Tweet
Lightbourne briefed Brady
E-mail cited as justice minister faced eighth day of gruelling questions
BY PAUL HENRY Crime/Court Coordinator henryp@jamaicaobserver.com
Thursday, March 17, 2011
JUSTICE Minister Dorothy Lightbourne yesterday stoutly denied authorising an e-mail that was sent by her secretary to both Solicitor General Douglas Leys and controversial attorney Harold Brady concerning the Christopher 'Dudus' Coke extradition request.
The first six paragraphs of the e-mail, sent on September 16, 2009 were in relation to the extradition procedures — a process on which Leys, according the evidence, was already versed.
The e-mail with the subject line "extradition" and for which the flag status was branded 'red', was introduced by Leys' attorney Oliver Smith during his cross-examination of the justice minister at yesterday's sitting of the Dudus/Manatt Commission of Enquiry at the Jamaica Conference Centre in downtown Kingston.
Smith suggested that the e-mail was sent to brief Brady on the extradition proceedings but Lightbourne — who had previously testified to never having any contact with Brady regarding the issue — denied the suggestion.
Lightbourne said she could not recall the document.
"I don't know it. It doesn't say it's from me," said Lightbourne.
Again, after the luncheon break, Lightbourne came out strongly denying that she had sent the e-mail and sought to distance herself from it.
"This e-mail did not come from me," Lightbourne said in response to questions from Linton Walters, the attorney for the Jamaica Defence Force's Lieutenant Col Patrick Cole. "The content is not correct either. It did not have in it that I spoke to Mr Cole, and I did."
Lightbourne had contended that on August 25, 2009 when the extradition request arrived from the United States, Cole spoke to her on the telephone from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions about speeding up the extradition process.
Cole — who also gave evidence in the enquiry — has denied that he spoke with Lightbourne.
The e-mail outlines a conversation with Lisa Palmer-Hamilton, the senior deputy director of public prosecutions on August 25, 2009 regarding the extradition request. Lightbourne had previously testified to the conversation.
Questioned further by Gordon about the e-mail, Lightbourne said she could recall the content but was still adamant that she did not give the authority for the e-mail to be sent.
"I have an e-mail address, why wasn't it sent from my e-mail address?" she questioned.
Gordon suggested that Lightbourne was the author of the e-mail, that it was sent on her behalf and that she was trying to pass the blame for her action, but the minister denied the suggestion. She had earlier testified that she was not conversant with e-mail use.
Cross-examination of Lightbourne continues today.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Bruce Golding is expected to start giving evidence tomorrow.
COMMENTS (7)
Trevor Harris
3/17/2011
What do we have here? An email sent from the AG's office but its not from the AG.Boy, I am really confused.We need to know the truth.Who will come forward and be forthright and honest instead if taking about MoUs and other peripheral things.We need to know the truth.
Alex Campbell
3/17/2011
When the email was first introduced didn't Dorothy accepted same as coming from her? It was only after the Brady connection was mention she started flip flopping. Now we are seeing how deep the web of deception went. Golding on 6th September 2009 sanctioned the initiative with Brady. On the 16th September the AG copied an email Brady. Leys knew that. Now Leys lawyer is spilling the beans. Oh, what a tangled web they weaved as the practiced their web of deception. RESIGNATION TIME
renrick hall
3/17/2011
clean bold!
renrick hall
3/17/2011
howzat!
george watson
3/17/2011
So why aren’t we getting the AG's secretary into the witness box? The email had to be either sent by her on Ms. Lighbourne’s instructions or she took it upon herself to do so. It must be in the AG’s interest that she testifies, to show that she (the AG ) is telling the truth. SHE MUST TESTIFY.
george watson
3/17/2011
If there is one thing we can give the JLP credit for it is transference. They have tried to shift the focus of the Enquiry to PP and the MOU they have tried also to make KD the wicked fox trying to gobble up the nice sweet old lady.
Having said all that, how many of us heard an exasperated Frank Phipps shouting “dammit” the other day. Not complaining (he is an excellent lawyer who I would like to be like when I grow up), just saying that had it been KD then it would be all over the media and we would be equating him to Mr. Warmington, as many are already doing.
Raul Grant
3/17/2011
I don't believe anything Dorothy says. How can she say the email is not coming from her? Who wrote it then, the secretary?and why would the secretary cc Brady, somebody the office not supposed to even be dealing with?
My one wish is that Brady changes his mind and testify against all !
But then again he could like others just close ranks.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/...#ixzz1GrgFpRkm
E-mail cited as justice minister faced eighth day of gruelling questions
BY PAUL HENRY Crime/Court Coordinator henryp@jamaicaobserver.com
Thursday, March 17, 2011
JUSTICE Minister Dorothy Lightbourne yesterday stoutly denied authorising an e-mail that was sent by her secretary to both Solicitor General Douglas Leys and controversial attorney Harold Brady concerning the Christopher 'Dudus' Coke extradition request.
The first six paragraphs of the e-mail, sent on September 16, 2009 were in relation to the extradition procedures — a process on which Leys, according the evidence, was already versed.
The e-mail with the subject line "extradition" and for which the flag status was branded 'red', was introduced by Leys' attorney Oliver Smith during his cross-examination of the justice minister at yesterday's sitting of the Dudus/Manatt Commission of Enquiry at the Jamaica Conference Centre in downtown Kingston.
Smith suggested that the e-mail was sent to brief Brady on the extradition proceedings but Lightbourne — who had previously testified to never having any contact with Brady regarding the issue — denied the suggestion.
Lightbourne said she could not recall the document.
"I don't know it. It doesn't say it's from me," said Lightbourne.
Again, after the luncheon break, Lightbourne came out strongly denying that she had sent the e-mail and sought to distance herself from it.
"This e-mail did not come from me," Lightbourne said in response to questions from Linton Walters, the attorney for the Jamaica Defence Force's Lieutenant Col Patrick Cole. "The content is not correct either. It did not have in it that I spoke to Mr Cole, and I did."
Lightbourne had contended that on August 25, 2009 when the extradition request arrived from the United States, Cole spoke to her on the telephone from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions about speeding up the extradition process.
Cole — who also gave evidence in the enquiry — has denied that he spoke with Lightbourne.
The e-mail outlines a conversation with Lisa Palmer-Hamilton, the senior deputy director of public prosecutions on August 25, 2009 regarding the extradition request. Lightbourne had previously testified to the conversation.
Questioned further by Gordon about the e-mail, Lightbourne said she could recall the content but was still adamant that she did not give the authority for the e-mail to be sent.
"I have an e-mail address, why wasn't it sent from my e-mail address?" she questioned.
Gordon suggested that Lightbourne was the author of the e-mail, that it was sent on her behalf and that she was trying to pass the blame for her action, but the minister denied the suggestion. She had earlier testified that she was not conversant with e-mail use.
Cross-examination of Lightbourne continues today.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Bruce Golding is expected to start giving evidence tomorrow.
COMMENTS (7)
Trevor Harris
3/17/2011
What do we have here? An email sent from the AG's office but its not from the AG.Boy, I am really confused.We need to know the truth.Who will come forward and be forthright and honest instead if taking about MoUs and other peripheral things.We need to know the truth.
Alex Campbell
3/17/2011
When the email was first introduced didn't Dorothy accepted same as coming from her? It was only after the Brady connection was mention she started flip flopping. Now we are seeing how deep the web of deception went. Golding on 6th September 2009 sanctioned the initiative with Brady. On the 16th September the AG copied an email Brady. Leys knew that. Now Leys lawyer is spilling the beans. Oh, what a tangled web they weaved as the practiced their web of deception. RESIGNATION TIME
renrick hall
3/17/2011
clean bold!
renrick hall
3/17/2011
howzat!
george watson
3/17/2011
So why aren’t we getting the AG's secretary into the witness box? The email had to be either sent by her on Ms. Lighbourne’s instructions or she took it upon herself to do so. It must be in the AG’s interest that she testifies, to show that she (the AG ) is telling the truth. SHE MUST TESTIFY.
george watson
3/17/2011
If there is one thing we can give the JLP credit for it is transference. They have tried to shift the focus of the Enquiry to PP and the MOU they have tried also to make KD the wicked fox trying to gobble up the nice sweet old lady.
Having said all that, how many of us heard an exasperated Frank Phipps shouting “dammit” the other day. Not complaining (he is an excellent lawyer who I would like to be like when I grow up), just saying that had it been KD then it would be all over the media and we would be equating him to Mr. Warmington, as many are already doing.
Raul Grant
3/17/2011
I don't believe anything Dorothy says. How can she say the email is not coming from her? Who wrote it then, the secretary?and why would the secretary cc Brady, somebody the office not supposed to even be dealing with?
My one wish is that Brady changes his mind and testify against all !
But then again he could like others just close ranks.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/...#ixzz1GrgFpRkm
Comment