Patriarch of the Mottley Clan Elliott Mottley(l) Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley (r)
On March 18, 2009, Barbados Free Press (BFP) linked to the Keltruth managed blog Barbados Money Laundering and Offshore Business Advisory Blog and published a report entitled Mottley Family’s Miami Mansions – Were Real Estate Profits Declared In Barbados? How Did A Million U.S. Dollars Get To Florida?.
One of the claims the BFP report made was, Barbados Money Laundering Advisory has been doing some digging under the freedom of information in the United States. We wonder what else and who else they have come up with.
A read of a recently posted blog by Barbados Underground (BU) should have presented a different perspective for consideration.
You should have concluded after reading the BU blog that the “evidence” produced by Keltruth and promoted by BFP was not* obtained “under the freedom of information in the United States” but* as the result of illegal, criminal stalking of, among others, the Mottley Family (the family of Barbados’ former Attorney General and now leader of the opposition, Mia Mottley) by a former Ontario Provincial Police officer, now a criminally sentenced fugitive from Canadian justice, Donald Best. Best even attempted to get his hands on the garbage of the Mottley family – garbage, which, given the status of Mia Mottley as Leader of the Opposition, is almost certainly covered by diplomatic protocols and attendant protections.
It is said that Donald Best travels in and out of the USA and Florida with impunity. Under what name? Under which passport from which country? Is his first or last name Nathan in these ventures and on these documents? Is he purporting to be Thai? Or Canadian? Or, is he purporting to be a US Citizen?
He was a member of the OPP so would have been documented and undergone all kinds of physical testing, possibly including DNA. No doubt the US authorities in cooperation with the Canadian authorities can find him. In light of all that we know, we hope for the sake of Messrs Allard, McKenzie and Knox family they are not found in the company of Best in Florida. The reason is obvious.
This really is a matter for Barbados to report to the US authorities. To be honest, I suspect that this has probably already been done.
In light of the above will the Mottley’s go to court to seek damages?
@ David, under the photo the name should be Elliott not Elton
@David. good, but difficult question. To sue for damages, you must show that you have sustained damage and I don’t, on the face of it, see damage. In fact, it might be argued that Mia has benefited from the publicity and the outrage on her behalf by the public.
There are, however, other areas that, in my respectful submission, MUST be addressed and these give rise to possible criminal actions by the USA authorities. Indeed, if the allegations, as alleged, are proved, then the organizer (McKenzie) and the paymaster (Allard) may well be facing serious investigation by the USA authorities and possible legal process. The USA cannot (and must not) be seen to take no action to protect the members of foreign governments (especially friendly foreign governments) and the personnel of their diplomatic missions.
There will, of course, be no fanfare to the process, but I would be suprised if the mastermind, the paymaster and the tool (Best) are not under serious investigation and I can assure you it will be one where reliance on false documentation and codenames and all the rest will be completely seen through. I think they may also well find that the only places they will likely not be found will be in countries ruled by regimes unfriendly to the USA.
I actually begin to feel sorry for the people taken in by this lot.
David
Best even attempted to get his hands on the garbage of the Mottley family – garbage, which, given the status of Mia Mottley as Leader of the Opposition, is almost certainly covered by diplomatic protocols and attendant protections.
****************************
You got to be kidding me!!! Under what law is garbage legally protected? This may not be a consideration in Barbados but anyone living in the USA or Canada should always shred any papers with their names or addresses prior to disposition, that goes doubly for documents with financial or other proprietary information.
If someone sued another party for going through their garbage they would be laughed out of court
Thanks Hants!
Sargeant | August 18, 2010 at 8:14 AM | I am told that there is a way to reassemble shredded documents and if you read the documents provided by BU you will see that the shredded documents of David Shorey were transported from Barbados to Canada to be reassembled. The collection of such documents for the purposes of reassembling them would certainly constitute a breach of the protection of privacy legislation in both the States and Canada and in the UK. Garbage per se cannot be protected under a California ruling and you can look that up on the internet. However, my understanding is that all hinges on the reasonable expectation of privacy – and if you shred a document, you can reasonably be said to expect the contents to remain private and confidential and secret to you. With Mia or any member of government, it is different and I can assure you that no one is laughing, in or out of court. This is an issue that needs to be addressed, as the California ruling desperately needs to be revisited. So, I give you an example. You have been fooling around on your wife and the lady with whom you have been fooling around writes you a highly indiscreet letter. You shred this letter, but our friend Mr Best comes and takes the shredded document to Canada and puts it back together again – and sends it to your wife. Well, unless you have an “open marriage” your goose is cooked and it is going to cost you NUFF money. Would you think that maybe you ought to have a right of action in the courts against Mr Best? Do you think that the courts would have a right to laugh (at you) then?
In any event, no good trying to reassure the Allard, McKenzie, Best camp that they are safe. Or to be the little boy whistling in the dark. Because, you can be absolutely certain without the slightest scinthilla of a doubt that, far from being the stalkers and the hunters, Messrs Best, McKenzie and Allard are now the stalked and the hunted – and the difference is that the stalking and the hunting is being done with full legal sanction by experts in the field. We may never know what happens, but I hope we do find out.
@Amused: “I am told that there is a way to reassemble shredded documents…
Yes. It’s not particularly easy, but it can be done. Especially if the full “data set” (read: all the shreds) are available to be scanned and analysed.
(Now a-days it’s done automatically by robots which scan both sides of each shred, and then a large computing cluster which uses various means to reassemble the “jigsaw”. But please remember that during the “Iran Hostage Crisis” that Iran was able to reassemble many documents using only humans.)
Being the geek you all know I am, let me please render this advice to anyone who actually wants to destroy documents, rather than using the courts to make them inadmissible:
In order — each step should be followed…
For paper:
1. Ensure you use a “Cross Hatch Shredder”.
2. Stir up the output bucket containing the shreds at least once a day.
3. Have several different waste bins into which you place the output when you’re ready to dispose of the shredded documents.
4. Burn at least fifty percent of the output, if possible. Then stir until a fine ash.
5. Add water and stir until a nice porridge consistency for anything you can’t burn. (This works particularly well for ink-jet output.)
For CDRs / DVDRs:
1. Place into a microwave. Cook for 10 seconds at full power.
2. Physically break into many pieces.
3. Burn, if possible.
For CDRWs / DVDRWs / Harddrives / Memory Sticks:
1. Use a tool such as Darik’s Boot And Nuke which writes several layers of random data onto the media.
2. Burn, if possible.
@Chris
Where do you find this stuff? Still waiting on your response on the LIME blog. To hot to handle maybe?
@Sargeant
What is evident in today’s world is that there is a willingness to test any matters in Court. Only then can we speak in absolutes.
@David: “Where do you find this stuff?
I don’t find it.
I know it. And I write original material based on my knowledge of information theory and modern ICT (spiced with a bit of trained and natural paranoia).
@David: “Still waiting on your response on the LIME blog. To hot to handle maybe?
Nothing is too hot to handle.
It took me a while to decide how best to reply to that. Do I Comment, or do I submit a new Post?
I’m working on a Post. But I must double-check a few statements, lest I make a mistake….
@Amused | August 18, 2010 at 1:14 PM | Sargeant | August 18, 2010 at 8:14 AM | So, I give you an example. You have been fooling around on your wife and the lady with whom you have been fooling around writes you a highly indiscreet letter. You shred this letter, but our friend Mr Best comes and takes the shredded document to Canada and puts it back together again – and sends it to your wife. Well, unless you have an “open marriage” your goose is cooked and it is going to cost you NUFF money. Would you think that maybe you ought to have a right of action in the courts against Mr Best? Do you think that the courts would have a right to laugh (at you) then?
In the example you give the husband is guilty of adultery.
A judge should crack up laughing at him for getting caught so simply.
I know I would so who am I to deprive a judge of a laugh!!
Clearly the wife hired the right man for the job.
In my books Mr. Best would be due a rum.
So, did the missing FBI report turn up in the files you have?
@Chris. Thanks a million. Guess what I am buying today. Cross hatch shredder. Thanks also for the information on CDs and DVDs. Very helpful indeed. I scan a lot of documents on to my hard drive as PDFs and I have a programme installed that deals with them when I send them to trash so that they cannot be recalled later. I made sure that they installed the best. Thanks again, Chris, that was very helpful.
@Gigo, you are one very sick puppy. And I am sure that you and Mr Best have shared many a rum together – you may even be Mr Best, but I doubt it. But I would guess that you are one of the people under official investigation (which is the term for LEGAL stalking). Now all we have to do is await the comments of Anon (2) and then the Unholy Trinity is complete once more.
Actually BU garbage once put out on the street or taken to any dumping facility is public property in the US. Anyone can scavenge it for info. This was determined I think when some lawyers attempted to sue to stop the FBI from using info gleaned from their garbage.
Secondly there is nothing in US law that prevents you from following or conducting surveillance in public places of any individual especially a public persona unless you are deemed to be a physical threat to them or you are intrusive of their personal space. Look at the Paparazzi and how they hound politicians, their families, celebs etc. Correct me if i am wrong.
Thirdly I don’t think that the private activities of any Barbadian politician are protected in the US by diplomatic privilege. Do you think that if a Barbadian Minister had a US registered company which he ran with the intent to defraud the public that he would be able to invoke diplomatic privilege and escape prosecution? Do you think that personal communication between him and his company reps would be privileged? Come on David man.
@Christopher Halsall | August 18, 2010 at 3:15 PM |
It depends on the type of shredder being used. some shred horizontally and vertially and extreme fine. it is impossible to put papers back together that was shredded in that type of machine
@Amused: “Thanks a million. Guess what I am buying today. Cross hatch shredder.
You’re most welcome. And LOL…
And to share a bit more, if I may… Dumpster Diving is a rather old (but still fruitful) methodology for information (and other goods) retrieval.
But nowadays, people should also be very concerned about their Internet and Telephony (including FAXes) being intercepted. Probably more than divers…
(My GPG keyID, for anyone interested or for anyone who wants to send me an email which only I (and probably four different governments, if they intercepted and/or had the cipher text) can read, is 0xcb95259c.)
To a lesser extent — for those who are saying and/or doing things which they don’t want discovered — parabolic and laser microphones should also be considered….
(Just in case it isn’t clear, this is meant to be serious and informative, and funny, at the same time.)
@Anonymous (August 19, 2010 at 2:16 PM) : “It depends on the type of shredder being used. some shred horizontally and vertially and extreme fine. it is impossible to put papers back together that was shredded in that type of machine
It depends on how fine “extreme fine” is. And how much of the sample set is available. (This is why I gave the advice I did above.)
Most cross hatch shredders produce output approximately 5mm square. There’s still a great deal of information there…
Please do note that most documents are usually printed on paper. Paper is usually made from fibres….
You don’t think the scanners are only digitizing in the (human) optical range and resolution for the post-processing pattern matching? Do you?
Bad man saying nuttin | August 19, 2010 at 11:35 AM | Wanna bet? Wait and see.
Do I have insider information? Guess!!!
This is heating up nicely.
@Chris. Again thanks. I have no problem with the authorities reading anything I send by voice, mail, e-mail, text or fax -I have nothing to hide from legitimate authority. I DO have a problem with it falling into the hands of non-officials. BIG problem. For that reason, your information is most helpful and I thank you.
@Amused…
With respect, you are not connecting the dots…
@Amused: “I have no problem with the authorities reading anything I send by voice, mail, e-mail, text or fax -I have nothing to hide from legitimate authority. I DO have a problem with it falling into the hands of non-officials. BIG problem.
So what happens if it isn’t the “authorities” who are reading what you communicate by way of modern telecommunications technology?
Do you run to the courts to try to have said messages inadmissible?
Or do you instead ensure that all private messages are actually private?
I argue the latter is the more appropriate position.
What’s your public GPG keyID?
@Chris. Point taken and badly phrased by me. I was merely attempting to underpin that I have nothing to hide – that is the way I have always tried to conduct my life and business (and that sounds so pompous, which I don’t mean to be, but it IS true). Of course, you are right that I would rather certain facts and documents not come into the possession of anyone and I would rather not have to plead a whole slew of in limine motions before the courts to have excluded documents that should not be before them in the first place.
So, I defer 100% to your reasoning.
What is a GPG Key ID? Remember, I am old(ish) and not nearly as well clued in on these things are you youngsters. BUT, I am willing to learn. Very willing indeed to learn.
Some more bad news for Donald Best. Just when he thought he was safe from extradition safely holed up in Thailand, seems that he can be extradited to the U.S.A. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7956558/Merchant-of-Death-Viktor-Bout-will-finally-face-justice.html . And the combined legal skills of Sargeant, Gigo and Anon (2) seem unlikely to save him. Wonder if Donald Best and Victor Bout are friends? Question, not statement!!! Time will tell.