A couple weeks ago there was an attempt to stop BU from being a vehicle for freedom of expression in the Bajan blogosphere. It is a matter which is ongoing and one which BU continues to fight away from the public glare. We will return to this matter later in this blog.
Having lost his case on the matter of jurisdiction and having cost Barbados and its taxpayers approximately $8 million, Donald Best, the sole listed officer of Nelson Barbados Group Limited, is a now officially a convicted criminal and a fugitive from justice.
On January 15, 2010, Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued a warrant for the arrest of Donald Best and for his incarceration for a period of three months at an Ontario correctional facility.
Donald Best failed on two occasions to turn up for court-ordered cross-examinations and to submit the books of his company, Nelson Barbados Group Ltd, to the scrutiny of the Court so that costs could be apportioned against it. January 15 2010, Donald Best was convicted and sentenced in absentia (actually BECAUSE of his absence) in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Donald Best was also fined $7,500 (Canadian) and costs on a substantial indemnity basis in excess of $60,000 (Canadian) were awarded against him personally.
Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy did, however, give Donald Best the opportunity to purge his contempt by appearing before the Honourable Court on or about February 22, 2010 and providing the evidence and documents demanded by the Court.
On December 2, 2009, Shaughnessy J. issued a pre-emptory summons returnable Friday January 15, 2010 by which Donald Best was ordered to submit his person and his corporate books and records to the Court at Barrie, Ontario. BU has obtained a copy of that Order inclusive of the Judge’s handwritten notations and changes.
Having failed to purge his contempt on January 15th, 2010 and having now been convicted and sentences in absentia, Donald Best will now be subjected to the type of investigation not available to private investigators, one private investigation having already been carried out. BU reported on this and provided details of UPS drop boxes made to look like apartment addresses, by which Donald Best tried to hide his whereabouts. Since then, BU has discovered that the Wikipedia entry for Donald Best has been removed from Wikipedia, but can still be read here.
A private investigator was hired in order for counsel in Canada to adhere to the terms of the Rules of Civil Procedure of Ontario that require that a Summons to Witness ordered by the Court be served by personal service upon Donald Best. BU has obtained and posts here a copy of the Affidavit of PI Jim Van Allen.
BU has obtained information that Donald Best resides, and has resided, for some appreciable time, in Thailand. Which makes the comments in his exculpatory letters to the Court both untrue and self-serving, but ultimately totally irrelevant in any case. His suggestion that BU’s reports on a matter conceived and executed by him to the detriment and prejudice of Barbados and its people has caused him (in the dead of night and in imitation of Jewish families under the Nazi regime – which is deeply insulting to Barbados and its people, not to mention those who suffer under repressive regimes) to flee Canada (which is deeply insulting to Canada and its institutions that protect its citizens) is beyond belief. Best’s letters are posted here.
In his letters, Best confirms BU’s report that he has visited Barbados on over 40 occasions and while here he stayed at either a certain Long Beach guesthouse or at a private residence overlooking Long Beach.
Of great concern to all Barbadians must be the affidavits of Lawrence Hansen and BU posts them here 1, 2, along with the exculpatory remarks of Best’s former counsel, K. William McKenzie, whose law firm, Crawford McKenzie McLean Duncan and Anderson, are embroiled in a bitter dispute between Canadian legal professional blogs, the moderator of one of which (LawBuzz) is a partner in Crawford McKenzie McLean Duncan and Anderson.
In reviewing the affidavits of Mr Hansen, we note:
-
The involvement of Alair Shepherd, Barbados counsel for Madge Knox paid and retained for her by Peter Allard (and please, Mr Allard, do not run to WordPress – we can prove this with documents bearing your signature).
-
The involvement of K. William McKenzie with the Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary (owned by Peter Allard).
-
Those following this case will recall that Stuart Heaslet, the head of the GHNS and an employee of Peter Allard, tried to ground accusations of threats to the safety of Nelson’s counsel, K. William McKenzie, using secretly recorded telephone conversations with Peter Simmons, a defendant in this action and brother of Barbados’ outgoing Chief Justice, Sir David Simmons. It will be recalled that Justice Shaughnessy and then the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the ‘evidence’ of threats based on these tape recordings as meritless (Links 1 and 2).
-
It will be recalled that Heaslet carried out his spying expedition on Peter Simmons from the Vancouver home and on the phone line of Peter Allard.
So we are left with the statement of William McKenzie recorded on the transcripts of cross-examinations in this matter that he visited Barbados 40 times (coincidentally the same amount of times as Donald Best), stayed at Long Beach, worked on a project at GHNS and he represented Donald Best and it was to him that the report was made by GHNS chief Stuart Heaslet, on the surreptitiously- recorded telephone conversations between Heaslet and Peter Simmons made from Peter Allard’s Vancouver residence on Peter Allard’s phone line. We then see that McKenzie held a meeting (involving the presentation of documents) with Alair Shepherd, the counsel for Madge Knox in Barbados and Madge Knox’s ‘First Friend’ in the Ontario action. Coincidence? You think??!!!
EXAMINATION OF WILLIAM MCKENZIE
In his Order of January 15, 2010, Shaughnessy J. dealt with Mr McKenzie in the following manner:
“6. THIS COURT FURTHER ORDERS that notwithstanding any solicitor-client or other privilege between Nelson Barbados Group Ltd. (“Nelson Barbados”) and Mr. Best (collectively, the “Clients”) and Mr. McKenzie, Crawford, McKenzie, McLean, Duncan and Anderson LLP (“Crawford Mckenzie”), and any member or employee of Crawford McKenzie (collectively, the “Lawyers”), and notwithstanding any duties of confidentiality owed by the Lawyers to the Clients under the Rules of Professional Conduct or otherwise, the Lawyers shall produce to the moving parties copies of the following documents of Nelson Barbados in the possession, power or control of Mr. McKenzie and Crawford McKenzie on or before January 27 2010.
(a) the incorporation documents for Nelson Barbados, minute book, directors’ register, shareholders’ register, banking documents (including bank account opening documents, operating agreements and bank statements) non-privileged correspondence, notes, memoranda and other business documents and e-mails from the date of incorporation through to the present;
(b) all books of account ledgers and financial statements of Nelson Barbados from the date of incorporation through to the present;
(c) all documents by which Nelson Barbados allegedly acquired security or an ownership interest in the shares of Kingsland Estates Ltd. (“Kingsland”) from the date of incorporation through to the present;
(d) all trust documents;
(e) the retainer agreement between Nelson Barbados and Mr. McKenzie and/or Crawford McKenzie; and
(f) all professional accounts for services provided by Mr. McKenzie and or his firm with respect to the action.
7. THIS COURT FURTHER ORDERS that Mr. McKenzie may not object to questions on the basis of privilege or confidentiality at his cross-examination with respect to the documents referred to in paragraph 6 above.”
THREAT TO BU
The main commentator on the Other Side of Kingsland Matter was BWWR from whom nothing has been heard for a year or more. BWWR also commented on a BU report about an unnamed octogenarian who has lost money in an investment involving a Barbados-registered offshore company and one Sebastian Mecca. A report in Montreal’s La Presse named as a colleague of Mr Mecca, one Frank Masrtocolo.
Just weeks ago, a person purporting to be Mr Mastrocolo sent BU an e-mail in which he threatened legal action unless BU withdrew its article (which, by this time, was well over a year old).
BU responded by reporting the matter to WordPress and copying the report to La Presse and the Toronto Globe & Mail and publishing a report on the matter on BU. BU also invited the person purporting to be Frank Mastrocolo to make use of BU’s blog to present his side of the story and/or to deny his involvement with Sebastian Mecca and the information that BU had quoted from La Presse as being fair comment. The offer is still open.
Within days, BU received a communication from WordPress to say that a complaint had been received from Donald Best claiming that BU had published information confidential to him. WordPress, in conflict of the Inter-American Declaration of the Principals of Freedom of Expression Principal 8 which states “EVERY SOCIAL COMMUNICATOR HAS THE RIGHT TO KEEP HIS/HER SOURCE OF INFORMATION, NOTES, PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL ARCHIVES CONFIDENTIAL,” advised that it might require from BU the name of its source. Within days, Google and Microsoft had issued a statement backed and supported by the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in connection with attempts to muzzle freedom of expression in China, but which sounded a clear and unambiguous warning to any country or entity attempting to muzzle freedom of expression and freedom of social communicators, particularly by way of internet blogs.
As Barbados and each and every Bajan is sued in this Ontario action by Nelson Barbados and its convicted and sentenced sole officer, Donald Best, this is a matter of Barbados’ National Interest. Some BU family members have commented that this is a family matter but BU has taken the decision that the ongoing Nelson Barbados matter is one which should concern ALL Barbadians. BU regrets that the average Bajan is not aware of the machinations concerning this matter but we will continue to expose what we believe is a matter which has implications to how we want to define ourselves (Bajans).
We consider this MATTER TO BE OF NATIONAL INTEREST!
Those who want to read about the law suit against Lawbuzz can follow this link.
http://www.lawstudents.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=23218&sid=93839f30257507bcabba23b0ca9b2fc4
Interesting. Over on BFP, we have a blog about the plight of poor old Peter Allard and how he, a successful businessman, always likes to give something back to the country in which he does business. Or words to that effect.
So, let me see if I get this right:
* Allard inherited his money from his father and this makes him a successful businessman.
* Allard undertakes (on his own and as a commerical venture) Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary without the government of Barbados as joint venture partners. And it is now closed – reasons manufactured, no credible ones given. This is the hallmark of a successful businessman.
* Allard tries to acquire Kingsland Estates and fails. This, of course, makes him a successful businessman.
* Allard supports Madge Knox in trying to acquire Kingsland Estates through the Courts – and she fails. And that too makes him a successful businessman.
* Allard allegedly disposes of his “interest” in Kingsland transferred to him allegedly fraudulently, to Nelson Barbados. For how much? But it doesn’t matter, this makes him a successful businessman.
* Allard “loans” Madge Knox $24 million that he may almost certainly never be able to recoup. And that makes him a successful businessman.
* Then, there is this lost case in Ontario that has cost Barbados and its citizens several million dollars. No idea how much it has cost Allard. That makes him a successful businessman.
Clearly it is high time we all revised our ideas on what constitutes a successful businessman. I also want to know what this “philanthropist” intended to give, considering the Ottawa action against Barbados for $35 million.
Where will it end? How many more Peter Allard “business successes” are we going to be witnesses to? When will his “generosity” towards us cease?
@David. I have looked at this law suit in Canada between LawBuzz and the other legal professionals site, thanks to what you posted. Not being a Canadian legal professional, I don’t know for sure, but I would need to see the briefs of counsel for both sides (they call them Factums in Canada) and the further affidavits. If your source has access to those, as they will be filed and public domain, I, for one, would read them avidly.
On the face of what has been published, the case seems tenuous, but I do caution everyone not to go by that. For them to have filed such an action when they now know that the eyes of the Canadian press is on them and for LawBuzz to have so hurriedly posted an apology, there is likely FAR more than we know here and it just has not been posted yet.
This present case, however, as well as the LawBuzz case, impacts, like Watergate, on a far bigger issue, that of freedom of expression in matters of national interest. This impact is likely to be significant.
I firmly believe that, not only the eyes of the particpants, are on this case, but the eyes of the world press and of Google and Microsoft and the US State Department.
That may not have been the intention of BFP and Keltruth when they rushed to judgment and condemned Barbados and the other defendants back in 2007, but I confidently predict that this is what they will reap.
Interesting to read the comments of the law students on the lawforum. Many of the law students appear to be familiar with rulings. This case is obviously receiving buzz in the legal sphere in Canada.
@David. Any particlar ones?
I have briefly reviewed the posts on this whole issue. It seems to me that Donald Best’s contempt is not the only one. I just reread the affidavit of John Knox. If that document was ever filed in a Barbados court, it would constitute contempt of court here. It would be a matter for the DPP, but I have no doubt that it consitutes contempt.
reply to amused post: if you look at only what you like you can paint anyone as ugly, think about this, Father: wealthy businessman. Raised Catholic. Well schooled. Childhood distinctions: pious, bookish. Never married, she never had a “real” paying job, she lobbied to get stuff for free from businesses and private individuals, lived in a slum, made movies, and died surrounded by poverty…would you call that a successful life??? Those are truths about Mother Terasa……I very much doubt Peter Allard is a villinous or as gracious he is made out to be. This looks like cherry picking the facts to fill your own basket of sour grapes.
All we need is food and shelter and someone to blame right?
Why put him down for playing by the rules, rules made by the polititions! Sounds like it’s the system that should be vilified and not those who live by it. …ya think?????
@sw42 // January 21, 2010 at 3:03 PM.
Picture this. Equality between Mother Teresa and Peter Allard. They are about to cannonize Mother Teresa. But when they get to Peter Allard, there is already one Saint Peter – so are they, Vatican style, going to call him Saint Peter II?
Do you have any idea how rediculous your comment is?
For all those who follow this matter READ the recent Judge Shaughnessy ruling regarding Donald Best case..
Very interesting reading David. It seems to me that we are dealing with some very slimy characters. Maybe we should look for Donald Best at the bottom of the GHNS swamp.
@Pat
This Best person has ball that much we have to say about him. Can’t imagine the thought of anybody committing contempt of court in CANADA!
This truly is a mess and highlights the differences in Canadian and Barbadian (also English) law. And a few other things. It is, frankly, DISGUSTING.
First of all, it amazes me that Canada has these tiers of costs that can be claimed and that, instead of ordering “costs to be agreed or taxed”, a full motion must now be pursued to determine what level of costs will be awarded. All, most, or less than half. If a contempt motion lasting, from what I can see, just one day, costs almost CDA$70,000, then we have to assume that this three day hearing on costs in late February will be at a price of at least twice that. CDA$140,000. So, a full dress (and I can assure you that the lawyers will have to gown and appear in full court clothing) hearing at a cost of a further CDA$140,000 will now be held for the justice system of Ontario to decide if people who have soundly and roundly abused it (and they are sworn to uphold it and remember Convict Donald Best is a former policeman) have to pay all, most, or less than half, of the legal costs they thrust upon a foreign country and its foreign nationals over the shares of a foreign-registered company with no assets or interests in Ontario and no attornment to their province, country or laws.
And all this has been conducted in concert with a vicious campaign in the blogs BFP and Keltruth, both supplied with self-serving (and original) documentation by the plaintiff and/or Mr Best and/or Mr McKenzie.
I wonder how the Ontario court is going to deal with this attack on it and, worse still, this attack on the sovereignty and reputation and laws and elected and appointed officials of a democratic, sovereign and FRIENDLY (to Canada) country.
I also fail to understand why an affidavit by a non-party was allowed to be considered. John Knox (or, to use his fraudulently self-claimed title, Professor John Knox) is not a party to this action. He has no locus or standing in it. OR DOES HE!!!
In hiding the corporate documents of Nelson Barbados Group, is Convict Donald Best attempting to hide who the shareholders actually are? NO, SURELY NOT!!!!
Interesting point, because, you see, in our law, the Court would require that Knox show that he has standing (is a party to the action) before it would accept his affidavits on behalf of the plaintiff. In other words, he would have to demonstrate that he is an officer or directing mind of the plaintiff. Not so, apparently, in “politically correct” Canada where, apparently, any Tom, Dick or Harry can have their say in court case, whether or not they have standing. It is this kind of contradiction that makes you wonder why they still have “champerty” on their list of torts. BUT, it explains why they felt emboldened to post as exhibits the comments of bloggers on BFP that had been carefully manured and kept in the dark (like mushrooms) before being reaped.
I look in astonishment at the public domain record listing the 13 years of association between the Convict Donald Best and K. William McKenzie. They worked on: 1. Expressvu Inc. vs Norsat; 2. WIC Premium TV vs General Instruments; 3. Bell ExpressVu vs Rex; 4. Kudelski vs Love; 5. CAMT vs Pace; 6. Love vs Datacom.
In two of these cases (Nos. 4 and 6) McKenzie represented Convict Donald Best personally. So, in 13 years and with 6 cases in all of which Convict Donald Best played a major role in supporting or directing Mckenzie, they shared the same address – and, with that caseload, they might as well have, since for either of them to return home even to clean their teeth would have been a waste of valuable time. It is very clear that these two men think with one mind.
AND, they must have had a metaphorical housemate. Allarco/Allarcom, the source of income of one Peter Allard of which he is a directing mind. Because Allarcom had an interest in Cases Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 and may even have had an interest, for all we know, in case No. 4.
The most interesting part of all in this recital of cases in the Reasons, occurs in No. 4 where, predictably, when required by the Court IN 2002, Convict Donald Best could not be found by Mr Mckenzie (what a SUPRISE!!!) and Mr Mckenzie believed that Convict Donald Best lived in Thailand. So much for having to run and hide as the result of threats to his and his family’s safety emanating from a blog on Barbados Underground.
So, McKenzie has done this before – but MIRACULOUSLY, by 2005, Convict Donald Best and McKenzie had again set up housekeeping together at McKenzie’s law office in order to embark on other “legal adventures” with their best friend/partner Peter Allard. What a grim threesome. If those walls could speak…..
And by 2007, they had turned their attentions and sphere of operations to Barbados with the fraudulent assistance of Madge Knox and her socially and mentally challenged children.
And so who suffers? The money to pay for this has come from the pockets of Bajan taxpayers out of Barbados’ foreign currency reserves in a time of global recession. The position of these people, one a convict, has been supported and promoted by Bajan Reporter aka Barbados Free Press and by Keltruth, using tactics specifically designed to strike directly at Barbados’ international standing (among other things, letters to the UN just before a speech by our new PM), its tourist trade (on the silly assumption that people who come to Barbados for sand, sea, sex and sun – and rum, have an overriding interest in the fate of a swamp), its Police Force (which, refusing to take on manufactured threats and self-inflicted arson attempts, has not jumped to attention) its off-shore investments (by promoting PANAMA as a superior off-shore investment country to Barbados) and so on. Come home, Norriega, all is forgiven – by fellow convict Donald Best.
Instead, we must bow down low to the dictates of a fat, red-headed little man known as “Little Peter” (which I assume probably refers to something other than his stature) from Alberta via Vancouver who conceived (not, I suspect, on his own) a business plan involving a swamp (which failed and which he now calls “philanthropy”) and his crew of convicts and shady Ontario legal practitioners and an “ecology expert” who makes Mata Hari look like a rank amateur when it comes to secretly recording conversations which, purporting to be about GHNS that both parties served at the time, might well have been privileged in any case.
I have rarely been so disgusted with anything as I was after reading these latest Reasons.
I urge you, David, to let us know as soon as possible the fate of Mr McKenzie and whether he too will be found in contempt and sentenced like his erstwhile house/office mate, Convict Donald Best.
As for you, Peter Allard, I think it is high time now that you left our shores. Take your chattels with you and leave our property and fixtures where they are. Sell them and take your money and your “philanthropy” elsewhere.
Thailand seems a good destination for you and one understands that the dunes are far more populated than those of Long Beach.
Maybe they will canonize you there and then you will indeed have something in common with Mother Theresa. Of course, if you really want to be like her, go and live in Calcutta and work among the poor.
The poor of Barbados do not need or want your “philanthropy” GET LOST. Oh, and take Heaslet and the Knox clan with you – apparently Marjorie can support you all in a large house with servants and you will never miss a meal and she will do all this by selling a few eggs.
Nelson Barbados:
I can assure all Bajans that the matter of MacKenzie and his cohorts remains ‘on the radar’ of Canadians also.
Notwithstanding ties to pre-and post 9-11 high tech / Middle Eastern espionage exchanges / suicides / lawsuits / settlements, some associates, and now former associates, and apparently soon to be yet further former associates of the impugned firm are trying to hide.
I can report further that the LSUC (and indeed some Superior Court Justices) have permitted some impugned parties to continue to act as Ontario lawyers notwithstanding clearer and yet clearer irregularities and patterns of conduct over a number of years that was noted as being unbecoming of both corporate clients and lawyers acting / advancing their interests alike.
The murky client-solicitor veil of darkness may be lifting in these remarkable circumstances, and at some point, one wonders if the LSUC will come clean with investigators – and just who those investigators will now be?
Aiding and abetting and / or professional misconduct allegations are now plain and obvious. As a former client / victim of Mr. MacKenzie and his firm, I will read his transcript of evidence with great interest / attention to detail. What a house of cards.
You can follow the discussion on Canadians Against the Proroguing of Parliament on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=14939&uid=260348091419
This is also a matter of Canada’s national interest because it may bring / has brought the administration of justice into disrepute, depending on one’s perspective. I applaud the free exchange of ideas and information in respect of this matter.
Pingback: LawPro Lawyers Ask For Surprising Adjournment In Nelson Barbados Matter: The Secretive World Of Peter Andrew Allard – Part III « Barbados Underground
I have had dealings with Donald Best & Bill McKenzie in Canada…The details do not matter, but suffice to say these 2 set out to destroy my life. Donald Best used his power to submit fraudulent documents and I have seen and have proof of his ability to manipulate the law. I hope I get to see the day when he is finally punished for his activities, I wonder if anyone knows how much harm he has done..l. be careful what you say he is a slippery character and I might be stupid for posting this, but it feels good to see some vindication…
@ Pat – Can you find me on Facebook? Or email me? info.mcecc@gmail.com? I would like to connect re: Mr. Best.
Just so you don’t miss it, Jason and Pat, here is what I posted on another link.
@Jason Bowman. Do you have any information on the whereabouts of Donald Best? If so, please forward it to the OPP along with a copy of your advises to the OPP to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to the attention of Mr. Justice Bryan Shaugnessy? The judge’s address is kindly provided for you here by BU on the letters sent to him by Donald Best. If you do it that way, then the OPP may find themselves having to report the facts of their investigations and enforcement of the certificate of committal of Donald Best to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
You also intimate that false identifies and passports are involved. May I recommend to you that if this is the case, you forward whatever you have to the USA’s Homeland Security on the basis that if Donald Best is using these tactics, then they might be also used by terrorists. In any case, it is illegal and strikes at the very heart of anti-terrorism legislation.
I have to wonder if Donald Best used false passports when he was coming into Barbados on those 40 occasions he was here and stayed at a Long Beach guest house and/or a Long Beach residence.
A report to Homeland Security would have the effect of all countries to the anti-terrorism accords having to open their immigration records, including the machine-readable strips on Canadian passports held by the Canadian authorities. That would include the governments of Thailand and Barbados.
It would also mean that organizations like GHNS with whom Donald Best was involved, not to mention people like itinerant vagabond Stuart Heaslett and shady and imupugned counsel Billy Goat Gruff and even our Petite Pierre Allarco and, of course, Alair “Doris” Shepherd, Professor (rtd) Knox and his sisters and their mother, Marjorie “Chicken” Knox, could find themselves answering to a higher authority (and I mean the USA and its fellow anti-terrorism accord signatories, including Barbados and Canada).
You are definitely a man after my own heart, Jason. Go get the bastards!!!!
Pingback: Barbados QC Named And Shamed In Conflict Of Interest, Abuse Of Legal Process Allegations. Nelson Barbados Group Ltd Backers Revealed – The Secretive World Of Peter Andrew Allard – PART IV « Barbados Underground
No jail or prison sentence can ever do justice to Donald Best and his cohorts of lowlifes for what they have done. God only knows how many lives they have ruined, families torn apart, meanwhile the various police departments including the OPP always seemed to look the other way and failed to investigate one of their former own. It wasn’t for lack of reports being filed on Mr. Best.
All I can say, Karma is ironic. Just look what happened to ‘Joran Van der Sloot’
May you rot in hell Don !