標題: Brian Urlacher Bears Jersey of fact or opinion
無頭像
LlzmjJ1r
炽天使
Rank: 3

積分 15176
帖子 12132
威望值 0 ♪
天使币 36394 枚
贡献值 0 ☆
爱心值 0 ♡
活跃度 36394 ☼
註冊 2017-10-13
用戶註冊天數 643
用戶失蹤天數 351
狀態 離線
發表於 2017-12-4 18:16 
36.57.176.45
分享  私人訊息  頂部
By Zena HenryLawyers in the Jagdeo/Kissoon libel case are torn over the admissibility of additional evidence to be presented on behalf of the defence in its obligation to prove that former President Bharrat Jagdeo practiced ideological racism during his term inFormer President Bharrat Jagdeooffice.The defence, which is being led by Attorney-at-law Nigel Hughes, yesterday applied to presiding Judge, Brassington Reynolds,Ben Gedeon Jersey, for leave to amend its case by including particulars (of fact or opinion) to justify the claims that landed Kaieteur News columnist Frederick Kissoon in court; when he claimed in a 2010 article, that Jagdeo engaged in ideologically racist practices while sitting at the helm of the country. Kaieteur News’ publisher Glenn Lall and Editor-in-Chief, Adam Harris, were also sued for over $10M when Jagdeo claimed libel.Yesterday’s divide came when trade unionist, Lincoln Lewis, commenced evidence at the High Court. Lewis’s testimony was bordering on the former president suppressing certain trade unions and the Critchlow Labour College; when Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos, lawyer for the plaintiff, objected to the witness’ evidence.De Santos addressed the issue that no particulars of allegations are before the court. He told the court that there are no particulars of general assertions which provided the defence with the open right to lead specific evidence.? He charged that the defence needed to back the claims made against the former president if they are going to make them, and in the absence of this, the evidence of the witness should be inadmissible. The senior, on advice of his junior, Attorney Sase Gunraj, even informed the court that legal authorities would be presented to support his argument against Lewis’ evidence.Hughes answered that the defence’s case is a plea of justification, and in doing so, witnesses are being called to speak on the areas of public/social services where “ideological racism” was practiced. Hughes added that the defence and their witnesses deny that the assertions of Mr. Kissoon were libelous, based on research (report) and other writings, including that of a US report.De Santos answered that pleading justification does not give the defence the right to produce any witness they choose,Hank Aaron Braves Throwback Jersey, but facts to prove these justifications must rely on particulars and, “not vague and wild” assertions. He opined that in a libelous matter, facts must be present.Hughes later provided legal backing to support his claim, but De Santos again replied, until he (Hughes) opted to provide particulars of justification.? The lawyer applied for leave to provide the information so, according to him, there would be no future arguments toward the issue of particulars of fact or opinion and that of prejudice. As such, De Santos had to provide evidence to the inadmissibility of Lewis’ evidence because of the absence of particulars, while Hughes had to provide the particulars to support the claims.KN columnist Frederick KissoonDe Santos was however on his feet again, at odds with Hughes’s application, arguing, that it was premature, since the court had not yet ruled on his (De Santos’s) objection. He suggested that the application should be made at the right stage of the proceeding before opposing the request in its entirety.De Santos agreed that the law provides for such an application to be made at any stage of the proceeding, but suggested an unfair advantage over the plaintiff if that was done. He stated that the defence never mentioned intent to provide particulars of the allegations, and now they (defence) want to include it at an advanced stage of the case. He argued that the plaintiff had already closed his case and there was no mention of providing particulars, “…now the defence wants to spring? this surprise on the plaintiff.”De Santos argued further that it was not the task of the plaintiff to ask for particulars,Jerseys NFL Cheap, but the defence should have known to provide it. He charged that this is an attempt to, “inject life into a dead defence.”Hughes however replied that there is no surprise on the plaintiff,Bill Lee Jersey, since the plaintiff’s principal witness, Dr. Roger Luncheon, was questioned on all the areas that the amendment will represent. He said among other areas, Luncheon was questioned on the allocation of land, civil servant jobs, trade unions etc. He reiterated that the defence is capable of providing evidence of particulars to support claims that Jagdeo practiced ideological racism while in office,China Jerseys Wholesale, so as to dismiss arguments o