COMMENTARY: Lawyer Obtains Piracy Order From Court Of Lunacy


By Rawlston Pompey


When the nation of ‘Antigua and Barbuda’ formally severed the ‘Umbilical Cord of Colonialism’ from the United Kingdom, a new nation was born [November 1st, 1981]. The people proclaimed a desire to establish a framework of ‘Supreme Law,’ within which to guarantee their inalienable human rights and freedoms.’ These speak to; (a) ‘…Liberty; (b) …Property; (c) …Security; (d) …Legal redress; (e) …Speech; (f) …Press; (g) …Assembly; and (h) …Assembly.’ That which has always been conveniently or deliberately omitted has been a most fundamental clause. It advises that in the enjoyment of these rights and freedoms, they are; ‘Subject to the public interest. In other words, the ‘Public interest,’shall supersede that of the ‘Individual’ [CO: 1981: Principle: ‘E’].


These provisions appear to be inconsistent with the; (i) ‘…Founding Constitutional Principle’ [Principle: ‘D’]: nor of (ii) … The Supreme Law.’ To all intents and purposes, the former unambiguously states; (a) ‘…This Constitution is the ‘Supreme Law’ of Antigua and Barbuda; (b) …If any other law is inconsistent with this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail; and (c) …To the extent of the inconsistency, the other law shall be void’ [CO: 1981: Section 2]. Judicial officers- (i) ‘…Judges; (ii) …Masters; and (iii) …Registrars’ that have been empowered under the ‘Absconding Debtors Act,’ particularly as it relates to the issuance of ‘Warrant of Arrest’ [Section 2], shall know that the ‘Lawrepresents the ‘Public Conscience’ and that irrespective of their; (a) ‘…Social; (b) …Professional; and (c) …Financial status,’ every citizen owes to it an undivided allegiance’ [CO: 1981: FCP: ‘D’].


For this commentary, while the focus will be on certain procedural aspects that operate within; (i) ‘…The Judiciary; (ii) …Its behavior; (iii) …That of Applicant/Claimant; (iv) …Treatment of Respondent/Defendant; and (v) …Certain provision contained in the Absconding Debtor Act.’ The contents reflect seized facts. This will include a scenario respecting; ‘Obtaining Money Under False Pretence.’ This particular crime often starts with a fraudster; intellectual or otherwise. Her/she; (a) ‘…States an existing fact; (b) …Disguised by the element of deception; and (c) …Followed by an inducement.’ Professional training, knowledge and practice focuses on ‘Intent; Word and Conduct.’


Whether rightly or wrongly, citizens have almost always heard pejorative terms’ being often been used in describing the behavior, either within, or by the ‘Judiciary.’ Likened to members of the wider society, litigants have often used such terms as; (i) ‘…Corrupt Justice System; (ii) …Racketeering; (iii) …Crookedness; and (iv) …Graft-taking’ among a very small minority of ‘Judicial Staff.’ Such often tend to place even ‘Judicial officers’ under ‘Public Scrutiny.’ It has been the knowledge that the ‘Judiciary’ has often found itself in dire need of competent ‘Judicial officers.’ Thus, for efficiency and effectiveness in the administration of justice, the judicial system shall at all material times, be properly staffed with officers sufficiently au fait with national laws and adjudicating procedures. These are not only critical for effectiveness, but also in guiding informed and rational judicial decisions.


Even as ‘Chief Justice of the ‘Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (ECSC)’ Dame Janice Pereira has been promoting the Court as the ‘Beacon of Hope,’ for many litigants, some ‘Judicial officers’ have been promoting it as a ‘Place of Horror.’ Thus, it shall please the ‘Chief Justice’ if ‘Judicial officers’ shall not allow craving or provide indulgence of expedition to those with the proclivity to enrich themselves by fleecing the unsuspecting victims. Even though those destined to the place where there will only be ‘Fire and Brimstone,’ some professionals seem hell bent on taking as much wealth with them.


It still remains the knowledge that among the mantra of ‘Law enforcement officers’ are; (i) ‘…Protect the weak against the strong; and (ii) …The innocent against deception.’ Judicial officers appeared to have paved the way for ‘Professional Fraudsters’ to ‘Obtain Money Under False Pretence.’ Fundamental to the crime of ‘Obtaining Money by False Pretence,’ are dishonesty, the intent or mens rea, and deprivation of property. Likened to the magician using ‘Sleight of Hands,’ the fraudster often; (a) ‘…Conjures up a story (words); (b) …Induces a state of mind that often leads victim to believe a fact exists); (c) …Victim accepts as fact (deceived) and acts to his/her detriment.’


Just about 3pm, Friday [March 23, 2021], the judicial foundation of the nation may have been shaken when the frantic ‘Son-in-law’ of a ‘seventy-two (72) year-old Respondent/Defendant’ approached my adjacent residence. He informed that ‘Police officers’ had arrested his ‘Mother-in-law.’  He revealed that it related to ‘an unpaid Invoice in the sum of EC$ 44, 495’ for certain professional services obtained at a certain medical facility. Though no personnel were seen, from professional knowledge of such visitation, it was obvious that the Law enforcement were either requested by; (a) …Law Firm or (b) …A Bailiff of the High Court of Justice,’ merely to ‘Prevent Breaches of the Peace.’ This has always been part of the service rendered to the public. In the absence of a Police officer, all ‘Hell has, and could break loose’ at any time.


Interestingly, one (1) day after the ‘Settled Draft Order’ had been made, before the ‘Debtor’ could have prayed; ‘…Dear Lord, heal my foot; and …Help me to find a way to settle this outrageous and exorbitant bill,’ a convoy consisted of two ‘Police vehicles’ was at her ‘Light Foote Residence.’ In the ‘Master’s Chambers,’ the third-party‘Deponed Debtor’ appeared to have found herself ‘Tightly and helplessly wedged’ between two ‘High-Profile Professionals’ and the Court. She was brought before the Court on a ‘Warrant of Arrest.’ This was obtained clearly by statements not entirely consistent with truth, but partially ‘Pregnant with Deception.’

FORK OUT – FORK IN – EC$10, 000

When the demand was made for full settlement of EC$44, 495. 000,’ the only way this may have been possible, was if she was possessed a concealed weapon and there and robbed; (i) ‘…The two Doctors; (ii) …Bailiff and; (ii) …The Master,’ then pay the loot through the ‘Registrar of the Court.’ It appeared that the ‘Other side of Fate’ stepped in, thus, availed time to ‘Fork out and Fork’ into a law firm the sum of ‘EC$10, 000’ on a ‘Court Fixed Date’ [March 29, 2021].


Not infrequently citizens have been given reasons to view this institution as often being exploited by people with adequacy of means to oppress those starved of such luxury. It shall be warned that those that graced the ‘Halls of Justice’to; (i) ‘…Sits as arbiters or adjudicators; (ii) …Interprets the nation’s Laws; (iii) …Administrate and dispense justice,’ shall know that they have as much a responsibility to protect the ‘Unrepresented Litigants,’ as they may show to high-profile Attorneys, representing high-profile litigants/clients.


The Court’s Bailiff executed the ‘Master’s Warrant of Arrest’ upon the third-party ‘Deponed Debtor,’ that saw her whisked away to the ‘High Court of Justice.’ There was no opportunity to engage the services of a practicing attorney. Having no immediate visible means so to do, even as the sun was brightly shining, to her, it was as cold as a ‘Winter night in Alaska.’ Many people so financially-deprived, have seen people financially well-positioned influencing the expedition of matters that are filed, ‘less than seventy-two (72) hours,’ being hastily rushed to a ‘Judge’s Chamber’ for judicial consideration. If there was hope, the elderly Defendant saw no ‘Beacon.’ Neither could she believe that she was going to be served with ‘Egg and Bacon.’


The ‘Creditor/Claimant’ deponed that the ‘Debtor’ intends to abscond from this jurisdiction. This appeared not to have been contained in his ‘Affidavit.’ Then when; (i) ‘…A learned Judge; or (ii) …Master; or (iii) Registrar’ reads that which was deponed that; ‘…I was informed that the Defendant intends to leave Antigua very shortly to travel to the United States where she permanently resides,’ only a nincompoop would believe she ‘intends to ‘Abscond.’  Consequent upon the ‘Filed Affidavit,’ he applied for and obtained a ‘Warrant of Arrest’ for the falsely assumed‘Absconding Debtor.’ In support of this contention, this was what the ‘Applicant/Claimant,’ under ‘Oath’ deponed; ‘…(i) …I do not know the precise flight for travel; (i) …I verily believe that the Defendant could be located at Light Foote, St. George’ [ANUHCV: ***: Paragraph 5: March 22, 2021].


It was obvious that Parliament intended that Students at the ‘Clare Hall Secondary School’ shall know ‘The Law.’Moreover, ‘Principal Ashworth Azille’ shall properly instruct them. This is in the hope that in pursuit of a ‘Legal Education,’ some may be appointed to sit on the ‘Bench,’ to make informed ‘Judicial Decisions.’ The law stipulates the;‘…Form of Affidavit.’ It states; ‘…The intention of the Defendant to quit Antigua and Barbuda on the same or another Affidavit; (i) ‘…Showing satisfactorily the ground on which the deponent believes; (ii). The date on which; (iii) …The place for which the debtor proposes to leave; and (iii) …As far as the same is known to the deponent’ [Section 5: Absconding Debtors Act: Chapter 3].


Seemingly under hypnosis or ‘Sleight of Intellect, ‘a ‘Master’ at the ‘High Court of Justice,’ seemingly not up to, or capable of matching the collective intellect of two smart professionals, appeared to have accepted that such may have been the case. A ‘Judicial officer -Judge or Master or Registrar’ reading an ‘Affidavit’ that constituted an ‘Application for ‘Warrant of Arrest,’ shall have seen that given the contents contained therein, speaks to two possibilities; (i) ‘… Warrant of Arrest was ‘Perjuriously Issued; or (ii) …The law may have been inadvertently overlooked or conveniently ignored. It begs the question, ‘What manner of Judge is appointed to make decisions affecting the movement of a person entitled to enjoy, without hindrance, hurdles or obstacles, such freedom?’


The ‘Judicially Crude’ and inconsiderate treatment of the timid and traumatized ‘elderly American citizen’ may have caused the ‘Master, Her Ladyship, Justice Jan Drysdale’ to review the rather hasty way the matter came to her ‘Chambers.’ Incidentally, if not ironically, there had been no existing ‘Judgment Order’ for execution by the ‘Provost Marshall’ or a High Court’s Bailiff.’ Even so, consequent upon the ‘Warrant of Arrest’ so issued, a Bailiff was lawfully-bound to cause her to respond as the Court ordered [Section 2: Absconding Debtors Act: Chapter 3]. Given the urgency and Affidavit-omitted requirements of the law, upon reflections, she may now be convinced that the ‘Respondent/Defendant,’ was not in fact ‘an Absconding Debtor.


There had been no ‘Cause of Action’ for immediate hearing and determination. The ‘Settled Draft Order,’ speaks to two frightening elements of; (i) ‘…Coercion; and (ii) Intimidation.’ It frighteningly states; (i) ‘…A Warrant of Arrest be issued to arrest the Defendant/Respondent to bring her before the Court to; (b) …Show cause why she should not give ‘Security’ for the payment of EC$44, 495. 00 owing to the Claimant/Applicant; or (b) …Committed to Her Majesty’s Prison; (ii) …The Applicant/Claimant do serve the ‘Claim Form and Statement of Claim’ on the Respondent within seven (7) days from the date of this Order; and (iii) …The Respondent/Defendant do pay to the Claimant cost of the application in the sum of $1, 000. 000’ [March 22, 2021].


Compelled to making a ‘Limping-Appearance’ before a ‘Master’ at the ‘High Court of Justice,’ with a visible clinical adhesive applied to the affected part of the foot, neither Counsel for the Claimant, nor the Court’ may have denied that the ‘Respondent/Defendant’ had suffered some discomfiture. The other persons present were; (i) …The non-adjudicating Master of the Court; (ii) …Arresting Bailiff; (iii) …Applicant/Claimant; and (iv) …a live-in Son-in-law.’ A demand for a ‘Part Payment of the reportedly prompted the frantic ‘Respondent’ into a response: ‘You are asking for a million dollars’ [ANUHC: March 23, 2021.’By this, reasonable inferences may have been drawn that the ‘Respondent’ may have been asking the the High Court Master;’ ‘Your Honor, are you allowing the Claimant to use the Judiciary to financially amputate my leg?’ Heaven, help them all.


The reported matchless legal address to the Court by the trained and practicing attorney and the eloquence of his high-profile client, left her speechless and defenceless’ before the ‘Short-Tenured Master’ of the Court [February 18, 2021 – March 31, 2021]. Seemingly sensed a ‘Judicial Blunder,’ she was eventually discharged by the ‘Master….’ Moreover; the Court, in contemplation of incarceration, ordered her to (i) …Show Cause why she should not be committed to Her Majesty’s Prison;’ (ii) …The Applicant/Claimant to serve the Claim Form and Statement of Claim on the Respondent/Defendant within seven (7) days from the date of this Order; and (iii) …Respondent/Defendant to pay to the Claimant Cost of the Application in the sum of EC$1, 000.’ The Order finally states; ‘…The Claimant shall have carriage of this Order’ [March 22, 2021].


The apparent ‘Contentious Invoice,’ supported by an Affidavit and rushed to a ‘Master’ of the High Court of Justice’for judicial consideration under provisions contained in the ‘Absconding Debtors Act’ [Chapter 3], may have been placed on ‘an Imbalanced Scale of Justice.’ Judges shall always be mindful of provisions provided for; (i) ‘…Equal treatment before the Court; and (ii) …Protection of law.’ The ‘Master,’ seemingly not guided by the constitutional guarantees, may have wished the Court’s Bailiff may have been more considerate. The unnerving experience of the ‘Respondent/Defendant not only speaks to an urgent necessity, but more careful selection and appointment of ‘Judicial Officers,’ with the capacity to make informed ‘Judicial Decisions.’ deserves.


Astoundingly, this has been the experience of a ‘seventy-two (72) year-old American citizen’ and retiree, resident in this nation for a legitimate period of five (5) years.’ In the Affidavit’ that seemed ‘Pregnant with Deception,’ while she may have ‘Neglected to settle Debt,’ it may have been a ‘Perjurious Falsehood’ to have deponed that; (i) …She has the means to pay; (ii) …Refused to pay; and that (iii) …She has no defence to the specified sum EC$44, 495. 00 Claimed as per Invoice.’ Without the conduct of a ‘Judicial Means Test,’ it appeared insufficient procedural knowledge may also have factored in the issuance of the ‘Warrant of Arrest.


By a Creditor/Claimant, a Respondent/Defendant had been deponed as a potential ‘Absconding Debtor.’ While private matters were to the knowledge of the Claimant, he demonstrated sheer adamance that the Defendant shall not leave the jurisdiction without the immediate settlement-arrangements was necessary. Considering the ‘Lightening Speed’ some litigious matters have been fixtured, for ‘Bench’ for adjudication or in ‘Chambers’ for urgent judicial consideration.’ Though that which was not heard or done in open Court was often given credence, some developments in camera, often raises suspicion, provoke consternation and/or public outrage. The ‘Particularized Claim NO: ANUHCV2021/***’supports unchallengeable facts addressed by a ‘Master’ within the Judiciary.


Sequentially, these represents ‘Uncontroverted Facts.’ Thus, it is in the vested interest of; (a) ‘…The Judiciary; (b) …General public; and (c) …Judicial and Legal Services Commission (JLSC),’ these developments are highlighted. The records at the ‘High Court of Justice’ shall not fail to show that ‘Claim Forms and Statement of Claim’ were; (i) ‘…Duly signed by an Attorney-at-law and (ii) …Submitted to the High Court of Justice at 13.45hrs or 1.45pm at Parliament Drive [March 19, 2021]. The particularized ‘Statement of Claim Form’ was purportedly; (i) ‘…Filed at 13. 45hrs [March 19, 2021]; (ii) …Filing Fees of EC$52.00 was paid; (iii) …Affidavit upon personal presentation by a high-profile ‘Claimant,’ the ‘Commissioner of Oath’ administered the Oath to accord both legitimacy and status as a ‘Deponent’(Swearing on Oath to contents); and (iv) …Fees paid EC$22.00 [March 19, 2021]. These, commendably reflect efficiency and professional competency within the ‘Judiciary.’


Be that as it may, still among the most vexing of matters languishing under judicial consideration has been the ‘tragic vehicular accident death’ of Cedar Grove community resident, ‘Andrea Hughes.’ It has been delayed for an eternity, while ‘James ‘Tanny Rose and Sir George Ryan’ have been persistently begging for ‘Judicial Closure.’ Then there are many other ‘Criminal Cases,’ including that of ‘former Antigua and Barbuda Transport Board Manager, ‘Harry Josiah.’ As for those continuing to languish in the penal institution, others not so institutionalized with residency, they too, continue to languish in anxiety, uncertainty and frustration. likened to many others overwhelmed and financially-challenged, there is hardly a way out of misery.


This is the juncture where it shall be made very clear that while conclusions may be drawn, no aspersion shall be made on the revered positions of ‘Judicial Officers,’ or their professionalism, honesty and integrity, and neither ‘Judicial Staff,’ not necessarily considered to have issues that speak to ‘unscrupulous behavior or skullduggery.’ In their ‘judicial functions,’ they shall not only exercise an inherent discretion, but also take ‘Judicial Notice’ of the principle contained in the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights.’ It was so state; ‘…All are equal before the Law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law’ [UDHR: 1948: Article 7].


It has been the professional knowledge and experience that while ‘robbers’ attack victims with guns and knives, the professionals skillfully use their ‘intellect’ in fleecing the innocent and unsuspecting clients. Every precaution has been taken to conceal the identity, and avoid references to, and the identities of the litigating parties. It has not only been the professional knowledge, but also a legal duty to follow the ‘Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.’ However, even with such ‘Code’ and ever dangling consequences, nothing stops a ‘Rogue Cop’ from positioning him/herself to ‘Get something’ and ‘Get into trouble.’


Conversely, nothing stops the ‘Crooked Professionals,’ from using their intellectual skills in ‘Fleecing Clients.’ For it has been the public’s cry that purposeful ‘Consultative Visits’ to the office of certain professionals not endowed with scruples or with a proclivity to engage in fraudulent behavior have the innocent more pain than had been their medical conditions. It may have been for situations like these, that the offence of ‘Fraud’ had been created, primarily to protect the innocent and vulnerable. The Courts, therefore, shall not allow any ‘Abuse of Process.’ Neither shall ‘Judicial officers’ position, or offer themselves to be manipulated.


The scenario contained herein, may help in an understanding of this crime. For instance; (i) ‘…A person ‘Consultatively Visits’ a medical practitioner; (ii) … Medical history is sought;(iii) … If a sore leg, a professional opinion will be given (iv) …Affected foot is examined; (v) …Diagnostic and prognosis are given.’ The practitioner then induces ‘State of Mind’ by a professional advice, that the affected is serious; (a) …May lead to surgical amputation (mind filled with fear and anxiety); and (b) …Practitioner advises that foot could be saved by clinical surgery (relived- fear partially subside).’


As a consequent of such assurances, the ‘Unsuspecting Victim’ agrees to; (i) ‘…Surgery; (ii) …Clinical and surgical formalities, including pre-tests and Vital signs checks are complete; and (iii) …Brief possible cost may or may not be given (opportunity to inflate or deflate Cost). Finally, deception is complete and victim submits to procedure complete;(a) …Observation period of 72 hours or 3 days showed no clinical reaction or instability occurs; (b) …Assurances and encouragement are given; and (iii) …Discharged and given the status of; ‘Out-patient,’ with follow-up treatment.’


Instructively, by way of an Affidavit, the ‘Deponed Claimant’ advised the ‘Court’ that; (i) ‘…The Defendant requires to travel overseas’ for unspecified medically-related care; (ii) …Defendant had personally advised the Claimant of an intention to travel overseas.’ Additionally, they shall know that ‘…It is fundamental that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly be seen to have been done. In the same dicta, he said, ‘…Nothing is to be done which creates even a suspicion that there has been an improper interference with the course of justice.’ [1924: Lord Gordon Hewart: Regina v Sussex: 1KB: 256].


The ‘Master’ appeared to have been guided by the ‘Horse-Bolting Syndrome-’ ‘Close the stable door before it bolted.’ The ‘Respondent/ Defendant’ and former patient and outpatient’ of a certain medical facility was known, the ‘Claimant’ reportedly adamant that a debt of ‘some EC$44, 495. 00’ shall be immediately settled, caused the Judiciary to be visited upon her residence [March 23, 2021. Such debt reportedly incurred for professional services rendered between ‘February 24, 2021 and March 16, 2021,’ saw the unthinkable and unusual. A submitted ‘Invoice’ and an immediate demand for full payment resulted in the issuance of a ‘Warrant of Arrest’ and ‘Deprivation of Liberty.’


Rivers and sunken wells often run dry. So too, are finances with a receivable income. To the young adults to the elderly, indigent or poverty-stricken, and even Governments, including ‘Social Security, in the ‘Twinkle of an eye,’ their finances often dwindle, or dissipates. She was reportedly poised to fork out money from an ‘ant mound to the sum of ‘some EC$10, 000.00.’ This was to represents ‘Part Payment’ primarily principled upon recognition, but not necessarilyacknowledging or confessing the ‘Invoiced Indebtedness’ to a Claimant who had reportedly performed a ‘double-procedure on a foot sore.’ However, with suspectedly poor prognosis of early healing [February 23, 2021]. The reported ‘Invoiced Fees’ were said to have been; (i) ‘…A previously settled ‘Bill for EC$5, 000; and (ii) …Current Invoice for EC$44, 495. 00.’


Most disheartening was an application to the distinguished ‘Master in Chamber’ of the High Court of Justice. Then came the most troubling request; ‘…In the circumstances, I humbly request that this Honourable Court makes the Order prayed for in the application for a ‘Warrant of Arrest’ of the Respondent under the provisions of the ‘Absconding Debtors Act,’ Cap 3 of the Laws of Antigua and Barbuda and that the Respondent does pay the cost of the Application’ [Paragraph 6]. Though deceased practicing attorney ‘Ralph Francis’ had not named this Act, he had privately described it as the ‘Piracy Act.’ Others had described it as the ‘Piracy Court Act.’ This scenario shall neither be associated with any professionally practicing medical officer, operable Clinic or medical facility within this jurisdiction.


For under the provision of the ‘Absconsion of Debt Act’ [Section 8 (2) & (3)], a creditor is procedurally empowered to make ‘an Affidavit Applicant’ with a ‘Statement of Claim’ to a ‘Judge or Registrar of the High Court of Justice.’  This has been the ‘Section’ that often turns creditors and lawyers, Registrars, Masters and Judges.  into characters associated with piracy. Likened to the ‘Queen’s Pirates Francis Drake’ [1540-1596] and Henry Morgan [1635-1688]. Incidentally, the former was nicked ‘The Dragon,’ while the other ‘The Terrible.’ Though not necessarily a frequent occurrence within this jurisdiction, some creditors have exploited situations that have influenced those with; (i) ‘…Money; (ii) …Power; and (‘ii) …Authority’ to act against the poor oppressively.


The minds of those so positioned to wield ‘Judicial Power and Authority,’ often become warped; …intellect manipulated; judgment is impaired, and conscience becomes dead.’ Research has shown that it has often been in such setting ‘Perverse Decisions’ were often made to the disadvantage to a litigating party and detrimental to another.  It appeared to have been in such setting that ‘Piracy Orders’ were often secured upon ‘Sworn Affidavits’ with unproven statements. In the instant Case, the parties present at the ‘In-Camera Hearing,’ were reported to have been; (a) ‘…The Judge; (b) …Claimant; and (c) …Counsel for the Claimant.’ Though it may not have been the case, ‘Chamber Application’ of the provisions appears disadvantageous to a ‘Debtor.’ This appears capable of being called the ‘Court of Justice for Creditors.’


It may have been the specified procedures contained in the ‘Absconding of Debtors Act,’ why it may have been so referred. It states; ‘…The Judge or Registrar, as the case may be, may, if he/she shall think it fit, proceed to dispose of the action by trial thereof, or may direct such action to be set down for trial, irrespective of the amount claim, at the first convenient sitting of the Court’ [Section 8 (2): ADA: Chapter 3]. Parliament anticipating that for ‘Reasons of Expediency,’ it may necessitate hasty resolution. Thus, it further states; ‘…There shall be no pleadings in any such action unless a Judge shall otherwise order, but the Affidavits filed on behalf of the ‘Plaintiff and Defendant’ respectively shall be taken to set forth the respective ‘Grounds of Claim and Defence,’ obey the said order of the Court’ [Section 8 (3)].


Through an apparent grave judicial blunder, a seventy-two (72) year-old retired American citizen,’ resident in Antigua and Barbuda for five (5) years, has seemly suffered the ‘Worst of Indignities.’ This occurred within the ‘Judicial System’ that has resulted from the questionable issuance of a ‘Warrant of Arrest’ as deponed by a Creditor as ‘an Absconding Debtor’ [March 22, 2021]. For academic interest, this was based upon ‘an Affidavit,’ supporting the Application. Instructively, the development showed no prior service of processes of the ‘High Court of Justice; (i) ‘…Claim Form; and (ii) …Statement of Claim,’ either suggested; (a) ‘…Gross incompetency; (b) …Abuse of Process; or (c) …Making mockery of the Judiciary.’ Given these developments, it shall never be perceived by litigants and members of the wider society, that the ‘Judiciary’ is more than willing to subject ‘Meager-Means Defendants’ to the propensities of ‘Affluent Litigants’ with cravings for money to ‘exploit and fleece and pauperize or piratize’ (right or wrong-new word) the innocent and unsuspecting by reasons of their superior intellect, social status, substantial means and exceptional quality of life. ***


Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]


  1. Does this case have anything to do with the fact that the plaintiff is a well known individual on the island who is using his notoriety to make a mockery of judicial processes?

Comments are closed.