Any comments, dear Mrs. Davis?

Black Woman Who Reads
May 15, 2008 at 11:16 am

Staggering that John Knox’s contract was not renewed, simply because he gave evidence against Peter Simmons in a case in Canada.

I wonder how many other contracts were not renewed for the 2007-2008 academic year by Cave Hill? Does anyone know? Was John Knox the only one?

It is not at all true, in fact it is a lie, to say that Peter Simmons threatened John Knox.

I have heard the recordings and read the transcripts in issue - and I am surprised that the transcripts, which are now public domain, have not been published by the Nation and the Advocate - and even more shocked that Barbados Free Press has not published them, since the Knox family clearly have it in their back pocket and would, if required, produce these to BFP.

I see that a decision was made regarding this alleged threat by Peter Simmons in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Justice J. Brian Shaughnessy) on February 8, 2008.

With all the facts in front of him, including expert testimony from both sides, the Judge decided that no threat had been made by Peter Simmons.

I am perplexed as to why this decision was not published in full by the Nation and the Advocate and by their self-appointed and self-annointed conscience, the Barbados Free Press?

Maybe the Judge made the wrong decision for you, BFP?

Justice Shaughnessy does deal with the issue of John Knox’s employment and the claim that he was discriminated against at Paragraph 64 of his judgment. He says:

“[64] ……Mr Knox states that his employment at his former job as lecturer was not renewed for the 2007-2008 academic year. Apart from a vague reference to a Mr. Leonard Nurse no further particulars relating to the termination of his employment are provided………. ”

Well, since Mr. Knox’s affidavits cover in great detail the gamut of every part of Bajan life going back 50 years and more, including the construction of the new prison, it does make one wonder why he has not provided more details on his own circumstances. You know, document-backed facts and not speculation.

Now I don’t know. I merely offer an alternative interpretation for your review, discussion and determination.

These are some facts that cannot be disputed by way of background.

First, John Knox is over 50 years old.

John Knox lives with his mother in a house the property of Kingsland Estates Limited on which he pays no rent - presumably because he thinks that his mother is a still a shareholder of Kingsland Estates Limited and therefore it is owed to him to live and run his business affairs rent-free.

John Knox has operated several (now defunct) businesses from that house. John Knox has never paid rent and, until he was almost 40, did not pay any utilities either.

So his businesses had none of the overheads that we other poor mortals have to endure to make a crust - yet those businesses have not succeeded within the terms that any reasonable person would measure success by. In other words, no matter what John Knox would like to think, they failed.

The tone of Peter Simmons’ alleged threats as regards John Knox are far from threateneing. Peter refers to this middle-aged man as a boy. Peter says that John Knox is being misled. Nowhere is there anything that can be construed as a threat. Indeed, Peter’s comments could be fairly charaterized as paternal, fond, but disappointed.

Therefore, I ask you to consider that, given John Knox’s record in his own business, he merely made an almighty mess of his work at Cave Hill so that the UWI felt that it could not in good conscience continue his employment due to its responsibility to provide its students with better lecturers than “Professor” Knox?

Seems reasonable to me, but there again I have the advantage of being able to access the same documents as BFP which BFP, in the interests of truth and fair play, refuses to let its readers participate in. Naturally, they will say the matter is sub judice and you must then ask since when that has stopped them.

By the way, in these days of the internet, smoke can definitely be generated without there being a fire. You all know this.

“Now we see exactly what it means when a senior politician is appointed as the highest judge in the land: because David Simmons unethically linked the dropping of a personal lawsuit against him to the efforts of citizens to create a National Park.

Shame! Shame!

What foul lack of integrity and bad character would cause a man to try and save his own skin by destroying a national initiative that would have benefited all citizens of Barbados?”