Court rules in favor of Dr. Philbert Aaron

Dr. Aaron (left), Checko
Dr. Aaron (left), Checko

A court has ruled in favor of Dr. Philbert Aaron in a civil lawsuit involving calypsonian “Checko” in reference to a song performed at last year’s calypso competition.

Checko had performed a song entitled “Bug her” and Aaron had filed a lawsuit against him which claimed “damages for libel and slander; aggravated damages; exemplary damages and an injunction restraining the Defendant from further publishing offending words or other words that are defamatory to the Claimant.”

The suit, filed earlier this year, claimed that the song referred to the Claimant by his designation and initial “Ambassador A.”

When the matter was heard in court on Friday it was revealed that Checko, whose real name is Abel Jno Baptiste, had failed to file a defense within seven days, as prescribed by law.

This prompted Aaron’s attorney, Noelise Knight Didier, to apply for judgement in default, which was obtained.

Attempts by Checko’s lawyer, Gildon Richards, to have the judgement in default set aside failed and the matter is set for October 18 to determine the quantum of damages.

Richards has vowed to take the matter to the court of appeal.

Disclaimer: The comments on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of DominicaNewsOnline.com/Duravision Inc. All comments are approved by DominicaNewsOnline.com before they are posted. We never censor based on political or ideological points of view, but we do try to maintain a sensible balance between free speech and responsible moderating.

We will delete comments that:

  • violate or infringe the rights of any person, are defamatory or harassing or include personal attacks
  • a reasonable person would consider abusive or profane
  • contain material which violates or encourages others to violate any applicable law
  • promote hatred of any kind
  • refer to people arrested or charged with a crime as though they had been found guilty
  • contain links to "chain letters", pornographic or obscene movies or graphic images
  • are excessively long and off-topic

See our full comment/user policy/agreement.

173 Comments

  1. D & disappointed
    March 29, 2014

    It’s so sad that Dominica had become what is is now … Ever since I’ve been growing up people have always sang calypso with direct mention on an individuals name .. (A wonder last 9 days) soon after carnival it’s over and done ,,,, but to take it this far … I think it is ridiculous .. I guess there’s not n much engagement and productivity and focus on one person job .. To sue and the BIAS court of Dominica to award someone monetary compensation based on animosity & Speculation .. Boy I’m glad I left the country I was born 30 years ago .. I will always visit ,, but this place is not what god in tented to be very very sad. : :cry:

  2. BARK NOW
    October 11, 2013

    Mr. Richards now u must bark like a dog and rumble like a wrestler like u think u are..where’s the defense within 7days? slacker. Talk now..smh

  3. Justice and Truth
    September 23, 2013

    It appears many of you are not fair, that you are upholding Checko in singing that calypso which had reference to Dr. Philbert Aaaron. It is pure corruption on your part to do so, people with corrupt minds.
    Then you are calling others corrupt and other evil names?
    You should help Checko pay for his court case and if he appeals. Let us see the outcome of this case.

  4. Nah man
    September 22, 2013

    Any body could be ambassador A! He ain’t got no copyright! Y he’s so offended anyways?……

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      If it is his job title and initial he has the copyright just as you have right “of copyright” to your name.

  5. Views Expressed
    September 22, 2013

    There was no defence presented….this is sad and wrong for Justice……!!!!!
    what happened to his lawyer…..this has to appealed as there is no evidence of of maliciousness to this “A” character…..
    Our songs, our social commentaries trough calypso must be preserved and protected at all times…..
    Good luck Chekko. Lets hear the chorus….

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      Even though it is a calypso song, sung as a calypso, it is malicious enough to make such a song about a person’s private action with reference to him as stated.

  6. Wow!
    September 22, 2013

    Interesting how most calypsonians, their writers and supporters want the right to destroy people with words and in song. Forget the cutlass and gun…too messy! They want to use more approved and more insiduous means to kill people while these people go on living, hoping to laugh all the way to the crown and bank.

    What a double standard Dominican society!!!!!! Even the church is known to support this effort by holding its own competition including some of these calypsonians!

    Well, we all have the right, and I dare say the responsibility, to protect/defend our reputation, the only thing we really take out of this life.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      In bygone years people thought nothing of it because it is a calypso. They accepted it through ignorance. We are living in a different era. What was then accepted is no longer accepted. This is progress.
      Recall how women have been treated; even children. Remember how bosses maltreated their employees be it verbally. Today, such behavior is unacceptable. People are demanding their rights. Therefore, they have the right to protect their name and reputation. If someone breaches it, a charge could ensue. The best place to settle it is through the Court.
      Now, there are laws against abuse, sexual abuse, rape, etc. Those who say we must move with the times should consider this and keep it in mind.
      Let us look forward and not backward. Overall, we should be getting better; not worse.

  7. Calypsonian
    September 21, 2013

    Sparrow also sang songs directly about other people. Princess Magaret marry a camera man and Saddam is a wanted man etc. How many Princess Margarets were there? He didn’t mask the names, but, that’s calypso.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      Oh yes! Sparrow shocked the Queen herself when he sang that calypso saying, “He didn’t know why a princess would marry a camera-man.” He did not expect the Queen and her family would have heard about it. They were told. He was slated for knighthood or some other citation from the Queen and it was withdrawn. Note what it cost him.
      In effect, he did not tell a lie. The entire world knew it and no doubt made that same statement.
      He could not be sued for he did not make a derogatory statement or the untruth or speculation or innuendos. It was one of status. Later, the camera-man did not prove himself as a worthy husband.
      Saddam could not sue him either because he was indeed a wanted man. Note the difference and in spoiling a person’s name and reputation.

  8. vex
    September 21, 2013

    Checko, leave them in the hands of the Almighty. Go down on your knees and BAYO Blanc balen and Noire Balen.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      Leave God out of this. Do not call his Name in vain. God is not pleased with some of the words of calypsos and the reason why they are written. Checko should apologize to Dr. Philbert Aaron.

  9. ROSEAU VALLEY
    September 21, 2013

    DNO, this case raises some other concerns that I hope you would allow us to highlight.

    The bigger picture is that so often in Dominica, our ordinary citizens are afraid to speak for fear of being sued, whereas our PM feels no pressure in manufacture stories at his party’s Delegates conference about his opponent and the opposition party without any fear of being sued.

    Even the Speaker of our parliament openly accuses private citizens of attempted murder under the protection of parliamentary privilege and Senior Counsels publicly and illegally discuss information obtained through their professional relationship with former or current clients on radio programmes without any reservation or repercussions.

    We hear callers to talk shows on Q95, DBS and Kairifm making the point, “tell him to sue me but I know what I am saying is true” or “he can sue me if he wants but I must speak in defense of my country” or some variation of the above. However, Dominicans are increasingly fearful of expressing themselves in a lawful manner.

    Dominicans are now afraid to speak, newspapers are no longer the voice or conscience of the nation and websites that highlight the corruption in our governance are being sued. Hence, even in calypso, we are bound to be cautious.

    We have all been successfully intimidated by the powers that be in our little Island. Everyone who can speak is placed in a state of mummified silence. Notwithstanding the slogan of one political party, “Fear no more”, it would seem that our people believe that there are numerous reasons to be fearful to speak. To a large extent, this has negatively affected or participation in the political reality.

    Whereas no one should be unfairly attacked and everyone is entitled to protect his/her reputation, the fear among our people is at an all time high. People fear the retribution, victimization, the reprisals, retaliation and intimidation. People fear being sued by the Senior Counsels on behalf of a Minister or the Prime Minister and his cronies and Ambassadors.

    The truth is there is reason to fear based on secret deals with journalists to be quiet, the protracted ongoing matter against the proprietor of TDN (Dr. Fontaine) and the treatment of Mr. Linton by a resident High Court Judge, who appeared to be more concerned with the further humiliation of Mr. Linton in his judgment than serving justice.

    How can we not fear when our calypsonians are being sued for using the art form to ridicule politicians in a manner that can only be so skillfully done in calypso? I refer to the present case and the Antiguan case of Dr Edmond Mansoor and Eugene Silcott, in which the claimant claimed defamation for words sang in songs of the defendants.

    Perhaps we have become a very sensitive society but it seems that there must be a balance between our rights of free speech, our right to know, our right to access to public information vis-à-vis the rights of others to enjoy their rights to protect their reputation and good name. Herein, lies the lesson for all of us.

    Respectfully
    Roseau Valley

    • Just saying
      September 23, 2013

      Valley, we are all blessed to enjoy such independence and democracy that others are either fighting for or just don’t have. Freedom of speech is necessary and is an essential part of our democracy. Just as a cutlass is good for gardening and not for committing murder so to must freedom of speech not be allowed to trample upon the rights of others such as character deformation and privacy. Why should we be encouraged to say things that aren’t true or things where there is no evidence to verify. When we do those things we affect people lives and most time negatively. We should not be permitted to hide behind the cloak of freedom of speech to spread lies, propaganda and deceit to benefit ourselves and or others at the embarrassment and detriment of others. It would appear that our judicial system is only fair and balance when it is in support of our cause or action but is corrupt when it doesn’t. How unfair that is when the judges are doing exactly what we as a people should expect of them; to look at the evidence presented objectively and to only come to a decision based on the evidence presented. We should not let our ambitions, loyalty, and hatred to others allow us to spread lies and propaganda and to lunch an unnecessary attack on our judicial system and the constitution we all would want to remain protected. The court must remain the place for us all to seek redress on matters affecting us even when most people are against us.

    • Juan Pablo
      September 23, 2013

      Garcon write good lyrical songs that make sense….You don’t hear that sort of roro in Reggae, Zouk, R$B, POP, Rock…is only coshonie calypso all you always in a name calling crap.

  10. Morihei Ueshiba
    September 21, 2013

    Is the song true about him?

  11. ROSEAU VALLEY
    September 21, 2013

    Let’s be real here, Dr. Aaron has won but this is not a victory based on the substantive matter as his attorney would like us to believe. Dr Aaron won the case on a legal technicality, which results from what appears to be inefficiency on the part of Checko’s attorney. There was no trial. This was a procedural victory, whereby Dr. A received the relief requested in his original pleadings. The matter of whether the calypsonian defamed Dr. Aaron was not tried.

    A default judgment is just like a team not showing up to play a match. Victory is given to the team that shows up without the game being played. Therefore, one cannot conclude that the team that showed up was the stronger of the two teams.

    But in law, a win is a win and Ambassador A won. The default judgment is binding and failure to comply with it will result in enforcement action, especially as the motion to set aside the said judgment has failed. The fact remains, the defendant failed to respond or to respond in a timely manner. The failure of Checko and his attorney to take timely and appropriate action is the real default that they must suffer the consequences of.

    Interestingly, in a defamation case between Mr. E. James and I. Douglas, the same situation occurred. However, the attorney for Mr. Douglas was able to convince the court to set the judgment aside as is the normal case in practice.

    The bigger concern here, however, is less about the immediate impact of the judgment on free speech or the Calypso art form but the conduct of our local attorneys and the level of representation given to their clients. One may say what he/she likes about Mr. Astaphan but such a lapse is not usually associated with the Senior Counsel when he fights in defense of his clients. With all due respect, based on the facts available to the public, it would appear that Mr. Richards has failed his client, failed calypso lovers with his tardiness and what seems to be a display of inefficiency.

    Respectfully
    Roseau Valley

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      The fact is he won the case. It is a feather in his cap. He is liable to receiving compensation which his attorney and the Court will decide.

  12. fil
    September 21, 2013

    This is a lesson to learn calypsonians respect peoples name.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      To a certain extent you may be correct but this case did not go to trial. The facts were uncontested and no legal issues relating defamation by the calypsonian seem to have been considered. Therefore, this judgment does not necessarily send this message.

      Respectfully
      Roseau valley

      • Justice and Truth
        September 23, 2013

        I am speculating that Checko’s lawyer and himself probably thought, if they did not file a defense within the given period the case would be thrown out of Court and this would have been the end of it. It is a legal matter. Why else did they not file “a defense”?

    • John Paul
      September 22, 2013

      Bull ! His Lawyer failed to file on time the case was not even heard .He won by default.Let us see what the appeal reveals.
      So if there is a mention of a “Doctor” in a song any Doctor can win a case against You ? Ha I dont think so.
      There will be a backlash from this lawsuit from the Dominican Public and it will affect the Party in Power
      Dominicans value their freedom of speech in Calypso.We do not need such Ambassadors who enjoy Diplomatic immunity while taking others to court

      • Justice and Truth
        September 23, 2013

        Freedom of speech is one. How about defamation of character? Why do some of you find it so difficult to comprehend? You are without comprehension.

      • Malatete
        September 23, 2013

        Diplomatic immunity would apply to the laws in the country he is issigned to as a resident ambassador but not in his home country .I couild be wrong but that is how I see it. If he enjoys all diplomatic privileges whilst living in Dominica it would also mean that he does not pay taxes or import duties.

  13. not a checkoo fan
    September 21, 2013

    i hope all them Christians that fighting against checko there know what they doing, so because he lose a case he not your brother no more wow

    • Justice and Truth
      September 22, 2013

      Who said not?

  14. Nomination committe
    September 21, 2013

    We need to respect the rule of law because we are a nation established by law under God.

    The performer was warned, he insisted that he had legal counsel on the matter and proceeded to slander the ambassador A.

    His failure to file a defense is proof that he had no defense.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      This judgment calls on us to respect the rule of law only to the extent of being mindful the civil procedures, the role of legal counsel and the quality of legal representation.

      There is no substantive legal lesson from this judgment with respect to the issue of slander of Ambassador A.

      The lesson is the need of legal officers to ensure that they perform their professional duties in a professional manner and they respect the court and their clients.

      Respectfully
      Roseau Valley

  15. Good
    September 20, 2013

    Wait, but isn’t it 28 days (under the Civil Procedure Rules 2000) that a Defendant has to file a Defence to a Claim filed against him?? Where that 7 days come out??

  16. anonymous2
    September 20, 2013

    Better get an attorney that is on the ball.

    • Mr Gouty
      September 21, 2013

      So PM u can sue too and pour Gon Emanuel awa Dominica some is not right with you

  17. SN
    September 20, 2013

    This is a sad day for calypso and should have never come to this. The big question, however, is where was his lawyer? If he secured representation prior to the seven day response period and the lawyer failed to respond, then this is malpractice. If he is to pay damages, he should sue his lawyer. This is a judgment not on the merits, but on procedure. The judge had to abide by the law, as hard as the result may be for Checko.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      You are so right but actually, I think it is a scour victory for Dr. A. He has won a hallow, procedural, legal battle but not a moral, cultural or socio-political one.

      This seems to be the hallmark of all the DLP’s legal victories. A sure sign that they are being led by a legal mind and not by one with a social/political intellect. We saw the same thing with the Speaker’s victory against the opposition, the victory of the PM and Petter in the dual citizenship case etc. They are winning legal battles while doing more damage to themselves.

      Contrast that to the initial short lived victory of Pinard-Byrne over Lennox Linton in Cottle’s court. However, Lennox has gained the respect of the people. Who is the biggest all round victor now?

      Respectfully
      Roseau Valley

      • Just saying
        September 23, 2013

        How unballanced and unfair we can be

  18. way
    September 20, 2013

    Oh now I understand

  19. pinky
    September 20, 2013

    he wish right now he was singing for Jesus. You cannot want to be a singing in the day for Jesus and singing in the night for Satan. His Gospel album did not make enough money for him he turn to calypso. They will sell their soul for money. Now the devil caught up with you I hope you go back to singing for Jesus.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      What does that have to do with anything? Last week a Kenyan preacher brought a lawsuit against the Jews for killing Jesus, saying that Jesus was not given the opportunity to be heard and his natural justice rights were infringed.

      Sometimes we have to take religion out of the discussion and deal with legal issues from a legal perspective.

      Respectfully
      Roseau valley

  20. Anonymous
    September 20, 2013

    One word To describe this judgement utter rubbish

    • mouche meil
      September 21, 2013

      Okay Comish!

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      No. the judgment is not rubbish. It is real, practical and perhaps fair under the circumstances. The lawyer failed to file a defense of failed to do so in a timely manner. PERIOD.

      Judgment against the defendant is in order.

      Respectfully
      Roseau Valley

  21. dominica
    September 20, 2013

    this is a very sad day for calypso and culture in our nature isle. how do you expect upcoming calypsonians to digest that unfair justice system. if is on some paro the the court would not even entertain the case.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      I wish we could see the judgment for what it is.

      With all due respect to the many thumps up that this comment has received, this does not necessarily have to have a negative impact on calypso and our culture.

      It is unfair to be critical of the justice system in this case. The justice system has done what it is expected to do other than ruling in favour of the motion to set aside the judgment, which is normally granted.

      Nevertheless, the defendant must take responsibility for his lack of defense or tardy defense.

      Justice was well served based on the limited facts as reported.

      Respectfully
      Roseau valley

      • Malatete
        September 23, 2013

        You are absolutely right. The judge had little alternative under the circumstances. We will have to wait and see if damages will be awarded, if any.

  22. I DIE NU
    September 20, 2013

    He Will Learn!.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      Well, not that he will learn per se but all calypso writers will have to uplift their standard to produce calypsos that are respectful of the rights of others but still funny, witty and can be enjoyed by all.

      Respectfully
      Roseau valley

      • Justice and Truth
        September 23, 2013

        In addition to according people their due rights and dignity. The days of singing calypsos that scandalize the names of others is long gone. Dr. Philbert Aaron has set the precedent. We must thank him for that.

  23. Malgraysa
    September 20, 2013

    What a victory for the Doctor! His opponent forgot his gumshield and the Dr. is declared the winner of a match that never took place. Congratulations Doc., well done! You sure have a dry sense of humour.

  24. Lucy
    September 20, 2013

    Dr. Aaron this is such a hollow victory. What it does is that it reduces who you are personally and professionally. I think in the end you will a end up loosing much more than going after an entertainer. In my opionion you have not not won- rather you have lost.

    This is a sad and shameful commentary.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      People as you will never comprehend this situation. This was character assassination. Unless it happens to you or someone close to you, only then will you understand.

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      September 21, 2013

      I concur. This is a hallow LEGAL victory but one that has reduced Dr. Aaron as a human being on our little rock in the ocean. This does not augur well for the good doctor personally and professionally.

      I agree with you that in the end, Dr. Aaron has really lost the respect of many in society. he needs to put on the thick skin of politicians whenever one is in the political arena. He would have been better served by just letting this whole thing be a funny calypso.
      Respectfully
      Roseau Valley

    • SMH
      September 21, 2013

      I totally agree. What a hollow victory. Damage if you want to call it that was done when we all heard the song and thought it was great. All calypso songs are about something or someone and even though name not mention we know who it is about.

  25. kim
    September 20, 2013

    ckecko never called dr.aron name in his song.that is rediculous

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Did he not say “Ambassador A?” Did you not read the words of the calypso?

  26. WEH WEH WEH
    September 20, 2013

    Garde kouman Dominique vini! Ah! Ah! Ah! Magewh sa. Dominica is so you come nuh?

  27. Anonymous
    September 20, 2013

    Its about time that someone attempted to stop the recklessness. We cannot have two legal systems. All civilised societies utilize a legal system where a defence is allowed. We have two systems in Dominica. The one managed by Calypso does not allow a defence so it must go unless we agree for innocent people are subjected to continued unrestrained harassment. This is a dangerous situation where a calypsonian will end up barking the wrong tree and heaven knows what the outcome might be.

  28. Do Not edit
    September 20, 2013

    He only won because of default, by not following due process.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Think of someone who wrote an exam and he/she barely won by one percentage. This person has reason to be jubilant. It is the same with Dr. Aaron. It does not matter how he won the case and what happened to make him win. The fact is, he won.

  29. 2 CuTe
    September 20, 2013

    Theres gonna be some veryyy interesting calypos next year …cant wait :lol:

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

  30. One Love
    September 20, 2013

    all I am asking is “IS a BIRTH or BAPTISMAL certificate any use in this particular matter?” – did the judge mess up?

  31. Justice and Truth
    September 20, 2013

    Here is a typical example. Some people think because they have freedom of speech, they could say what they want. Freedom of speech has certain limitations.
    Calypsonians beware. It is time to cease writing and singing about the personal life of people and their personal action which you cannot prove, which is none of your businees or that of others which does not concern them. What you do not want for yourself and your family, do not do it to others.
    The Golden Rule – Matthew 7:12, the Word of the Lord.
    If you are a Christian whom I know Dominicans are, you should refrain from this type of scandal and scandal of any nature which defames the character of others. It is wickedness of heart to do so. You should not even insult them and for no reason.
    Some of you need to learn the Golden Rule as taught to us by Our Lord Jesus Christ and to live in love, peace and harmony with others.
    Those whom the scandal is directed at have the right to sue for defamation specifically if their name/job position is mentioned. Surely lawyers should know this and others who are fair and just.
    The Ten Commandments of God – The VIII – Eighth Commandment – Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor.
    It Commands: truthfulness, respect for the name of others, the observance of secrecy is required.
    It Forbids: lying, injury to the good name of others, slander, tale-bearing, rash judgment, contemptuous speech, and the violation of secrecy.

    This applies to all those who access DNO and comment. They must also do their utmost not to get those who comment angry that they will call you names which they did not plan to do. Do nothing to get people angry. Be Christian-like.
    Many do not practice this Christian trait. God will hold everyone accountable for failing to practice true Christianity and the truth of Christianity. You are told and were told as also contained in Holy Scripture.
    Read, those of you who say, “I go by the Bible” and quote from it. Practice what is contained therein. Live genuine Christianity. These are godly marks of genuine Christianity and of a loving Christian.
    St. Paul reminds us: “Be kind to everyone.”

    • Francisco Telemaque
      September 20, 2013

      Justice and Truth September 20, 2013
      “Here is a typical example. Some people think because they have freedom of speech, they could say what they want. Freedom of speech has certain limitations.Calypsonians beware.”

      Calypsonians beware of what?”

      You see that is why sometimes I get on your case, especially when I see you do not know much about what you are dealing with. You know when a law suit is filed against someone, the plaintiff must serve a Summons (Citacion Judicial), stating the type of case they have against the defendant, in this case the allegations against Aaron is libel and slander and some other rubbish.

      On the Summon served on the calypso kid; it will read: Notice To Defendant: (Aviso AL Demandado), and that which is not in English could be in any other language where common law is utilized. On the same Summons it will state: You are being sued by plaintiff: (Lo Esta Demanaando El Demandante), it could be in another language, however that is usual on Summons in countries where they practice law under the common law system.

      That Summon is compelled to read ” you have X number of calendar days after this summons, and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. In some cases the length of time the court will allow the defendants to respond is thirty (30) days, in some cases less. I can detail it some more but I am not here to teach law, so I will simply say.

      The summons will also state “Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. It will also inform you ” if you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default.

      That is exactly what happened to the defendant in this matter, he defaulted, thus a verdict was rendered against him, however, if he is concerned, he can get him a lawyer to move the court to set-aside the judgment, and give him time to respond, and prepare for a trial.

      So, I do not think the Dominica calypso singers have anything to worry about, or have to be guarded from.

      Beware of what?

      If that man defended himself, Aaron would not have won that case, since he had no case in the first place, I know you are going to laugh and say Francisco do not know what he is talking about, so I might as well tell you I am in a business where I get sued regularly, and I also sue people who owe me regularly, and I represent myself as “Attorney for Plaintiff: IN PRO PER.”
      Francisco Telemaque IN PRO PER; if you know what I mean!

      Francisco Etienne-Dods Telemaque

      • Spiritual Drone
        September 21, 2013

        Justice and truth is more evil than good and never comments objectively on anything. Like thee is some mental block. Thats why when J&T called Behazin’s program ( in a bow wow fashion) on the president issues 2 or so Mondays ago; he handled himself well and really socked it to J.

      • ROSEAU VALLEY
        September 21, 2013

        Once again, I concur with your contribution and must give support. You are on point.

        Respectfully
        Roseau valley

      • September 21, 2013

        Dude who are you trying to impress? You waste soo much time explaining stuff that you yourself don’t seem to have a handle on. Garçon stay in your lane.

      • Justice and Truth
        September 22, 2013

        Telemaque, some of you do not like hearing or reading the truth. You are annoying. You are lawless people who agree with what Checko did to Dr. Philbert’s name.
        I do not think anyone was interested to know what the Dr. did, if he did what Checko insinuated he did. He thought since it is a calypso he could say and sing anything and get away with it.
        It is time for them to clean up their act and cease defaming the character of others in their calypsos. Dr. Philbert did right to sue him.
        The VIII – Eighth Commandment of God is: “Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against thy Neighbor.”
        Do I need to state to you that defaming a person’s character is a grievous/mortal sin? If you are a person of God you should know that what Checko did was out of place and wrong.
        What do you know about Christianity and the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ and that of the disciples, as inspired by the Holy Spirit?
        By the way, “God is God, The Father – Our Almighty Father.” He is not Jehovah.
        Our Lord Jesus Christ taught us to pray to the Father, not Jehovah. Christians pray to Our Almighty Father who is also Our Heavenly Father. This is how we call him and rightfully so. When we commence praying to him, as Our Lord taught us, we say, “Our Father who art in Heaven…” Not Jehovah who art in Heaven.
        I could not care less if you get on my case because I do not have a case. I provided my opinion. Allow me this privilege as you are allowed the privilege of commenting. Cease criticizing everyone who comment on this Website in such a manner and play you are “mr. goody two shoes” and know it all more than they do. You are not more educated and intelligent than I.
        Provide your opinion but consider that you are not perfect, far from it and you cannot talk/ comment for others; never should.
        Each one of us has our views. We are not of the same mind and reasoning. I know I am not wrong in stating the truth.
        I said Checko was wrong. Most of all, God knows it. If your name was implicated you would be highly upset. You, an instigator, would be on DNO lambasting everyone and being crude to them and would even threaten to sue them.
        As I have told you, you think you know everything but you do not. You have much to learn and it is also the art of communicating amicably with others on this Website. Stand up for the truth. Do not be a hypocrite and two-faced.
        Once and for all respect the views of others. Keep your opinion to yourself and rectify your mannerisms.
        You are another one who comment on this Website that I am not interested in your opinion which does not reflect mine or anywhere near mine. I cannot learn anything from it. In fact I only read a few words of your writing, “two”. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

  32. Anthony Ismael
    September 20, 2013

    The power of a good calypso. I can’t believe that this case is still in the news. If only we could solve some of the cold cases on the island, then we would be ok.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 23, 2013

      They expend too much time and energy debating about “default” instead of the truth of this case, “do not scandalize the name of people” and you will not find yourself in such a situation. They get angry with those who stand up for the truth. What a waste of time.

  33. CIA on the Watch
    September 20, 2013

    What does that say for the calypso art form?? it would be interesting to note what Kelly the Ghost President of the Dominica Calypso Association have to say about this one. I suspect Kelly the Ghost will toe the party line on this one since Ambassador A carries the color Red as Ghost

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      The words and message are, “watch your mouth and watch what you say about people and to people.” Otherwise, pay the price.
      The thought is occurring to me, people should also be jailed for libel, tarnishing a person’s name and character. This is a great damage which cannot be repaired. It is like murdering a person. You cannot bring back the life. The same applies to a person’s good name and character which are tarnished by callous mouths. It is an irreparable damage. This is why the cost of compensation and restitution should be exorbitant.

      • nel
        September 20, 2013

        You makes no sense justice and truth. Neither party is guilty or inocent nothing was proven there was no court hearing. Your point is nod and void. Be objective

      • CONFUSED !!
        September 22, 2013

        @ justice and truth: sir/madam the case was not tried to determine who was right or wrong. Aron won by default. I see nothing but pure ignorance in what you say. Go educate yourself please!!!!!!

    • babalene
      September 20, 2013

      what It says well for carnival next year is more bouyon on the road nuh! thats all. But seriously Calypsoians should tailor Sugar Aloes song “I ready to go” to suit this local situation – (check it on utube) I am proposing that for 2014 calypso season all calypsoians in support of the art form should dress up in prison garments and sing the song “I ready to go” just like Aloes did. Man I tell you,if Jamaica, Guyana and Barbados had ambassadors like ambassador A, then when Chalkie sang ‘ three blind mice” we would have definitely seen a caribbean war because Chalkie refered directly to Burnham, Manley, Barrow as the three blind mice’. Again check the song on utube and while we at it utube ‘songs like ‘ah fraid karl and ‘chalkie the mail man ‘ to hear and understand how calypsoians can call names in song without that BS we talking about – anyway since when we have become so thin skin – garcon leave our calpyso alone.

      • Justice and Truth
        September 23, 2013

        Just do not scandalize people’s names. Otherwise, from now on, people will be listening more intently to the words of the calypsos and those who are offended will take issue by suing.

  34. One Love
    September 20, 2013

    if there had been a real trial would he have had to PRESENT HIS “BIRTH” or “BAPTISMAL” CERTIFICATE?

  35. ZULU
    September 20, 2013

    Minister W is a tif
    Minister S is a funny cator
    minister A is fro odd
    somebody take me to court
    dont agree with verdict. Man name was never called. That judgement is setting a very bad precedence

  36. The just man
    September 20, 2013

    This is a message to all! be careful what you sow for you shall reap the same, “For the wages of sin is death, but when you serve God you shall reap good things”.

  37. Scared
    September 20, 2013

    Wow! I am sooooooooooooooooo afraid to talk now! Democracy has been thrown to on the sreets.

  38. Kixx
    September 20, 2013

    dat is a waste of time

  39. mee1
    September 20, 2013

    but really, how can you take a man to court and the man did not even call your name. Ambassador A is not your name. Secondly the man is singing calypso, since when we sue people for singing a song without even calling names. That should not even got to a court room. the judge should have thrown that out the moment he/she heard what is was all about.

    • dominica
      September 20, 2013

      for real if he had said ambassador aaron then I agree. but ambassador a or b or c . I see nothing wrong.

    • Anonymous
      September 20, 2013

      He should have filed a defence. Simple as that

  40. nightandday vision
    September 20, 2013

    As the saying goes ‘Who help you buy cow doh help you buy grass to feed it’ All of you that ‘running’ all you mouth, I hope all you help Checko to pay the money. People, please stop your biasness and unfairness and call a spade a spade

    • Not a herd follower
      September 20, 2013

      the court did not rule that Checko libeled or defamed Aaron. It simply awarded the verdict in favour of the claimant. Checko may well have strong grounds to appeal.

      • Justice and Truth
        September 23, 2013

        This is what you who support him are harping on, trying to satisfy yourself and wanting to make it look like Checko was correct in singing that calypso. Be fair. He did not win the case.

  41. Anonymous
    September 20, 2013

    he just bug her i just love that song :lol:

  42. Rule
    September 20, 2013

    With all the unsolved crimes we have here in DA, This case is a mockery of the criminal justice system and an infringement on free speech in this country. This shows the inability of the Gov’t to capture and prosecute criminals, now they are targeting calypsonians for exercising their rights to free speech. We are heading in a downward spiral.

    • One Love
      September 20, 2013

      any reflection on the so-called JUSTICE SYSTEM? CCJ et al?

    • anon
      September 20, 2013

      I dont understand something. We have a right to free speech, we can say what we want as calypso is social commentary. SO someone enlighten me, Aaron haven;t got a right to seek legal redress if he finds something was unfair to him. IT will teach calypsonians to properly master the art of ‘song masking’. You can write a song and the whole world know who it is about yet the individual cannot complain becuase the song is properly masked.

      • Justice and Truth
        September 20, 2013

        Anyone could appeal a case. The Law has the last say. It will decide if he has a legal right to redress.
        Contemplate on that: He scandalized the Dr.’s name by making a calypso about him and singing it. If you recall Dr. Philbert Aaron wrote him and asked that he withdraw the words and/or change the wording. He refused. Checko committed a grave error. Why can you not think that he committed the crime of libel?
        Anyway, we are to love one another. Calypsonians should not be making songs with a direct reference to someone’s name. Let this be a lesson for all of them.

    • Anonymous
      September 20, 2013

      How about the rights of the victim?

    • dominica
      September 20, 2013

      so that is what we come to in partaking in our culture. well where is miss justice? that court result just pave the way for more songs to come . so if all them songs hunter scrunter, dice and many other clypsonians have made all these years, no body was suing , the court has no understanding of our society and our culture. what a shame.

    • Anonymous
      September 20, 2013

      Rule! Please note that this is not a criminal matter. This is a private suit, what should be discussed is, whether Messrs. Abel Jno. Baptiste and Gildon Richards responded to the complaint and filed a defence according to law. Had Mr. Richards represented his client properly by meeting the requirement of the law, the outcome might well have been different.

      Mr. Jno. Baptiste may now consider a suit against Mr Richards for obtaining money by false pretences.

      • Justice and Truth
        September 20, 2013

        Are you certain?

      • Informer
        September 21, 2013

        That is the most intelligent response I have read on the matter! You must have a very strong legal background particularly for Dominican Law.

  43. Observer
    September 20, 2013

    We, meaning non legal minds have so much to say about this matter. It is not surprising that some have brought it to the level of “justice for so and so” because you have a name or has some status (political or otherwise)in society and “injustice for so and so” because they do not have any status and belong t certain political grouping.

    My beef though is with the two lawyers who see things differently. here we have two officers of the local bar, practicing attorneys who see the issue in different light. The law says that Checko has seven days in which to respond to Dr. Aaron’s first letter. If what DNo carried is true, it appears that Checko (a serving police officer) did not comply with the law. In the absence of a defense the matter goes to trial as field. that happened. Checko was found guilty of the charge. Did Mr. Checko had a lawyer at the time he received the first letter? What advise , based on the law did his lawyer give him? I remember Checko was insistent that he was going ahead to singing the song because he trusted the advise of his lawyer and of course his fans, Skerrit’s haters on Q. Was it the same lawyer? I do not know?

    We are now hearing that a motion was field to set aside the decision that was given in the absence of a defense and to allow the defendant – Checko, time to file a defense. that ended today with the court ruling essentially that it could not set aside its earlier decision since the defendant did not comply with tried tested and established norms and procedures (my interpretation). Of course Checko’s Lawyer forever in the news has given DNO and its reads notice that he will take the matter further.

    the question must be asked. Why didn’t Checko file a defense within the stipulated time frame? was he advised not to? If he was why would a trained attorney advise him otherwise? I not at all suggesting that Mr. Richards was Checko’s lawyer at the time he was served with the first letter of intent to sue and given seven (7) days to respond. It could very well be that Checko changed attorneys.I do no know.

    I understand that the process is a simple one to the learned and trained. But obviously the two lawyers involved see things differently even when they are reading the same law, the same processes apply to both lawyers, yet still they see it differently.

    And those of us with absolutely no training in law can find a million reasons why Dr. A should not seek to protect his good name and reputation. Check alone now has to dish out thousands. Should Checko fire his lawyer?

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Just speculating that the lawyer knew he erred, that he did not have a case and would not win it.

      • Truth Seeker
        September 20, 2013

        This is the crux of the matter. Ably disposed of by Observer. Yours is a balanced approach to the issue at hand. I myself, am no lawyer. But the analysis you put forward seem to make a lot of sense to the reasonable, in whose bracket I’d like to consider myself.

        Checko erred by time. And on at least two important respects. A good reader will see that you dealt with both quite ably and succinctly.

        Why do talkers on here, who are simply looking for a cause, come on here and spin mischief. For heaven’s sake, say something to educate readers. Make readers go, “hmm, I didn’t think of that one.”

  44. Mark
    September 20, 2013

    Atlee what do you think you are doing? Wow this is so sad Atlee.Are you the same guy a few years ago in Washington DC who was engaging everyone who would listen in so much policy and progressive discussions on the future direction of Dominica?I think this decision by the court will turn on its head when you and Skerrit are kicked out come election time. Best of Luck Mister.

    • Papa Dom
      September 20, 2013

      For once I agree with you, the lawyer should have done what he was supposed to do end of

  45. Not a herd follower
    September 20, 2013

    It’s a pity there was not a hearing from the defence. Why the defence lawyer did not file a respone within the prescribe time? Now, Philbert Aaron is given a victory by default. The substantive question relation to defamation and slander was not answered. I think the calypsoian should appeal.

  46. One Love
    September 20, 2013

    OK DNO I give up – you are no champion of freedom of expression BUT ….. is so dull; I will accept the editorial abuse and stay with you. anyway what’s wrong with the word MIRIDOM?

  47. Anonymous
    September 20, 2013

    They do right! Its high time people start paying for their mouth

    • Not a herd follower
      September 20, 2013

      He won by default. Try to understand what you read.

      • Bug
        September 20, 2013

        He won,swallow it.

    • September 20, 2013

      You never seem to understand much of anything especially the Law I dont know why you dont take a brake just read some of the comments and stop posting you may learn something… Aaron won by default do you know what that means ?

      • Justice and Truth
        September 20, 2013

        Whether default or not, you should know what Checko did was totally wrong, scandalizing the Dr.’s name and calling him by name “Ambassador A.” It is no exaltation for Checko and his supporters. He lost the case. If you do not comprehend that, then, you have much to learn.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      This should also refer to slandering the Catholic Church and the good name of priests; listening to and reading what which may not be factual but they also repeat it on DNO when they are by no means perfect, putting it mildly. They really need to pay for their mouth and what is spewed out of their mouths including through their fingers on the keyboard.
      They want the Church to change to suit them but they do not want to change their scandalous attitude and conform to the Will of God.

  48. Jay
    September 20, 2013

    Maybe Dr. Aaron won but in my humble view it will always be a pyrrhic one, the good doctor’s umbrage turned into ridicule. If I were Judge Judy I would award him $1.00 exemplary damages.

    • nightandday vision
      September 20, 2013

      The thing is you are not Judge Judy
      :oops:

      • Jay
        September 20, 2013

        I wish I was! She makes over U.$.$.40 million a year for showing up silly people, who forfeit their right to appeal. What a job!!

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Some of you are not fair and do not practice fairness. Always put yourself in another’s shoes – situation as in the case of Dr. Philbert Aaron. How would you like someone to delve into your personal affairs, make a song against you and scandalous your name? Or listen to hearsay and make a song about it?
      If the Dr. did what he thought and sang about, making a tape, distributing and selling it worldwide, he was darn well wrong. It is downright scandalous and defaming the character of Dr. Philbert. He should mind his own business. God knows his lifestyle is not a perfect one.
      If you are a Christian, you should know that it is totally wrong. He was also out of place. It is a sin; it is a crime to scandalize people’s names. You could be charged for libel and an exorbitant sum of money.

      • babalene
        September 20, 2013

        Sparrow “Melda oweh you making wedding plans” all you hypocrites that dance and prance on such songs and many more and now have them as classic calypsoes now want to crucify the poor boy for using the art form in a creative way – well fire go burn all you. Magwahsay.

      • dominica
        September 20, 2013

        well make a song on him but just don t call his name is all . mask your song. use letters ect.

  49. just saying
    September 20, 2013

    was there any doubt that mr aaron would have won this case? the system works for some. mr emmanuel i just feel so sorry for you cause we know that thats how the system in DA works.

  50. One Love
    September 20, 2013

    With all the real cases to be heard – the court finds time for THAT frivolous exercise?

    • real possie
      September 20, 2013

      @ Doc u shld be happy is that one and not the secko case,maybe they shld have taken up that case for u to cry corruption oh you know what the judge asked for the secko case but they misunderstood and brought the checko case,lol.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      You missed the important point.

    • Loveliness
      September 20, 2013

      Don’t you get it.. there was not trial. There was no wasting of the court’s time. This was a default judgment.

  51. gorgirl
    September 20, 2013

    That’s the only way Ambassador A could have gotten judgment, by default…

  52. One Love
    September 20, 2013

    DNO I think you take pleasure in reading posts and have a good laugh while you are deleting them any way have fun – all I said was RULES AT ALL LEVELS

    • omg
      September 20, 2013

      omg!!! I had a good laugh on that one. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Some of us also get a good laugh at some of the comments. :lol:

  53. One Love
    September 20, 2013

    let little labourites think they matter

    just watch the combination SPEAKER+PRO and no BIG LABOURITE intervened to say DON’T KILL THE CULTURE

    but when BIG LABOURITES break the law they send SSU and TASK FORCE to protect them so they can’t be brought to justice

    • Anonymous
      September 20, 2013

      And let you little workers think you all matter to the BIG L OR DOUBLE L whatever the hell all you does call him there. Since he thinks he is more than all you. sakway sot

      • One Love
        September 20, 2013

        If you missed him at Castle Bruce THEN Come to Londonderry on the 29th

  54. Doc. Love
    September 20, 2013

    Mr. Lennox Linton, opposition leader of the United Workers Party should sue Aaron for defamation of character. On radio and in the press, Aaron told Dominicans and the world by extension that Linton was a dropout from school at form four. Mr. Linton has since denied the vicious attack on his reputation. In fact, Mr. Linton, in a radio interview, made it known that he left school in form five and was no dropout.

    • Dominican
      September 20, 2013

      stupes

    • Anonymous
      September 20, 2013

      Isn’t he a drop out? What the hell you talking about? Shut up!

      • my 2 cents
        September 20, 2013

        do you think that if you hear something being repeated on the animal show all the time it becomes truth. go check your facts

      • rol
        September 20, 2013

        I know of some really successful drop outs. Mark zuckerberg, Bill Gates. Drop out or not is he capable

    • Anonymous
      September 20, 2013

      Mr Linton is not the opposition leader sir

    • One Love
      September 20, 2013

      CASE WILL NEVER CALL TILL HE BECOMES PRIME MINISTER – but really does Aaron matter anymore? These times of refreshing are making people of his ilk redundant

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      He did not tell a lie or defame his character. It is well known and no doubt world-wide among Dominicans that Linton is a high school drop-out. Also, as written on this Website by those who comment which I read, it was for disobedience. This will always remain with Linton – for the rest of his life. He cannot deny it.
      The Prime Minister should sue some of you for libel, calling him corrupt. You cannot prove it. This is a serious matter and a crime to scandalize anyone’s name. The PM would win his case and could get a lot of money for this. Maybe he should pursue it. He had already informed Dominicans that he would do so. Some Dominicans are scandalous people and should muzzle your mouth and fingers.

      • Doc. Love
        September 20, 2013

        Are you trying to tell me, the case of the Bin Boreball and the repayment of approximately fifty thousand dollars to the treasury , Skeritt’s name was being scandalised.

  55. Lougaoo mem
    September 20, 2013

    We’ll see how the court of appeal handles the matter. Better luck next time Checko.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Checko cannot prove that he did not refer to “Ambassador A.” How many “Ambassador A’s reside in Dominica and elsewhere in the world? Let us see his lawyer and himself disprove that.

  56. kim
    September 20, 2013

    who was the judge?

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Who cares? Why do you not find out?

  57. Anonymous
    September 20, 2013

    The Rule of Law requires compliance to both substantive and procedural law!Rights must be taken seriously by all.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      The right to preserve one’s good name and not scandalize it is tantamount.

  58. Faithful
    September 20, 2013

    Why did his lawyer fail to file a defense?

    • my 2 cents
      September 20, 2013

      Probably the client failed to contact the lawyer early enough or failed to tell the lawyer what to say in his defence before the time ran out.

    • nightandday vision
      September 20, 2013

      Important question

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Ask the lawyer and/or checko.

  59. real possie
    September 20, 2013

    Boss u see when u all see big man…….. u all like to jump dem big man dem have their money hide up now u have to pay hope u get some ahwe de people to help u?what kind of lawyer pwaykaiy if thats how its spelled you have dere nah?in my da voice.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Big man or little man, respect their good name. All have such human rights and equal rights.

  60. i'mWondering
    September 20, 2013

    so …did the lawyer fail to file a defense? And if so ….. what’s the recourse for the client?

    everyone knows how sensitive court time lines can be and if he let’s supposed that the lawyer was retained berfor the decision, then why wasn’t a motion for a time extension filed?

  61. Shame
    September 20, 2013

    Well well well… this just draws more attention to Mr. Aaaron. The man should have just let well alone an pretended he didn’t know who the song referred to. Checko will win in the end.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      This is your simple opinion, to caste aside important matters. I disagree with you. He has a right to defend his good name.

  62. Ambassador K
    September 20, 2013

    Ambassador A will drop that case. He is focuses in Our next
    PM’s CV. :-D :wink:

  63. Law abiding citizen
    September 20, 2013

    I am just asking, but does Gildon Richards have any respect for the rule of law he has pledged to uphold?

    He has plenty talk and condemns others but srems to Always disrespect the court

  64. bias dca
    September 20, 2013

    Dr A…i forgot about this…you still on that. You have y name in media still…

  65. Yard fowl
    September 20, 2013

    Is that what our island nation has come to, today? Yeah mon! It’s called the next level.

    • real possie
      September 20, 2013

      @ YF i wonder how much of u would have liked u all name to be slandered in songs and say it’s a song don’t worry about that man?what u won’t like for your self don’t joke and laugh when it’s others he did a poor job of masking so he shld have to pay,now me tro me carn me no cal no fowl i waiting for u,yes u.

      • ambassador b
        September 20, 2013

        if your name was not called why would u assume that the “slander” was referring to you? .mr aaron i did not even know it was you the song referred to until you came out and make a big scene. .

      • Lougaoo mem
        September 20, 2013

        @ real possie,
        Ah so! Eat your carn me brethren while you have it. Me no want none, cuz me belly full all de time. You check? One love!

      • real possie
        September 20, 2013

        Yes dno u modarate the last one 1st wonder why is it because i did a better job than checko in masking? lol.

      • Anonymous
        September 20, 2013

        What name? What you talking about? Go take sparrow to court for singing melda oh you making wedding plans or mr walker. Just cannot believe you people.
        Because you committing adultery and the priest preach about it, is he preaching to you specifically, it’s your guilt and conscious that make you think so.
        SMDH

  66. Anonymous
    September 20, 2013

    alas poor checko

  67. BOOM
    September 20, 2013

    “When the matter was heard in court on Friday it was revealed that Checko, whose real name is Abel Jno Baptiste, had failed to file a defense within seven days, as prescribed by law.”

    “Richards has vowed to take the matter to the court of appeal”

    wat u appealing, wen u failed to file a defense?…..jeez….u going to spend a ton of money to appeal for something that was ur fault?…y didn’t u just file ur defense, wen ur suppose too and battle it out today!…my god! but checko got support from the anti-abassador Aaron folks, and held his ground..though untrue, that ” d man name not ambassador A on his birth certificate!///really?…….

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      Checko is stubborn.

  68. September 20, 2013

    My goodness at Dr.Aaron …I mean calypso has long came and gone and you’re still on that subject? seems as if you’re trying to stay relevant. what really is there to gain from wining this suit? geez man..let go and let GOD!

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      What do you mean? Do you have any common sense? The case was already filed whether carnival is long gone. It was on the books of the Court to be heard. The only way it could have been cancelled is if Dr. Philbert advised the Court. Otherwise the cases goes ahead as arranged.

  69. Malgraysa
    September 20, 2013

    In one word: PATHETIC!

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      What do you mean and who are you referring to? Some of you make incomplete sentences.

  70. kicks
    September 20, 2013

    well Abel boi, I hope you have money!! becuz Aaron coming for you! :lol: :lol:

    and i hope all those who were helping Abel will put a $10.00 towards his suit.

    • Justice and Truth
      September 20, 2013

      You made me laugh. :lol: The punitive damage may cost a few thousand dollars. If he were in Canada or the US of all, he could pay as much as one million or more dollars for defamation of character.
      For further information, even the Prime Minister of Canada can sue for libel. This has previously happened. Politicians do sue for libel. The Dominican PM should consider it. Be careful what you state also on DNO. DNO could be sued for allowing it to be posted.
      A man/woman is entitled to their private life. What they do in private with consenting adults is their personal business. Some songwriters and authors have been sued. Checko and others should take lessons from those people.

      • omg
        September 20, 2013

        But you forget that since he didn’t mention the man’s name there’s not much to go on. Further more he would have a lot to prove

    • babalene
      September 20, 2013

      Ready to put my 10.00 dollars whenever that becomes necessary; tell Abel when he ready just say the word and I will deliver because when Rabbit sang road match after road match such as ‘ u marry d’ girl Charlie’; ‘Brian Ting Lung’ and ‘run Solomon’; followed by ” u follow’ all of us talking now sang and jumped to these chants -it was fun it was frolic but now all you want to bring all you petty and thin skin standards into the art form – when the slaves sang the slave master tried to redefine calypso and restrict it but the art form only becane stronger.With that court ting the art form will only get stronger I am prepared to beg another ten dollars..

      • Justice and Truth
        September 21, 2013

        Where personal names are concerned they could be sued. Sing their calypsos but do not mention names or make direct insinuations.
        The mention of Sparrow’s name singing about women and others, Sparrow is an intelligent man. He has been a calypsonian for years. No doubt, on the advice of his lawyer he did not mention names. People speculated on who he sang about. He could not be sued because he did not mention anyone’s name. If I err, please correct me and inform me of the names of those people.
        Sparrow also sang on political matters and relevant occurrences.
        Calypsonians should learn a lesson. Hopefully next year they will refrain from direct inference to others. Be careful what you sing about and refrain from mentioning names.
        When you write a calypso, use decent language. What is more important is how the words rhyme and the music that everyone of whatever age could enjoy hearing, singing and dancing.

  71. proud dominican
    September 20, 2013

    hmmm that still going on.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:) :-D :wink: :( 8-O :lol: :-| :cry: 8) :-? :-P :-x :?: :oops: :twisted: :mrgreen: more »

 characters available