JACQUI QUINN: ‘I am hurt by what this government has done to me’

39

Jacqui Quinn has given notice that she will be challenging the charges which were bright against her in the bus conversion case, calling it malicious prosecution.

“I am hurt, I am hurt by what this government has done to me,” Quinn said Tuesday after High Court Judge Justice Colin Williams returned a formal verdict of ‘not guilty’ in the corruption scandal which also involved former UPP ministers Harold Lovell and Wilmoth Daniel.

“Seven year of my life, my reputation has been sullied and I am going to put this government on notice that I am going to challenge this because this is malicious prosecution that has happened, that has dragged on for all these years in order to bring down the leadership of the United Progressive Party — Mr. Harold Lovell.

Support Antigua Newsroom from as little as $5 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you.

39 COMMENTS

  1. This has been DISMISSED for the second time now. Is the Government going to Appeal this matter to waste more taxpayers money? This is not Prosecution. It is now seen by me as Political Persecution.

  2. First things first Jacqui. Try to get your name cleared. And what and whom are you going to sue for. There is a crime committed and the evidence so far points to you. Nothing wrong in the state filing charges against you. How smart can you be. There is no malice is that.

      • Why do you think we have an appeals court and a Privy Council? If we believe that we did not get the right justice in the lower court, we take our case to a higher court. And we can do so. All the way up to the Privy Council. Once we have the legal grounds to do so. In the USA it is more difficult to get your case heard by an appeals court and even worst by the Supreme Court. And I’ll take as example the Allen Stanford case. Each time he tried to get a retrial he was denied. Such would not happened in our justice system.

    • Hey “From the Sideline”, good points. I think the old gal already knows that. Is this another attention getting tactic? If I were her, I’d suggest she lay pretty low for awhile, and don’t make any rash decisions. Chill.

    • Be careful. The outcome of the case says none of them committed a crime. Where was the “crime committed”? Protect the medium please.

    • From the Sidelines:Her name was cleared by the Court.You are just a fat pig in Gaston’s pocket.Why not tell Gaston to turn over that matter of his so called forged signature to the Police.Let us all see that person who thief from the Country.All of you in Gaston’s inner circle are free loaders and thieves in my opinion.Yes,thieves !! Max Wurst did say the person should repay the monies. They did not want to embarrass him. That should have been a matter for the PO-PO to decide,not Linohel Wurst.

    • You HACK. It’s Political Bull shit dude. I used to believe you were an independent mind but it seems like you kissed the ring or whatever you clowns are kissing these days. This is more cultural than criminal. I would hope you were a person that would be for country but sadly you are JUST AN OLD POLITICAL HACK. Disclaimer: I have no party. I am only for the good of the African peoples who earned our respect though the shedding of our blood. Leave the damm people alone or expose dirty draws yourself as well.

  3. What more does Jackie want??? She already got nearly US$500,000.00 “”gifted”” to her from TAXPAYER’S MONIES via Medical Benefits. She tek the bus and register it in her name. What more “gifts” she want from this country????

  4. FROM THE SIDELINE it does not seem as if you are very smart. Isn’t the dismissal by the court today of the frivolous politically motivated charges a clearing of her name? What else do you want?

    • No actually he is very smart. He even used to sound like a fair and just man. All of a sudden he like you have become one sided in a time when we need leaders to motivate and pull the people together so we can pull out of this economy. There is real work to be done for the people of Antigua. You must admit they way they processed the busses was not the right way, but we must be culturally competent especially about ourselves. There were no criminal content and case dismissed. Jackie in the best interest of country should drop it and find a positive cause for the people with that energy. Go do something for the less fortunate.

    • Charles the very same Jacqui was very vocal against the CCJ and had a lot to say about our court system. How the judges collude with the politician. Did the judge in this case colluded with her? And you as an officer of the bench should never make such a statement that the charges were politically motivated. Cause you know and that such thing does not exist in our political system. We have a separation of the three branches of government. And the UPP has experience that more than any other party. They tried to take ALP member to court on corruption charges and they even went as far to lead the investigation out of the PM’s office by hiring a special prosecutor. They also fired the entire top of police hired outside Canadian Mounty Police. You name it they tried. And the result was always the same. The charges were dismissed by the court each time. The court has remained their independence every time. Shame on you as a lawyer for making such a public claim. You tried prosecuting Cutie Benjamin, even when the DPP said there was no case to answer, and the end result from the court was just that. I do not talk about the legal argument in this case. But having gotten busses from the government and people of South Korea and the busses ended up in three minister’s names. That to me smells of corruption. As they did not pay for it. And there is no corresponding to suggest that the government of South Korea send this specifically to them. When we have the proof that two of the buses were used for political campaigns as they were outfitted in UPP party colors and seen on the road as well during the election time that tell be there was personal benefit of the use those two buses. When one bus in particular was totally outfitted as a mobile brothel, that too tells me there was personal benefit from this bus. I mean the government of South Korea must have been very disgusted with the use of these buses the so gladly donated to us. They will of course not get into our internal politics, but I do not think we can ever approach them for any such donation in the future. That is the consequence of the misbehavior in public office that these three have displayed. And for the judge in my opinion to come to his conclusion that there is no case to answer, that the prosecution did not make a compelling case, and did not proof that the buses were the property of the government? That I call BS. Legally he may be right. But we know this is far from the truth. Reminds me of the OJ Simpson case. Everyone knew all the evidence pointed to OJ and was convinced he would be found guilty. However, a technicality causes them to lose the case and OJ was set free. But people know he was guilty. Even the judge knew he was guilty. I know they are guilty of converting government property unto their name. I also believe they are guilty of having used them for their own benefit. But proving this in court is another thing.

      • @from the Sideline
        Funny you mentioned OJ Simpson. The glove didn’t fit. The couple drops of blood was from the vials the prosecution took from OJ. They admitted they took the blood to his house. One man murdered two people with a knife and nobody heard anything. I guess one stood by and watched the other one being murdered. A lot of people like you would like to think OJ was guilty, but a lot of us think you shouldn’t win a case on planted evidence. Convictions should not be depended on people’s emotions and what they think, but on credible evidence.
        Anyway OJ is in the past. The jury decided just like the judge decided in the bus case.
        Do you think all the other cases involving theft of government assets should be brought to court? How can anybody take you seriously when you only see wrong in anything related to UPP? You are showing your red colours.

      • By the way FROM THE SIDELINE, just to clear up an erroneous point that you are making, what the Privy Council said in the Cutie Benjamin matter is that the DPP could not intervene in a police investigation and that Cutie Benjamin had a case to answer. Where is that case? Once a police investigation is complete and charges are laid, it is then up to the DPP to go forward or not. In a case that has started the DPP has the power to nolle prosequi the matter i.e., stop it.

        • And what did the DPP did? He threw out the case. And the same way you guys tried to bring charges against Tanny Rose. It took years of court appearance. And remember you guys brought in special prosecutor, went to parliament to make special provision that gave the man powers more than the police. That what was political harassment. How often was Asot Michael’s house not raided. You took Gaston Browne to court and lost also. You guys are known to have committed these political harassments of your opponents. But you will be silent about that. This was a case that was solely brought by the DPP. And as I said you as a lawyer know the truth that there is no political interference when it comes to that independent position. But because of the politics you will make that claim. And that is sad. Jacqui made the life of Qwen Tong so miserable that the woman had to do a lone protesting. And what did she call her? “Rag Tag”. And now because of her own doing she wants people to feel pity for her. Give me a break. And you better educate her that there is no one she can sue for the charges brought against her by the DPP. She should be grateful to the Lord and count her blessing and pray that this is the end. Cause the DPP can appeal the decission. I personally hope he will.

  5. Jakie! Sue them rass some of them is just fuc***ing Glaston clown I fuck***ing dislike you from sinse you force vaccine mandate on people, you are the devil you and you Government. Am voting upp this time

    • Hey “Voting Upp”…what’s with all of the filthy language? Or is that the rum talking? Get it together. No need for nasty words, or is that the way you were brought up? You might need help. Chuups. Pull yourself together.

  6. One day, I was walking up a highway on the top of St.John’s. I heard a quarreling between a fellow and his brods. A voice say. A wah mek you fellas a go an so fah. Don’t you know you hava crush UPP in order to stay in power. You can spare no charge, no allegation or even propaganda.

    There is no real chance to beat them. We must crank up the machine. The big red machine.

    We must tek them to court. Control the narrative. Mek them spend them money. Fu hafu hire a lawyer.

    The day has come when the court say they’ve been vindicated from all them charge. Stone must be balling in his corner. With his thumb inna he mout. Shouting, a hate the damn aacourt! Antigua should be like Venezuela.

    Where I can lock the opposition and throw way the key. I am going to loose the election and them go cum after me. Well Stone it’s love we love. We want to see the back of you!

    So hide up you money in the Arabia sea. All the land transaction.So prepare Maria to go back to work and hide up every ting. Because UPP a go cum after we. As soon as we loose the election.

    Yes Stone. It’s love we love we love you……

  7. Jackie Quinn what about what you have done to this country? You LOWER THE PASS MARK for exams. You call the elderly RAG TAG. You instituted a BRAIN DRAIN of teachers from the education system. You put on a nasty dirty conduct and told them to take that in their nehnen

  8. Did the trio included these buses as parts of their assets when they did their filings with the Integrity Commission after they were received?

    • JUST SAYING they did not have to disclose the buses as assets with the Integrity Commission since they were not their assets. I hope Gaston Browne disclose all of his assets. Then again his assets might be in persons names fronting for him or in companies so their is no disclosure.

      • CT..thanks. I like the retrofitted bus Daniel had and was thinking we can go on a boys lime since you don’t want to be seen going into those establishment. I do understand the pretentious image that must be set. So tell me quick when we can have access to the bus so I can organise further. By the way what you prefer “fluffy” or “slimmers”?

        • JUST SAYING you know that I am not interested in your type of nocturnal activities and it is not pretentiousness. The buses are in the possession of the police or government and if they are still roadworthy they can be used for the purpose for which they were intended i.e., transportation of senior citizens in the community. The government need to find a way to put the donation of the buses from South Korea into use.

      • Whose asset were they then? Cause the Judge said that the prosecution didn’t proof that the buses were the government. So, are you saying having the busses in their name does not mean that it is their assets? I thought ownership is demonstrated by the registration at the Transport Board in your name. You’re making some real contradictory statements.

        • FROM THE SIDELINE my statements are not contradictory. The buses were donated to Antigua and Barbuda by the South Korean government. These buses it was agreed would be allocated to various communities to facilitate the transportation of senior citizens, which was seen as a dire need. The buses were never transfered into the name of the government. When the buses arrived in Antigua, cleared from the Customs and taken to the Transport Board the three defendants were advised to go to the Transport Board and obtain the buses. In order for that to happen the buses had to be insured and licensed. Th defendants did that since that is the only way the buses could be driven out of the Transport Board. The agreement was that the buses would be used for community service. The buses were used for that purpose. What then was the issue may I ask. This was all a politically motivated case and being an officer of the court does not mean that that statement cannot be made. The Audit the Department was doing an investigation into the financial operation of our UN Mission between the years 2009 to 2015. The buses arrived here in 2008 and because the government was looking for some kind of wrongdoing it mandated the Audit Department to look at the years 2006 to 2008 as well. Even the blind and deaf could discern that this whole frivolous court case was nothing more than politics. If you cannot see it fine.

          • CT..so here is my question since you are in the know. With regard to the yellow registration card that TB issues who was listed as the owner?

  9. Anyone who condone such despicable behavior in public office by so called political leaders are nothing more than political prostitutes, sanctimonious hypocrites. You have lost any decency and credibility. What they did was absolutely wrong? The judge say they weren’t civil servants that’s why he dismissed the case. Politicians always find a way to get away. Whilst you dumbtards will be jailed if the same dishonest acts committed by anyone of you. You guys are so pathetic and disgraceful. Stopped following good fu nothing politicians so blindly.The sad thing some you’ll called yourself Christians.

  10. gaston election trump card gone a guassa. poor ting. he think everybody get fool by he stupidness. is plenty young people vex vex vex with alp and we waiting to fix dem bad come election.

  11. JUST SAYING you know that a vehicle cannot leave the Transport Board unless it is insured and licensed. The defendants were trustees of the buses and therefore insured and licensed them so that they could go on the road. A name had to be put on the Transport Board yellow card hence their names were put. You would recall that Dr. Errol Cort got a bus for St. John’s Rural East that was used in the community. In that case, the HOPE INSTITUTE insured and licensed the bus. The HOPE INSTITUTE could do that because it was a registered legal entity. Dr. Cort used the HOPE INSTUTUTE but he could have done the same thing that the defendants did if he did not have the agency of the INSTITUTE to go forward. JUST SAYING in either case their is no illegality. Please try to understand that.

      • Ok you know my identity. When your identity is revealed I will take you up on the offer for Daniel and myself to go on a lime with you. Give me a call

    • I guess you’ll provide the evidence of the Trust Agreement between the Government of Antigua and Barbuda and the three defendants. Cause unless there is no such document what you say is BS. And there are procedures as to how to go about disposing of Government Assets.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here