Except the court is not being asked to address the evidence at all. It is only being asked if Lightbourne has the right/power to do what she is doing now (not signing an extradition request to put the whole extradition matter before the court out here before the person is extradited to the US) which has nothing to do with whether another court order is needed in order to start a prosecution in Jamaica.
...and we know she has that right so what is this about going to the court on that
but a wah dat fa faaaaaaaadah
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
whoa whoa whoa....the SAME information that the us government has the jamaican government has and the americans think that it warrants dudus being extradited however no crime was committed in jamaica based on the SAME information?
i am lost....can someone help me out here??
if i laff i dead...
'to get what we've never had, we MUST do what we've never done'
I don't understand all the legal mumbo jumbo, but it is stated that the court order for the wire tap was to do one thing. What it is being used for, it is claimed that another court order was needed. Can that be correct?
i know you have more sense than that...
whenever anyone try to defend the indefensible, its inevitable they will look like a fool... lazie, i know you are better than that...
'to get what we've never had, we MUST do what we've never done'
whenever anyone try to defend the indefensible, its inevitable they will look like a fool... lazie, i know you are better than that...
"defend the indefensible"? I simply restated what was said in an interview. Of course I'll be considered a fool because I take a different approach from the masses. I have no problem with that ...but how can I be accused of trying to "defend the indefensible" when all I did was provide an answer via an interview?
"Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)
anybody who tries to defend this is a certified fool.
how yuh suh ruff... look like mi get smooden out over de years... still, mi tink yuh right... anybody who try fi defen it... lawd papa, fi yuh words, 'certified fool'...
mi si delano franklyn over de weekend... we was staying at the same hotel... mi wi tell yuh wha mi tell him, 'bruce golding is a criminal' and him need fi step down... mi nah guh seh wha atty delano franklyn seh...
btw, delano franklyn is a very good man... i hope he goes back into representative politics...
'to get what we've never had, we MUST do what we've never done'
Comment