Captain Willock secures another victory against the ABDF
The Honorable Justice Jan Drysdale, on November 12, 2024, delivered her judgment in the of Javonson Willock v Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) and Attorney General.
Captain Willock’s case before the High Court commenced because the CDS intended to revoke Willock’s indefinite commission and grant a short-term commission, which would have seen Willock’s career coming to a premature end.
Willock also asked the court to investigate the circumstances surrounding why he was not promoted despite Mr Samuel Roberts, who was junior, being elevated in rank before him.
Justice Drysdale found favor with the CDS who said that Willock remains under investigation over allegations of misconduct dating back to 2020.
Willock, however, gave evidence that he was notified that the investigation into his alleged misconduct would have restarted in October 2023. Over a year later, the investigation has not commenced, which Willock says is a deliberate act to continue to deny his promotion.
The Judge also denied Willock’s promotion citing a lack of vacancies. However, Willock says there is no shortage of vacancies when some of his colleagues are filling multiple portfolios and, Commissioned Officers who have far exceeded the mandatory age of retirement are still holding office in the ABDF.
Willock, who is not satisfied with the Judge’s decision, already hinted at his intention to appeal.
In a previous ruling, Justice Drysdale awarded Willock $25,000 in damages, but the decision was appealed on several basis including that the sum was inordinately low and that the Judge’s decision was motivated by bias.
We understand that before Willock gave evidence, Justice Drysdale, in open court, told counsel for the claimant to manage his client’s expectations because the court had a figure in mind to award Willock.
We also understand that Willock has since made efforts to retrieve the recording from the High Court, but was told that the entire proceeding for the day in question was not recorded due to technical difficulties.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
See why I don’t want any part to play in this ya Babylon system.
When you give your all and slave out for them this is what you get, injustice, bare oppression and fight down, bid mindedness and bias evil people all around you trying to sink your ship.
But brother, where there is will there is a way, walk with God and he will fight all your battles for you. Wicked set of people trying to block your every move, but the God we serve can sweep them away as he pleases, he can blot them out from this earth forever and ever if he pleases, they must all remember that. God doesn’t like unfair people, dishonest scales, a lying tongue, he delights in his judgement.
May fair justice be served to you my brother.
Is he married?
“Justice Drysdale found favor with the CDS who said that Willock remains under investigation over allegations of misconduct dating back to 2020.”
“The Judge also denied Willock’s promotion citing a lack of vacancies.”
“Willock, who is not satisfied with the Judge’s decision, already hinted at his intention to appeal.”
Based on these quotes from the story, Willock did NOT secure any additional victory because the ruling regarding the $25,000 in damages was made previously. That is why the last quote indicated that he is dissatisfied with the latest ruling and will appeal. This story does NOT comport with the headline.
I can see all the handiwork of Wendel Alexander (formerly Robinson) all over this post. These lawyers plant stories to sway public opinion and it is reprehensible, as per their legal code. May I remind that Wendel Alexander previously indicated that based on the questions the judge was asking that he expected victory. Now, it has been proven that his previous pronouncements were all intended to mislead ht public. Now that the judge has ruled, it would cause the unsuspecting to say that the trial and the judge rigged the case.
It’s all a part of the modus operandi of these rogue lawyers.
Court sounds bias and the lack of the recording of the opening statement is inexcusable. I believe it was recorded and base on the bias opening statement if he appeals the recording will go against this court.
Its not just to say he is junior to you he has more experience and qualities at the rank stop misleading people when you single out Mr Roberts you know exactly what you were doing when you single him out.
Comments are closed.