Sir Gerald lashes out at fellow QC and other lawyers

6
Queen's Counsel, Sir Gerald Watt

Sir Gerald Watt QC has once again called out his fellow members of the Bar Association. This time, he referenced their release of two weeks ago, which condemned his criticism of the Barbuda Airport injunction judgement, as, “Senseless, rambling, and wordy.”

Watt did not stop there, however, as he further went on to label his fellow Queen’s Counsel Justin Simon as, “vainglorious” and “self-righteous”.

“Justin Simon QC,” Watt said in his release, “…being his usual sanctimonious self, proceeded to launch a personal and unwarranted attack on me.”

“I ought not to be surprised at Simon’s personal attack, and the manner in which it was personalized, after all, he was just being his vainglorious, self-righteous self, but I do take umbrage at the fact that he failed to contact me, and ascertain my side of the matter before launching his attack.”

Watt says that, “Following Simon’s instruction, the Bar Council did not write to me but instead proceeded to publish a senseless, rambling, and wordy, press release, in which they quoted extensively from the Code of Ethics…and all of this simply as a result of the unfortunate use of ONE word – [“madness”].”

The Queens Counsel did not only refer to the judgement as “madness”, however. In his interview on Pointe FM, he also described the court’s decision as being “terrible” and “bad” while referring to the association members themselves as, “A useless lot.”

In further defiance to the Bar’s press release, Watt went on to point out two leading attorneys – Deborah Burnett and Sherri-Ann Bradshaw – who he described as generally being, “Exceedingly rude, coarse and disrespectful to fellow attorneys and are frequently rude and disrespectful in the face of the Court.”

Sir Gerald, emboldened by the recent overturn of by the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal said, “ Notwithstanding the brouhaha caused by Observer, Simon, and the Bar Council, it turns out that my criticism of a part of the Judge’s order was legally correct, and indeed I used very similar words and reasoning except for the word ‘madness’.”

“While, I accept that I could and should have used a word other than ‘madness’, my criticism of the decision could not be said to have been unreasonable, harsh or disrespectful.”

CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHATSAPP GROUP

6 COMMENTS

Comments are closed.