims was done to him, he could have simply sent out the "real" version himself, without it going through the people he claimed have done this to him before!
On Sir Jack ‘censored’ on Gov’t-slamming remarks
Posted 16 December 2014, 11:33 p.m. Suggest removal