Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Don't ever believe the 1% media when they say a leak report.The_Honourable wrote:Guardian "responds" to Express
UK company confirms TTPS’ EMBD case strong
Mark Bassant
Lead Editor, Investigative Desk - Trinidad Guardian
“There are reasonable grounds to suspect criminal behaviour.”
That was the comment from Kate McMahon, of the UK firm Edmonds and Marshall Mc Mahon (EMM), as she wrote an email to investigators of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) and its legal department last Friday to raise her latest concerns about the investigation into the Estate Management and Development Co Ltd (EMBD).
In follow-up correspondence on Monday (July 27), she denied recent newspaper reports that the evidence was weak and said the police were “quite comfortable with the warrants” they need to carry on with their investigations.
Mc Mahon informed the TTPS last Friday that her firm, which has been assisting the TTPS with the major probes, had intensified their communication with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in “relation to the cases we are seeking to charge.” She indicated that there were three cases now being actively investigated (EMBD, Lifesport and EFCL) and “two which are currently being assessed for charge by the DPP and the third which is at an advanced stage and has warrants to be executed which will, we believe, reveal money laundering and funding for the 2015 election via government contract fees.”
Mc Mahon also pointed out a third matter has also been considered.
“We wish to execute a search soon on (name called), who is central to our investigation with the Anti-Corruption Investigations Bureau (ACIB). This is an important matter of public policy and we urge that, on the evidence as it stands, there are reasonable grounds to suspect criminal behaviour and warrant a search,” Mc Mahon said.
Mc Mahon noted that with a search warrant under section 5 (1) of the Indictable Offences(Preliminary Enquiry Act 1917), “there is a general authority granted to a police officer to search specified premises in accordance with a validly issued search warrant under this section.” She said once the magistrate is satisfied that the place in question to search may have evidence “as to the commission of any such offence,” the DPP’s permission is not needed.
She said she was optimistic that “the DPP may see fit to advance the cases we have put before him.”
On Monday (July 27), Mc Mahon also wrote to TTPS investigators about the matter surrounding Ed Jenkins QC raised in another newspaper report. She indicated in her correspondence that “Ed Jenkins has advised that he does not wish these searches done as they will appear politically motivated. We have three problems here.”
However, Mc Mahon advised the officers that “since there has been significant media attention on this case, I think evidence should be collected now.”
The UK firm partner advised that “unless the warrant was particularly tricky or difficult, that the officers should be encouraged to (a) not go to the DPP for assistance with routine policing and (b) if they do have concerns or need help, they use the TTPS legal department.”
Mc Mahon ended her correspondence by stating they were working as quickly as possible with Jenkins to get his approval “but I think that it’s a significant problem for the TTPS to ask the DPP for approval of warrants. That is a policing function and it should be sped up.”
In her Friday correspondence, she also cleared the air on the firm’s contract with the TTPS.
“It was my mistaken belief that our contract was only until the end of July... it has been approved in principal (sic) for at least an additional year and is in the latter stages of contractual approval. This potential contract endpoint was communicated to the DPP’s office in the last few weeks. Unfortunately, (incorrect) circumstances of this contract appear to have been discussed with the media.”
On Monday, Commissioner of Police Gary Griffith and T&T Police Service legal adviser Christian Chandler also defended the evidence they had so far compiled in the Lifesport and EMBD probes amid reports they had not uncovered enough to press charges concerning those cases. Chandler noted that the report which the Trinidad Express based its stories on was old and they had advanced the case substantially since then.
On July 19, a Sunday Guardian report revealed that arrests were imminent in the $549 million criminal EMBD case, with a prominent politician allegedly closely linked to the matter.
Source: https://www.guardian.co.tt/news/uk-comp ... 888d0bf2f0
De Dragon wrote:Shameful that Geeyore felt it necessary to politicize the issue as well. If your evidence is so strong, why the need to defend it days before a GE, particularly when the PNM is pushing it hard on the hustings? Geeyore has proven to be the most political, conflicted and hypocritical CoP we've ever had.
Before the Red and Dotish brigade jumps out, please note my oft stated position that ANYONE who is found to have a case to answer, should be made to do so.
bluefete wrote:De Dragon wrote:Shameful that Geeyore felt it necessary to politicize the issue as well. If your evidence is so strong, why the need to defend it days before a GE, particularly when the PNM is pushing it hard on the hustings? Geeyore has proven to be the most political, conflicted and hypocritical CoP we've ever had.
Before the Red and Dotish brigade jumps out, please note my oft stated position that ANYONE who is found to have a case to answer, should be made to do so.
Yuh know, yuh so right.
I lost all respect for him with the Deputy Commissioner Hackshaw issue with all the accounts he had in the banks.
Seems like Gary and Hackshaw might be in the same Lodge.
De Dragon wrote:bluefete wrote:De Dragon wrote:Shameful that Geeyore felt it necessary to politicize the issue as well. If your evidence is so strong, why the need to defend it days before a GE, particularly when the PNM is pushing it hard on the hustings? Geeyore has proven to be the most political, conflicted and hypocritical CoP we've ever had.
Before the Red and Dotish brigade jumps out, please note my oft stated position that ANYONE who is found to have a case to answer, should be made to do so.
Yuh know, yuh so right.
I lost all respect for him with the Deputy Commissioner Hackshaw issue with all the accounts he had in the banks.
Seems like Gary and Hackshaw might be in the same Lodge.
There is a Lodge for dumb high ranking TTPS?
Redman more concerned about UNC plans.bluefete wrote:That is $116 million spend 'jusso" on foreign. Rowley real like dem foreigners.
zoom rader wrote:Redman more concerned about UNC plans.bluefete wrote:That is $116 million spend 'jusso" on foreign. Rowley real like dem foreigners.
De Dragon wrote:zoom rader wrote:Redman more concerned about UNC plans.bluefete wrote:That is $116 million spend 'jusso" on foreign. Rowley real like dem foreigners.
Love to see the reaction of those hypocrites if a UNC AG did a "Malcolm Jones"
That nasty little piece of abject corruption, done by a non-PNM GORTT would surely stick in their sheepish maws.
Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:zoom rader wrote:Redman more concerned about UNC plans.bluefete wrote:That is $116 million spend 'jusso" on foreign. Rowley real like dem foreigners.
Love to see the reaction of those hypocrites if a UNC AG did a "Malcolm Jones"
That nasty little piece of abject corruption, done by a non-PNM GORTT would surely stick in their sheepish maws.
Section 34 was.......The AG, the PM and the Cabinet....but that dont matter anymore.
Hypocrite indeed.
Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:zoom rader wrote:Redman more concerned about UNC plans.bluefete wrote:That is $116 million spend 'jusso" on foreign. Rowley real like dem foreigners.
Love to see the reaction of those hypocrites if a UNC AG did a "Malcolm Jones"
That nasty little piece of abject corruption, done by a non-PNM GORTT would surely stick in their sheepish maws.
Section 34 was.......The AG, the PM and the Cabinet....but that dont matter anymore.
Hypocrite indeed.
Redman wrote:You should pay more attention
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:You should pay more attention
I do, hence my previous post. You actions need no more attention to be made out for what they are.
Redman wrote:Yes- Explain how Section 34....and ONLY section 34 was Proclaimed.
You guys only remember one side of the story
Dizzy28 wrote:Redman wrote:Yes- Explain how Section 34....and ONLY section 34 was Proclaimed.
You guys only remember one side of the story
A pretty ironic statement as your response earlier seems to indicate you definitely only remembered one side. An act was passed unanimously by the upper and lower houses for which only Independent senator Helen Drayton at the time apologized for the lack of oversight.
I am not disputing Section 34 was nefariously passed (Can't speak to the other forum users) seemingly to benefit the Piarco accused. But to omit the players in the actual passage of the law cheapens the role of Parliament.
PNM voted n favour to pass the bill.Redman wrote:Ok
I get your point-albeit I think it isnt taken to the conclusion
Have you read the Hansard that shows the details of how the act was in fact passed????
It was passed with Volney making promises and commitments that were reneged upon...
The UNC position that they complete a series actions and that changes th the Section 34 would be made before proclamation.
They lied.
The UNCabinet-voted to pass Section 34 for proclamation.
Volney took the fall for that.
Redman wrote:Ok
I get your point-albeit I think it isnt taken to the conclusion
Have you read the Hansard that shows the details of how the act was in fact passed????
It was passed with Volney making promises and commitments that were reneged upon...
The UNC position that they complete a series actions and that changes th the Section 34 would be made before proclamation.
They lied.
The UNCabinet-voted to pass Section 34 for proclamation.
Volney took the fall for that.
SR wrote:All a pappy show for politics neither party cares about the country
The divisional managers were signing off on works that were never completed or even startedpugboy wrote:them contractors smarter than that, woulda hve tight contracts in place
Phone Surgeon wrote:The divisional managers were signing off on works that were never completed or even startedpugboy wrote:them contractors smarter than that, woulda hve tight contracts in place
Contracts or not....its fraud
Thats why embd bring 4 companies/parties into it saying if they found liable to namalco....then those 4 people liable as they were the ones saying the work was completed.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Les Bain, Musical Doc and 89 guests