TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
The implications of the debacle arising from the Attorney General’s conflict in the Piarco International Airport fraud and corruption case are substantial and potentially far-reaching.
The obvious first matter of concern is the Miami court’s rejection of AG Reginald Armour’s sworn affidavit given “under penalties of perjury”, in which he stated that for “a few years at the start of the preliminary enquiry” he had “worked as a junior lawyer” to the late Allan Alexander, SC, providing legal representation to defendants Brian Kuei Tung and Renee Pierre in a role “limited to minimal legal research and to taking notes”.
Having reviewed the evidence submitted by attorneys for Kuei Tung and Steve Ferguson, the Miami court disagreed strongly enough to disqualify Armour and the US law firm Sequor Law from representing the T&T Government in this matter. It found Armour’s involvement to be more significant than stated in his affidavit, and cited the Florida Rules of Professional Responsibility.
Perhaps time has dimmed Armour’s memory. In April 2003, senior counsel Alexander, and Armour are identified as appearing for Kuei Tung and Renee Pierre in an appeal against a ruling by then-Chief Magistrate Sherman McNicholls. By May 2004, Armour, by then elevated to the status of senior counsel, was publicly identified as a member of Kuei Tung’s three-man legal team for the preliminary hearings in the airport criminal case. One newspaper reported that Armour “grilled” Cpl Joanne Archie of the Anti-Corruption Bureau. These are public records which dispute Armour’s description of his role as a junior lawyer limited to “minimal legal research” and “note taking”.
Armour’s handling of potential conflicts between his prior private practice and current public responsibilities as AG begs the question of whether the potential risks were adequately addressed by Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley before inviting Armour to join his Cabinet as AG. There is certainly precedent between them.
In March 2015, within three days of being appointed president of the Law Association, Armour withdrew from all legal matters in which he was representing then-Opposition Leader Dr Rowley on the grounds of “insulating the Council and the Law Association from any charges of partiality against the Association in anything to be done under my leadership”. Having seen the problem as clearly as he did then, it is hard to understand why, in a matter as serious as the airport corruption and fraud case, which has cost taxpayers many millions over the course of 20 years, he did not immediately see the danger of crossing from defence to plaintiff.
Of note is the Miami court’s statement that it was making no findings of misconduct by Sequor Law, whose disqualification was due to Armour’s actions.
Several questions remain to be answered. What will be Sequor Law’s reaction to being disqualified? Will it seek damages from Armour and/or the T&T Government? How will the appointment of a new law firm affect the case in terms of cost and time? Most important of all, what impact will the Miami court’s ruling now have on the State’s substantive case against Kuei Tung, et al?
matr1x wrote:Nothing Kamla said was wrong. Them pnm just vex someone said it
SuperiorMan wrote:matr1x wrote:Nothing Kamla said was wrong. Them pnm just vex someone said it
Yo, you talking about the name thing?
matr1x wrote:SuperiorMan wrote:matr1x wrote:Nothing Kamla said was wrong. Them pnm just vex someone said it
Yo, you talking about the name thing?
Yes
14 to 16hover11 wrote:Rowley: New 4% wage offer costs $2.5b in back pay alone
https://newsday.co.tt/2022/06/19/rowley ... pay-alone/
While I empathize with the state, the workforce was under serious strain over the past couple of years...
The applause and verbal "thank you"s are well appreciated, but 4% won't cut it.
Lesson from this: Don't let 2 negotiating periods meet up...
Is the president being paid 2b to fund the increase? Where are the cuts and increases coming from?hover11 wrote:Time to consider the president office redundant as it is a burden to the tax paying citizens
The president is a redundant post ....surely even you can agree it is pointless. With the cost of housing and salaries aside from basically being a rubber stamp on bills to be passed and waving during independence parade please tell me what her purpose is....I didn't ask if we spending billions....fact is taxpayers money is leaking out on a redundant postwing wrote:Is the president being paid 2b to fund the increase? Where are the cuts and increases coming from?hover11 wrote:Time to consider the president office redundant as it is a burden to the tax paying citizens
matr1x wrote:It was great. Went to the vene protest and carried bottles of cold water. Can't believe they had their kids out there with no water on a hot day.
Also I see your AG in trouble. Stories about social development siphoning close to a billion dollars. Damn.
hover11 wrote:Rowley: New 4% wage offer costs $2.5b in back pay alone
https://newsday.co.tt/2022/06/19/rowley ... pay-alone/
While I empathize with the state, the workforce was under serious strain over the past couple of years...
The applause and verbal "thank you"s are well appreciated, but 4% won't cut it.
Lesson from this: Don't let 2 negotiating periods meet up...
This is what I dont understand this will actually breathe some life into the economy. Where business can actually pick up putting spending power back into the working class but the rum shop economist imbert believes he knows betterKronik wrote:hover11 wrote:Rowley: New 4% wage offer costs $2.5b in back pay alone
https://newsday.co.tt/2022/06/19/rowley ... pay-alone/
While I empathize with the state, the workforce was under serious strain over the past couple of years...
The applause and verbal "thank you"s are well appreciated, but 4% won't cut it.
Lesson from this: Don't let 2 negotiating periods meet up...
Now they saying 2.5b it costing for backpay, but 25% of that will be taxed $625m.
And like you say don't let the negotiation periods meet up, all the time the money sitting in the govt accounts getting interest (whatever little it was), when that money was due to be paid to the workers years ago. Why they don't put the breakdown as to how much it costing per outstanding period, because that's backpay for what, the past 8 years? Always trying to exaggerate costs and throw big numbers to justify not paying ppl.
Majority of that money (minus the tax) going right back into the economy for you to purchase items (and pay an additional 12.5% tax)
Everyone agrees that an increase is justified, the problem is where the funding is coming from, whether increased taxes, hsf, cut backs in other areas or just use all the windfall money. We know this government cannot increase revenue, so it looks like someone will have to suffer for the public servants to get their increase.hover11 wrote:This is what I dont understand this will actually breathe some life into the economy. Where business can actually pick up putting spending power back into the working class but the rum shop economist imbert believes he knows betterKronik wrote:hover11 wrote:Rowley: New 4% wage offer costs $2.5b in back pay alone
https://newsday.co.tt/2022/06/19/rowley ... pay-alone/
While I empathize with the state, the workforce was under serious strain over the past couple of years...
The applause and verbal "thank you"s are well appreciated, but 4% won't cut it.
Lesson from this: Don't let 2 negotiating periods meet up...
Now they saying 2.5b it costing for backpay, but 25% of that will be taxed $625m.
And like you say don't let the negotiation periods meet up, all the time the money sitting in the govt accounts getting interest (whatever little it was), when that money was due to be paid to the workers years ago. Why they don't put the breakdown as to how much it costing per outstanding period, because that's backpay for what, the past 8 years? Always trying to exaggerate costs and throw big numbers to justify not paying ppl.
Majority of that money (minus the tax) going right back into the economy for you to purchase items (and pay an additional 12.5% tax)
MaxPower wrote:matr1x wrote:It was great. Went to the vene protest and carried bottles of cold water. Can't believe they had their kids out there with no water on a hot day.
Also I see your AG in trouble. Stories about social development siphoning close to a billion dollars. Damn.
Nice to hear bro.
Rest assured, their thirst was quenched by the supporting public.
X10000The_Honourable wrote:Listen, politicians always finds the money that benefits them and their pockets. Let the public servants get their just due, especially since they are enduring inflation.
That being said, there are non-performers in the public service. At the risk of upsetting the PSA, the state needs to go in hard and weed them out even if it means changes in legislation. This is one area that the government will receive public support on.
Guess what, it's the politicians who in charge of the treasury and they not touching their cut. So guess what, they will rather increase taxes, or cut somewhere else if they can't find the money somewhere. Depending on politicians to do the right thing is wishful thinking. So it's between a rock and a hard place. Like I said earlier, the government keeps getting a positive appraisal every five years significant help from public sector voters.hover11 wrote:X10000The_Honourable wrote:Listen, politicians always finds the money that benefits them and their pockets. Let the public servants get their just due, especially since they are enduring inflation.
That being said, there are non-performers in the public service. At the risk of upsetting the PSA, the state needs to go in hard and weed them out even if it means changes in legislation. This is one area that the government will receive public support on.
Politicians find money for everything else so what is the issue now.How many non disclosure agreements this government has currently? They find the money though. So what's the problem now. You the employer know you have a collective bargaining agreement every three years that is not the workers' fault that you reneged on your obligations.
The PNM is boasting that they made billions in profits from Petrotrin, maybe thats where it is coming from . Other than that what are they doing with these profits that they speak off.wing wrote:Everyone agrees that an increase is justified, the problem is where the funding is coming from, whether increased taxes, hsf, cut backs in other areas or just use all the windfall money. We know this government cannot increase revenue, so it looks like someone will have to suffer for the public servants to get their increase.hover11 wrote:This is what I dont understand this will actually breathe some life into the economy. Where business can actually pick up putting spending power back into the working class but the rum shop economist imbert believes he knows betterKronik wrote:hover11 wrote:Rowley: New 4% wage offer costs $2.5b in back pay alone
https://newsday.co.tt/2022/06/19/rowley ... pay-alone/
While I empathize with the state, the workforce was under serious strain over the past couple of years...
The applause and verbal "thank you"s are well appreciated, but 4% won't cut it.
Lesson from this: Don't let 2 negotiating periods meet up...
Now they saying 2.5b it costing for backpay, but 25% of that will be taxed $625m.
And like you say don't let the negotiation periods meet up, all the time the money sitting in the govt accounts getting interest (whatever little it was), when that money was due to be paid to the workers years ago. Why they don't put the breakdown as to how much it costing per outstanding period, because that's backpay for what, the past 8 years? Always trying to exaggerate costs and throw big numbers to justify not paying ppl.
Majority of that money (minus the tax) going right back into the economy for you to purchase items (and pay an additional 12.5% tax)
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: st7 and 34 guests
