Election predictions - part 1
By ADRIAN GIBSON
ajbahama@hotmail.com
AS ELECTION draweth nigh, it is anticipated that drama will surely accompany the impending showdown. Indeed, as ham/turkey/dryer/washer season rolls around once more, I'm hopeful that a more edified electorate will reject political paternalism and demand change--demand that the substantive societal/national issues are addressed.
Thus far, whilst the FNM party seems slow-footed in announcing its slate of candidates, the electioneering has clearly begun as is evident by Opposition Leader Perry Christie and his Deputy's (Philip Davis) flurry of Family Island trips conducting what they refer to as a listening tour.
Frankly, as the electoral clock ticks away, there are a few sitting Members of Parliament who have virtually fallen off a cliff and have literally disappeared in their constituencies whilst others are visionless and/or have adopted an attitude of entitlement and intolerance. Undoubtedly, there will be fits of hysteria and much whimpering following this electoral cycle. There are quite a number of politicians who are said to be on the endangered species list--marching onward toward the political gallows.
It is expected that the newly-constituted Boundaries Commission will redraw some constituency boundaries using recent census and voter registration data to determine population shifts and, frankly, the favourable cuts for electoral success.
Notably, the FNM must also be concerned about its weakening presence in Grand Bahama which continues to suffer immense economic woes.
That said, I've decided to don my monk's garb and attempt to read the political tea leaves, making preliminary electoral projections relative to the political odds of the purported candidates contesting seats in the upcoming elections. One must be mindful that this preliminary tally--to be later followed up--comes as ratifications and candidate selection is ongoing and, moreover, boundaries have yet to be cut.
Mano-a-mano, for Dr Hubert Minnis (FNM) the electoral race against opponent Jerome Gomez (PLP) will be like running against a cupcake. Depending on how far Dr Minnis outruns him at the polls--and it seems that the gap will be wide--Mr Gomez may need a powerful telescope to even see his opponent.
The doctor has been a stellar MP and a smooth political salesman who actually delivers. His challenger is likely to be politically manhandled in a horrifying loss that will expose him--politically--as a paper tiger.
Annihilate
PLP MP Obie Wilchcombe will politically annihilate purported FNM candidate Jeff Butler. Wilchcombe, an oratorically-gifted Parliamentarian, has been a superb MP and is likely to jettison Mr Butler--a grocery store owner--to the political dustbin.
PLP candidate Dr Danny Johnson is likely to be shell-shocked and in denial after being KO'd by Desmond Bannister in the Carmichael constituency. It is anticipated that Dr Johnson--son of the late MP Oscar Johnson, brother of former House Speaker Italia Johnson and son-in-law of the late former PM Sir Lynden Pindling--will mobilize the PLP's campaign machinery/resources in the area. That said, Dr Johnson is likely to have recurring nightmares following this election episode.
Contrary to recent speculation, Mr Bannister is set to run in Carmichael again although reliable sources inform me that due to purported variations of the electoral map-- that would be an attempt to cut-out strong polling divisions to save the politically unpopular Charles Maynard's seat--he considered a run in his home town, North Andros.
The reality is that if Mr Bannister--a strong candidate--loses, for the FNM, the domino effect would probably afflict the entire Southwestern area. Mr Bannister's electoral outcome could potentially coincide with the outcome of neighbouring seats. That said, he's expected to at least win his seat.
Former MP Leslie "Potcake" Miller will politically clobber incumbent Sidney Collie in Blue Hills.
This race is set to be a carnivorous affair. Constituents assert that Mr Collie has been a resounding disappointment, malignantly neglecting his constituency and performing abysmally.
Any expectancy of Mr Collie winning his seat is comparable to waiting for VAT 19 (liquor) to turn 20!
Naturally, both parties concede certain seats--for e.g. Long Island (usually FNM) and Englerston (traditionally PLP)--offering second tier candidates who are considered to be sacrificial lambs who make up the party's frontline numbers.
That said, the race for the Long Island/Ragged Island yields an exploitable mismatch as incumbent Larry Cartwright faces off against PLP newcomer Alex Storr--son of businessman Henry F Storr. Unfortunately for him, in Long Island, Mr Storr will suffer a humiliating loss.
Branville McCartney, depending on his political decisions, could likely retain his Bamboo Town seat.
As an FNM, and perhaps even if Mr McCartney becomes an independent, he would be a strong and favoured contender. However, if he joins a new party, he will suffer a political death.
Currently, Mr McCartney is in a very critical position politically, however he must rid himself of any notion that its normal to be "half-pregnant"--that is, either he's with the FNM or he's not.
Will Mr McCartney's move happen during the BTC debate? Were his recent comments/actions a precursor to what his true intentions are, that is, to separate himself from the pack and portray himself as a man with the gumption to stand against Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham? Is his decision predicated upon the position he takes with the BTC debate? In the wake of the Prime Minister's recent remarks relative to a snap election if all FNM MPs do not support the BTC sale in Parliament, is the ground now loosening under Mr McCartney?
I've been informed that the Clifton constituency will no longer exist. Moreover, as a result of this constituency being eliminated, I'm told that incumbent MP Kendal Wright will be offered a nomination to contest the Golden Gates seat. I'm told that because Mr Wright was raised in the Sunshine Park area of the constituency, he should be a "natural fit" to challenge incumbent MP Shane Gibson. Frankly, barring any other happenings, Wright--who is an uninspiring candidate--will lose to Shane Gibson, who is a political powerhouse in the area and has a diehard support base.
The MICAL constituency is being divided into the Inagua and Mayaguana constituency and Acklins, Crooked Island and Long Cay, respectively.
FNM Senator Dion "The Bruiser" Foulkes is set to triumph over his challenger in the new Inagua and Mayaguana constituency.
Nomination
I was told that the likely forerunner for the FNM nomination in Acklins, Crooked Island and Long Cay was Johnley Ferguson. However, that appears to be a moot point now that Mr Ferguson has signed a two year contract as a consultant with the Department of Lands and Surveys. Incumbent Alfred Gray is likely to put a shellacking on his opponent.
South Andros MP Picewell Forbes will be wielding a big, electoral tamarind switch for FNM challenger and COB lecturer Zendal Forbes. Although Picewell Forbers may encounter some difficulties if former MP Whitney Bastian nominates as an independent candidate, he's expected to retain the seat with Mr Z Forbes coming a distant third as an "also-ran" candidate.
FNM insiders assert that Carl Bethel has worn-out his welcome in Sea Breeze. However, his uncertain political fortune is dependent upon the candidate that the PLP settles on running against Mr Bethel.
Of late, Hope Strachan--Bethel's strongest challenger--has been mentioned as a possible replacement for Fort Charlotte MP Alfred Sears who has announced that he will not seek re-election.
However, if Ms Strachan remains in Sea Breeze, Carl Bethel will suffer a shellacking.
In 2007, Ms Strachan lost by 60-plus votes after campaigning in the constituency for a mere six weeks.
Mr Bethel appears out of touch with the electorate and, unfortunately, has a massive risk factor concerning his candidacy--that is, the perception that he's arrogant and egotistical.
Moreover, another scenario discussed is the possible nomination of lawyer Myles Laroda in Sea Breeze, apparently the PLP's compromise for snubbing him in South Beach. Frankly, Laroda would be defeated by Bethel. The PLP's best chance of capturing that seat is to leave Hope Strachan as the nominee. No doubt, the PLP would be smart to smack down any inkling to move Ms Strachan to the other side of town.
The Fort Charlotte district--no longer being contested by PLP MP Alfred Sears--should be a political duel.
Sources assert that the boundaries will extend further into Dr Minnis' Killarney constituency to facilitate a successful run by FNM candidate Vincent Vanderpool Wallace.
I'm also informed that the recently departed former NDP leader (now PLP) Dr Andre Rollins is also vying for the nod in Fort Charlotte. There are those who argue that Dr Rollins--a political journeyman--lacks the political capital to win a contest. The race for Fort Charlotte could go either way.
Brent Symonette will retain the St Annes seat. Mr Symonette, who won nearly 64 per cent of the votes cast in his constituency in the last general election, will handily dispatch any challengers (said to be Billy Nottage or another applicant).
Loretta Butler-Turner will banish her challenger to the political wilderness and roar down victory lane in the Montagu constituency.
Mrs Butler-Turner won by a margin of more than 68 per cent of the total votes cast in her constituency during the last general election--the largest margin that year.
FNM nominee for St Cecilia Karen Shepherd--the former president of the Women's Association--will be a victim of circumstance. In a traditionally PLP stronghold, Ms Shepherd is a rookie politician whose candidacy reminds me of a wilting candle.
I'm informed that Ms Shepherd requested to run in St Cecilia since her father James Shepherd--a member of the Dissident Eight--once represented the area.
However, from the looks of things, Ms Shepherd could perhaps begin writing her biography, with it perhaps reading "I also ran in St Cecilia, etcetera" and being filled out during her lifetime.
Glenys Hanna-Martin has a strong political wind at her back in the Englerston constituency. The constituency is also a traditional PLP stronghold.
March 18, 2011
2012 General Election Predictions (Part 2) - Bahamas
tribune242
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label Philip Davis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Philip Davis. Show all posts
Monday, March 21, 2011
Friday, June 18, 2010
Clogged Courts... Clogged Justice
Confusion around the courts
tribune242editorial:
NATIONAL Security Minister Tommy Turnquest told Parliament Wednesday that at least 252 persons charged with murder are still awaiting trial. Of that number about 130 are out on bail.
It would be interesting to know how many of those on bail have been charged with a second murder, or have themselves become the victim of another criminal's drive-by shooting. Up to April 30, 130 murder accused were still out on the streets waiting to be called in to face justice.
Lawyer Philip Davis told the House that a murder trial usually takes a month. He estimated that it would take more than 20 years to clear those now waiting for their cases to be heard. "A near impossible" task to deal with, he observed.
The courts are not only clogged with too many cases, but also cases cannot move smoothly and swiftly through the system because of constant delays, either for lack of witnesses, summonses that have not been served, or lawyers who need adjournments because of a conflict in their own calendars.
A businessman, who was to testify this week for a theft at his office, after waiting four hours outside court for the case to be called, vowed that in future unless death were involved, he would never again call in the police to get entangled in the judicial system. "It is ridiculous what happens at the court," he said.
He said his case was set down for Tuesday and Wednesday this week. He arrived at the court at 9.30am on Tuesday. There were so many prisoners already there that everyone was asked to leave the court to make room for them.
He waited with the crowd under the almond tree in front of Café Matisse to find some shelter from the blistering sun. Later he hurried under an awning to be protected from the rain. "I am a middle aged man in good health, but can you imagine what would happen to an older person, not in good health, under these conditions?" he asked. He battled with the sun and rain for four hours before his case was called. When he entered the court room at 1.30pm he was told: "Come back tomorrow."
The next day, he went even earlier to secure a seat at the back of the court. He said that a sympathetic policeman who knew what he had gone through the day before helped him find the seat. His case was the second to be called on Wednesday. He gave his evidence, but believes that there will be at least two more adjournments in the magistrate's court before the case can make it to the Supreme Court.
In the two days that he was there only two cases went ahead. About 40 had to be adjourned because either witnesses had not shown up, or summonses had not been served.
On Tuesday he said in one case alone 15 witnesses were called. Not one was present. Of the 30 cases that day, no one had shown up to give evidence. Each case had to be set down for a new date.
Even a prisoner complained about the non-functioning system. He told the court that that day was the fifth time that he had been brought before the court, but each time his case had been adjourned because no one was there. "This is ridiculous!" he exclaimed.
Also at no time did the businessman feel secure. He said there should be somewhere for witnesses to wait so that they do not have to be so near to the prisoners.
He said all the staff and the police at the court were friendly. However, it was obvious that the court was under staffed.
"It was a total eye opener for me to our criminal justice system," he said as he vowed never again to willingly expose himself to such an experience.
As for murder cases, Mr Turnquest told the House, government will specify an amendment to a bill now before parliament that three years is a reasonable time to hold murder accused in prison to await trial. In our own experience, we know of a case that involved the brutal murder in 2006 of one of our own staff members. The man accused of her murder was back on the streets after only 14 months. He is still a free man and no more has been heard of her case.
Under the constitution, said Mr Turnquest, a person accused of murder has a right to bail if they are not brought to trial in a reasonable time. With the slow pace at which many matters proceed before the courts this has allowed many charged with serious offences to be released on bail, sometimes coercing witnesses or committing other heinous crimes, he said.
"There's no question that the granting of bail to persons charged with murder is particularly controversial and emotive in our country. The public is concerned and rightly so that persons charged with murder are given bail and remain free to coerce, compel, and influence others and tragically to kill again," said Mr Turnquest.
"It is critical that more persons charged with murder have their cases decided by the courts and we believe that this Bill is a step in the right direction," he said.
We suggest that a court be designated just for murder cases with its own staff to bring in the witnesses and keep the cases moving through the system.
June 18, 2010
tribune242
tribune242editorial:
NATIONAL Security Minister Tommy Turnquest told Parliament Wednesday that at least 252 persons charged with murder are still awaiting trial. Of that number about 130 are out on bail.
It would be interesting to know how many of those on bail have been charged with a second murder, or have themselves become the victim of another criminal's drive-by shooting. Up to April 30, 130 murder accused were still out on the streets waiting to be called in to face justice.
Lawyer Philip Davis told the House that a murder trial usually takes a month. He estimated that it would take more than 20 years to clear those now waiting for their cases to be heard. "A near impossible" task to deal with, he observed.
The courts are not only clogged with too many cases, but also cases cannot move smoothly and swiftly through the system because of constant delays, either for lack of witnesses, summonses that have not been served, or lawyers who need adjournments because of a conflict in their own calendars.
A businessman, who was to testify this week for a theft at his office, after waiting four hours outside court for the case to be called, vowed that in future unless death were involved, he would never again call in the police to get entangled in the judicial system. "It is ridiculous what happens at the court," he said.
He said his case was set down for Tuesday and Wednesday this week. He arrived at the court at 9.30am on Tuesday. There were so many prisoners already there that everyone was asked to leave the court to make room for them.
He waited with the crowd under the almond tree in front of Café Matisse to find some shelter from the blistering sun. Later he hurried under an awning to be protected from the rain. "I am a middle aged man in good health, but can you imagine what would happen to an older person, not in good health, under these conditions?" he asked. He battled with the sun and rain for four hours before his case was called. When he entered the court room at 1.30pm he was told: "Come back tomorrow."
The next day, he went even earlier to secure a seat at the back of the court. He said that a sympathetic policeman who knew what he had gone through the day before helped him find the seat. His case was the second to be called on Wednesday. He gave his evidence, but believes that there will be at least two more adjournments in the magistrate's court before the case can make it to the Supreme Court.
In the two days that he was there only two cases went ahead. About 40 had to be adjourned because either witnesses had not shown up, or summonses had not been served.
On Tuesday he said in one case alone 15 witnesses were called. Not one was present. Of the 30 cases that day, no one had shown up to give evidence. Each case had to be set down for a new date.
Even a prisoner complained about the non-functioning system. He told the court that that day was the fifth time that he had been brought before the court, but each time his case had been adjourned because no one was there. "This is ridiculous!" he exclaimed.
Also at no time did the businessman feel secure. He said there should be somewhere for witnesses to wait so that they do not have to be so near to the prisoners.
He said all the staff and the police at the court were friendly. However, it was obvious that the court was under staffed.
"It was a total eye opener for me to our criminal justice system," he said as he vowed never again to willingly expose himself to such an experience.
As for murder cases, Mr Turnquest told the House, government will specify an amendment to a bill now before parliament that three years is a reasonable time to hold murder accused in prison to await trial. In our own experience, we know of a case that involved the brutal murder in 2006 of one of our own staff members. The man accused of her murder was back on the streets after only 14 months. He is still a free man and no more has been heard of her case.
Under the constitution, said Mr Turnquest, a person accused of murder has a right to bail if they are not brought to trial in a reasonable time. With the slow pace at which many matters proceed before the courts this has allowed many charged with serious offences to be released on bail, sometimes coercing witnesses or committing other heinous crimes, he said.
"There's no question that the granting of bail to persons charged with murder is particularly controversial and emotive in our country. The public is concerned and rightly so that persons charged with murder are given bail and remain free to coerce, compel, and influence others and tragically to kill again," said Mr Turnquest.
"It is critical that more persons charged with murder have their cases decided by the courts and we believe that this Bill is a step in the right direction," he said.
We suggest that a court be designated just for murder cases with its own staff to bring in the witnesses and keep the cases moving through the system.
June 18, 2010
tribune242
Friday, March 19, 2010
FNM Lead attorney Thomas Evans QC: three protest votes must automatically be thrown out
tribune242:
LEAD attorney for FNM candidate Dr Duane Sands, Thomas Evans QC, yesterday argued in election court that of six protest votes cast in the Elizabeth by-election three must be automatically thrown out as the individual's names did not appear on the Elizabeth register on the day of the election.
"The evidence shows that three voters were not registered in Elizabeth. Two were in the adjacent Yamacraw and one was in Fox Hill. These voters plainly are not entitled to vote in the Elizabeth constituency and no question of retifcation of register with any of them," Mr Evans told the election court.
He further argued that in addition to these three votes - that of Voter A, D and F - the vote of Voter B should not be counted as his date of birth on his driver's licence which he sought to use to vote differed to that on the register and he never appeared before the court to explain why.
This left two protest votes, that of Voters C and E, which Mr Evans agreed should be counted. Philip Davis, lead attorney for PLP candidate, Ryan Pinder, had proposed on Wednesday that all five protest votes cast for his party's candidate should be upheld as valid.
But Mr Evans contended that the court can only consider counting the votes of those voters for whom clerical errors or omissions caused them to have to cast their ballot on a coloured or protest ballot, not those who did not appear on the register at all as the register should be consider "conclusive" on the day of the election.
He further stated that for the court to "stray" into the question of whether certain voters were resident in the constituency or not would cause the court to "overstep" its mandate in this particular matter.
The attorney made these comments as he gave his final submissions to the court on behalf of his client, FNM candidate Dr Duane Sands. Some had expected that once Mr Evans concluded his submissions today that judges would leave the court to deliberate and come to a conclusion on the matter as early as today. But yesterday when Mr Evans took his seat having made his final submissions relative to the votes, lead attorney for PLP candidate Ryan Pinder, Philip Davis stood to counter some of the points he had made and this is expected to continue tomorrow when the court resumes at 10.30am.
At present it is not entirely clear when a conclusion to the case will come, and it is possible that the matter may drag on until next week.
In the February 16 by-election in Elizabeth, Dr Duane Sands won 1,501 ordinary votes and Mr Pinder got 1,499. Mr Pinder made an application to the court to determine the validity of five "protest" votes cast for him, to see whether they could be added to the official vote count and therefore change the outcome of the election, making him the representative for the constituency.
Mr Evans spoke at some length about Voter A, whose vote he ultimately said should be discounted.
That voter claimed she registered at a foodstore then gave evidence to the court that she found that she had been "put in the wrong constituency" (Fox Hill not Elizabeth). She said she and some friends and family members net with Parliamentary Commissioner Errol Bethel to have the situation rectified.
However, Mr Evans drew that claim into question, and told the court he was "sorely tempted to ask you to dismiss" the evidence that she met with Mr Bethel and sought to have the discrepancy changed.
The attorney said this was because Errol Bethel was not questioned on this alleged meeting while he gave his evidence and because there were varying and significant differences between the evidence of voter A and other supporting witnesses connected to her, as well as between her own evidence at different times.
He noted that Mr Bethel said that he had no record of Voter A having attended his office to change her voter's card. There was no documentary evidence and her oath was unamended, said Mr Evans.
"Normally if a change was made it would be reflected in all of the documents relevant to that voter," said Mr Evans.
"The flood or accumulation of contradictions in the evidence is irrefutable proof of their lack of credibility," he said of voter A and associated witnesses.
"This court is invited to find that Voter A never made any such application or attendance at the Parliamentary Registrar's office,that Voter A voluntarily placed herself in the Fox Hill constituency by giving herself the address North Pine Barren Road and that her vote should not be allowed," proposed Mr Evans.
He added the inconsistencies raise the possibility of her voter's card being fraudulent. "I'm not saying anyone is guilty of fraud, but it is a possibility."
"We would say that from all the evidence available that the voter's card may very well not be genuine."
"If it is believed, you may direct further investigations along those lines."
In relation to Voter B, who was made to cast a protest vote after he could not produce a voter's card but only a driver's license which had a birth date upon it which differed from the date of birth on the register, Mr Evans said that because the voter has not appeared before the court or provided any evidence or explanation for the differences his vote should not be allowed.
"We have no evidence to show that the holder of the license is the same person on the register," said Mr Evans.
In relation to voter C, Mr Evans said that there was an inconsistency between the date of birth on her driver's license and on the counter foil and register. However, in this case Mr Evans said his client does not "suggest it can't be counted."
In relation to Voter D, Mr Evans said she does not live in the Elizabeth constituency and is registered in Yamacraw. "It follows that her vote can't be counted," he said. Voter D was removed from the register by the parliamentary commissioner.
Voter E, Mr Evans said she was on the Elizabeth register and had a voter's card and therefore she was "no doubt entitled" to vote. He said that the question of whether she was in fact an Elizabeth resident was a separate question, but could not be determined as part of this court matter.
With regard to Voter F, he said her vote should not be counted as she did not have a voter's card or appear on the Elizabeth register.
Mr Davis, beginning to respond to Mr Evan's submissions, said that if the court accepts the assertions made by Mr Evans it would "have startling results."
The attorney charged that the inconsistencies in the testimony of Voter A and other associated witnesses in fact make their evidence more believable.
If all of the witnesses had given the same story, one would suspect they had been "coached," he said.
"One has to look at the inconsistencies in regard to the passage of time," Mr Davis said.
"If a husband doesn't remember the date of his marriage, does that mean he didn't get married?" he asked.
March 19, 2010
tribune242
LEAD attorney for FNM candidate Dr Duane Sands, Thomas Evans QC, yesterday argued in election court that of six protest votes cast in the Elizabeth by-election three must be automatically thrown out as the individual's names did not appear on the Elizabeth register on the day of the election.
"The evidence shows that three voters were not registered in Elizabeth. Two were in the adjacent Yamacraw and one was in Fox Hill. These voters plainly are not entitled to vote in the Elizabeth constituency and no question of retifcation of register with any of them," Mr Evans told the election court.
He further argued that in addition to these three votes - that of Voter A, D and F - the vote of Voter B should not be counted as his date of birth on his driver's licence which he sought to use to vote differed to that on the register and he never appeared before the court to explain why.
This left two protest votes, that of Voters C and E, which Mr Evans agreed should be counted. Philip Davis, lead attorney for PLP candidate, Ryan Pinder, had proposed on Wednesday that all five protest votes cast for his party's candidate should be upheld as valid.
But Mr Evans contended that the court can only consider counting the votes of those voters for whom clerical errors or omissions caused them to have to cast their ballot on a coloured or protest ballot, not those who did not appear on the register at all as the register should be consider "conclusive" on the day of the election.
He further stated that for the court to "stray" into the question of whether certain voters were resident in the constituency or not would cause the court to "overstep" its mandate in this particular matter.
The attorney made these comments as he gave his final submissions to the court on behalf of his client, FNM candidate Dr Duane Sands. Some had expected that once Mr Evans concluded his submissions today that judges would leave the court to deliberate and come to a conclusion on the matter as early as today. But yesterday when Mr Evans took his seat having made his final submissions relative to the votes, lead attorney for PLP candidate Ryan Pinder, Philip Davis stood to counter some of the points he had made and this is expected to continue tomorrow when the court resumes at 10.30am.
At present it is not entirely clear when a conclusion to the case will come, and it is possible that the matter may drag on until next week.
In the February 16 by-election in Elizabeth, Dr Duane Sands won 1,501 ordinary votes and Mr Pinder got 1,499. Mr Pinder made an application to the court to determine the validity of five "protest" votes cast for him, to see whether they could be added to the official vote count and therefore change the outcome of the election, making him the representative for the constituency.
Mr Evans spoke at some length about Voter A, whose vote he ultimately said should be discounted.
That voter claimed she registered at a foodstore then gave evidence to the court that she found that she had been "put in the wrong constituency" (Fox Hill not Elizabeth). She said she and some friends and family members net with Parliamentary Commissioner Errol Bethel to have the situation rectified.
However, Mr Evans drew that claim into question, and told the court he was "sorely tempted to ask you to dismiss" the evidence that she met with Mr Bethel and sought to have the discrepancy changed.
The attorney said this was because Errol Bethel was not questioned on this alleged meeting while he gave his evidence and because there were varying and significant differences between the evidence of voter A and other supporting witnesses connected to her, as well as between her own evidence at different times.
He noted that Mr Bethel said that he had no record of Voter A having attended his office to change her voter's card. There was no documentary evidence and her oath was unamended, said Mr Evans.
"Normally if a change was made it would be reflected in all of the documents relevant to that voter," said Mr Evans.
"The flood or accumulation of contradictions in the evidence is irrefutable proof of their lack of credibility," he said of voter A and associated witnesses.
"This court is invited to find that Voter A never made any such application or attendance at the Parliamentary Registrar's office,that Voter A voluntarily placed herself in the Fox Hill constituency by giving herself the address North Pine Barren Road and that her vote should not be allowed," proposed Mr Evans.
He added the inconsistencies raise the possibility of her voter's card being fraudulent. "I'm not saying anyone is guilty of fraud, but it is a possibility."
"We would say that from all the evidence available that the voter's card may very well not be genuine."
"If it is believed, you may direct further investigations along those lines."
In relation to Voter B, who was made to cast a protest vote after he could not produce a voter's card but only a driver's license which had a birth date upon it which differed from the date of birth on the register, Mr Evans said that because the voter has not appeared before the court or provided any evidence or explanation for the differences his vote should not be allowed.
"We have no evidence to show that the holder of the license is the same person on the register," said Mr Evans.
In relation to voter C, Mr Evans said that there was an inconsistency between the date of birth on her driver's license and on the counter foil and register. However, in this case Mr Evans said his client does not "suggest it can't be counted."
In relation to Voter D, Mr Evans said she does not live in the Elizabeth constituency and is registered in Yamacraw. "It follows that her vote can't be counted," he said. Voter D was removed from the register by the parliamentary commissioner.
Voter E, Mr Evans said she was on the Elizabeth register and had a voter's card and therefore she was "no doubt entitled" to vote. He said that the question of whether she was in fact an Elizabeth resident was a separate question, but could not be determined as part of this court matter.
With regard to Voter F, he said her vote should not be counted as she did not have a voter's card or appear on the Elizabeth register.
Mr Davis, beginning to respond to Mr Evan's submissions, said that if the court accepts the assertions made by Mr Evans it would "have startling results."
The attorney charged that the inconsistencies in the testimony of Voter A and other associated witnesses in fact make their evidence more believable.
If all of the witnesses had given the same story, one would suspect they had been "coached," he said.
"One has to look at the inconsistencies in regard to the passage of time," Mr Davis said.
"If a husband doesn't remember the date of his marriage, does that mean he didn't get married?" he asked.
March 19, 2010
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)