Opposition Leader Arnhim Eustace has defended Vynnette Frederick’s (pictured) continued status as a senator. (IWN photo)

Opposition Leader Arnhim Eustace has defended his decision to allow Senator Vynnette Frederick to continue to hold that post, although she is scheduled to stand trial on nine counts of false declaration, saying she has not been found guilty of any offence.

The charges stem from the content of affidavits that Frederick, a lawyer, filed as part of private criminal complaints against Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves after the 2010 general elections.

(Read: Opposition senator, Vynnette Frederick, to stand trial)

The charges against Gonsalves were thrown out of court, and perjury related charges later brought against the senator.

At a town hall meeting in New York on Saturday, Eustace, who is also President of the opposition New Democratic Party, was asked why Frederick continues to be a senator and Public Relations Officer of the NDP although the charges have brought against her.

“Let me just say this: Miss Frederick has not been found guilty of any crime and her matter is still before the court,” Eustace said.

“In addition to that, we have a very strange history you know. There are persons whose cases have been nolle prosequi for rape,” he further said.

His statement was an apparent reference to the decision of Director of Public Prosecution Colin Williams to discontinue private criminal complaints against Gonsalves, after a female member of his security detailed accused him of sexual assault.

Higher courts have upheld the DPP’s decision.

When Gonsalves was accused of sexual assault, Eustace had called for him to demit office, pending the outcome of the charges.

2 replies on “Eustace defends Frederick’s keeping senatorial post amidst perjury charges”

  1. Carlos Walcott says:

    It’s SVG politricks. Everything goes. Perjury, rape charges, corruption, all part of the day-to-day running of things. In other words, just another day at the office.

  2. Is I-Witness News now suffering from the same malaise as other Vincentian newspapers?
    Have you stopped checking and performing basic investigative work before rushing to press?
    Which “higher courts have upheld the Dpp’s decision”? When was this matter heard in court?
    Please enlighten us.

Comments are closed.