He's claiming that he got the documents "after" the court decision came down. So the dog would be wagging the tail I think... It's interesting. My first question is, is the information materially different from what was presented in the trial. Next question if it is materially different did the govt violate the document disclosure requirement, it wouldnt have been difficult to find these communications. But every hinges on whether this is really new information

Is that Kirk Cornish? They really need to change the rules about MPs charged with serious offences. Pay them their salary and send them on leave until the matter is resolved.

The first rule of cloak and dagger is to give a little boy from the ghetto a few pennies to carry a message on a crumpled piece of paper to the hero. Or a burner phone that self explodes.

"*Shortly after the publication of his Lordship’s [Sir Ian Winder] judgment, I received an anonymous call to go to a local coffee shop and that I would find a brown envelope for me to collect*"

This lil country gat more cloak and dagger than The Bourne Ultimatum. From Columbus to Amistaad to Blackbeard to Wallace Groves, Harry Oakes and Myer Lansky, Joe Ledher, Commision of Inquiry Island for Sale, Ninety Knowles, Bahamar...oh the Korean Boat Scandal.. i miss anything? Oban

I guh put this in bold for you

"**Justice Carla Card-Stubbs also found that Mr Turnquest had “breached his statutory fiduciary duty, and the statutory duty of care, diligence and skill” owed to Mr Kaiser and his Alpha Aviation investment vehicle by releasing Mr Butler and his wife from their obligation to repay the mortgage even though a debt was still owing and no alternative security/collateral was provided.**"

"**the actions do not reflect conduct of a director**"

He is lucky. Fiduciary duty is not a flimsy responsibility, this could have easily been a very serious fine. I exclude "should have"

Work on the money trail. Customs, immigration, police, defence force, politicians, illegal gaming, airline workers, boat captains, Bimini

33 grams isnt recreational. Th he problem The Bahamas has from the top down everybody believes outsmarting the law is the way to get ahead. When/if marijuana legislation passes they're going to have a 7 headed monster on their hands, because no matter the messaging that comes after, the loose discussions that have been deliberately allowed (I recall the glee of officials at the town hall when they said people overwhelmingly wanted legalization) this will descend into chaos with everybody believing they can do as they like.

Just take a look at turn left on red. People now run red lights in every direction with impunity because the original discussion was extremely loose.

"*I’m not at liberty to disclose the private affairs of my members.”*

But this isnt "private". A clue might be that it's called *public disclosure*.

The issue here might be that persons accept these positions without understanding their responsibilities, not have the requisite knowledge for the roles, executive experience or understanding and even knowledge of the code of conduct. Clearly these MPs have no idea how public disclosure statements factor into good governance and the proper running of the country. If they did Dr Minnis would not have been able to say, "*its looked at as a joke*". CNN and the NY Times need to carry that story along with the next black listing and the Bishops inability to count on his fingers and toes or a handy abacus, how many people out of 39 men and women are left to disclose

Wise men and women always say define the problem so you can know when its resolved.

You can look at this statement and identify a whole range of issues we have at the country level and likely at the senior leadership level of many govt and private organizations. The first is the question "why" with the accompanying "**I**" dont want to. Why should you? Because the people you brought in specifically for their technical expertise, experience and knowledge of the area told you it was critical to do a certain set of things in a prescribed fashion, call out sexual violence within the confines of marriage as "rape" in order to protect mostly women and bring about a new level of consciousness in men.The second issue with the statement, the way forward is formulated by the maximum leader on their "*feelings*" and not information, evidence or research. And the two aren't mutually exclusive to a way forward, but when feelings trump evidence, get ready for the inevitable crisis when the leader has to pretend that they never knew this was an issue, nobody knew, in fact who could have possibly known? and we'll get right to fixing it.

The FBI is on Cornish's case? I thought the victim was Bahamian. In any event, one doesnt trump the other, rape is a horrific crime, because it doesnt only attack the body, it attacks the soul. every instance desrves a spotlight

The most damning reminder of how *unserious* (Minnis' new word) we are about allegations of rape is Cornish sitting in Parliament.

If the Financial Controller of a govt corporation was accused of stealing and there was enough evidence to show that money was missing and the individual had some or should have had some knowledge, the individual would be sent on leave, would have no access to the office building and would not be allowed to return to the office until a conclusion was reached innocent or guilty.

But here we are in 2024 with the police having a charge before them, that a sitting MP raped a woman, physically assaulted her, held a knife to her throat, threatened her with death and the gentleman is allowed to represent US as one of the best among us and cast his vote on laws governing other men.

I wonder if Parliamentarians have enough principles and character to at least attempt to change this farce. They certainly have the power to do so.