Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Withdrawal can mean any of the following:

1. As an esteemed lawyer herself, Justice Singh understands the case is a futile attempt to ursup the inevitable and does not wish to waste her precious time.

2. Justice Singh understands President Granger will be sworn in as President for a second term and no longer wishes to support the applicant's case. This can only mean she agrees with Lowenfield's report.

3. This was all a chess move. Make your enemies think they have won until the very last moment when they are trapped in their own web of lies.

Like I said - good luck PPP/C supporters.

 

Stay safe, Justice Singh.

Rochelle
Last edited by Rochelle
@Rochelle posted:

Withdrawal can mean any of the following:

1. As an esteemed lawyer herself, Justice Singh understands the case is a futile attempt to ursup the inevitable and does not wish to waste her precious time.

2. Justice Singh understands President Granger will be sworn in as President for a second term and no longer wishes to support the applicant's case. This can only mean she agrees with Lowenfield's report.

3. This was all a chess move. Make your enemies think they have won until the very last moment when they are trapped in their own web of lies.

Like I said - good luck PPP/C supporters.

 

Stay safe, Justice Singh.

She does not want to waste time.  After 4 months she cannot declare the results of March 02 Election, and you have the balls to say that she does not want to waste time?

R

Rochelle needs to go back to law school or whatever school she went to. Claudette Singh never withdrew from the CCJ appeal. People with big mouth spreading false information to fan the flames of hatred and division need to be locked up in a cage.

Please tell me what false information can be ascertained from the below:

"...we do not wish to actively participate in the appeal"

"...we do not wish to make to make any submissions"

I'll wait....

Rochelle
@Rochelle posted:

Is this coming from the same man that said the Court of Appeal had no jurisdiction to hear the case, and the COA actually heard the case?

 

 

And while u are waiting, please tell me why Jagdeo and the PPP needs to Assuage the General public if there's no proof of them having anything to do with the bombing of that Journalist car. Why couldn't it be any other party?

And so u know, I'm not a PPP or APNU supporter. Can't stand neither of the two.

Sheik101
@Sheik101 posted:

And while u are waiting, please tell me why Jagdeo and the PPP needs to Assuage the General public if there's no proof of them having anything to do with the bombing of that Journalist car. Why couldn't it be any other party?

And so u know, I'm not a PPP or APNU supporter. Can't stand neither of the two.

You're not going to bait me in trying to get this post closed, too. 

If you want to speak on that matter, PM me or create a new thread. 

Back on the topic at hand....

Rochelle
@Former Member posted:

Stay safe and FOCUS Rochelle 

Image may contain: text that says 'Mohabir Anil Nandlall 3mins mins The Chair has not

This is all about semantics and Nandlall letting his political bias influence his professional honesty.  The statement from Justice Singh's lawyer to the CCJ is shown in Rochelle's initial post.  It's in plain English: GECOM will not actively participate in the hearing and will not make any submissions.  Nandlall whose pronouncements are treated as gospel by PPP supporters interprets the letter for his own purposes .  Why don't people read and make up their minds rather than having Nandlall tell them what to think.  

T
@Totaram posted:

This is all about semantics and Nandlall letting his political bias influence his professional honesty.  The statement from Justice Singh's lawyer to the CCJ is shown in Rochelle's initial post.  It's in plain English: GECOM will not actively participate in the hearing and will not make any submissions.  Nandlall whose pronouncements are treated as gospel by PPP supporters interprets the letter for his own purposes .  Why don't people read and make up their minds rather than having Nandlall tell them what to think.  

Sanjeev Datadin Roy Beepat ... not so ... sheโ€™s a Respondent and cannot withdraw ... the letter is not unusual and indicates she wishes, upon reflection, to not make submissions to the Court ... still a party and submissions to court of Appeal is still a matter of record

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×