The Law has Spoken

[Bricktop]

Supreme Court today granted exparte injunction restraining rebroadcast of 18 degrees North programme on PM Andrew Holness

[Mosiah]

Sorry, Bricky, the damage is already done!

This is exactly what anyone would expect once Holness bawl fi him lawyer.

Does that change the facts of the case?

If, and I hardly doubt we'll ever, but if one day we find out that 18 degrees was mostly factual, should Anju step down for using the courts to hide and frustrate evidence of his wrongdoing?

[Bricktop]

When you provide some facts we can discuss further...until then we can all see through your mudslinging...goin bun yuh fi 3 more terms

[Mosiah]

When you provide some facts we can discuss further...until then we can all see through your mudslinging...goin bun yuh fi 3 more terms

I do hope Anju remains as PM for more than 3 school terms! Woulda look bad!

[Gamma]

What damage?

Btw are you OK with defamatory allegations being made on the basis of "well it did what we intended to do"?

I should hope not! Sullying a mans reputation should not be a pastime

[Rockman]

But it seems more procedural than a ruling that he was actually defamed.
The same legal actions would have the same results even if what is being alleged by the investigative journalist is true.

[Bricktop]

thanks captian obvious...hence an "ex parte injunction"...

[Rockman]

Maybe ignorance is indeed bliss but I will let you in on a well kept secret,this one flew well over your head.

[Gamma]

If it is not true he has been defamed.

It is not a hearing on the merits of a case for defamation ....

[Assasin]

The "Sham budget" and "tax perity" never work so the bring down agents have to find something else. A di 2nd a June now, so people can collect them money and if the PNP can't find something to stick them know them inna trouble soon so them a try hard.

[Mosiah]

What damage?

Btw are you OK with defamatory allegations being made on the basis of "well it did what we intended to do"?

I should hope not! Sullying a mans reputation should not be a pastime

Where are the defamatory allegations?

Were the taxes paid?

Does he own the 3 or 4 properties all without a mortgage?

Does he know Garvin?

Did Garvin get contracts while he was MOE?

Why was the offshore company set up?

Maybe I am not understanding "defamatory". If these questions can't be asked, then what can be?

Why come out now and say he will reveal his income sources in a few days or whatever? It wasn't important before the election?

[Mosiah]

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

If it is not true...the presenter went out of her way to produce what looks like irrefutable facts, at least to my biased mind.

[Gamma]

It's more than questions being asked....there are subtle and not so subtle insinuations that have made the rounds eg that Juliet Hnesses brother was labeled a drug kingpin on the basis of a similar name ....

" do you still beat your wife?"

[Don1]

Where are the defamatory allegations?

Were the taxes paid?

Does he own the 3 or 4 properties all without a mortgage?

Does he know Garvin?

Did Garvin get contracts while he was MOE?

Why was the offshore company set up?

Maybe I am not understanding "defamatory". If these questions can't be asked, then what can be?

Why come out now and say he will reveal his income sources in a few days or whatever? It wasn't important before the election?

It is so because:

In JA transparency for public officials is disavowed...corruption is normal and tolerated. ...libel laws are archaic throwbacks from 19th century England ....investigative journalism is completely unknown and seen as "fass inna people business"......political tribalism is ingrained

The environment is 100% backward .....Imagine judges still wearing wigs and lawyers in robes!! How idiotic is that shitstem!!

In a modern & progressive society there would be nothing wrong with the line of questioning. That it occurred is a good sign of a better journalistic culture emerging. ..which should be supported in ferreting out corruption on BOTH sides of the political divide

Nor is there any evidence of corruption provided. ...only questions that should be answered

[Mosiah]

It's more than questions being asked....there are subtle and not so subtle insinuations that have made the rounds eg that Juliet Hnesses brother was labeled a drug kingpin on the basis of a similar name ....

" do you still beat your wife?"

Ms. Burton didn't raise the Holness brother issue, nor was there anything similarly raised, in my view.

I can't recall seeing a "do you still beat your wife?" types of questions or insinuations.

Holness says he entirely and completely refutes all the insinuations, etc. So, nothing was true?