Advertisement 87
Advertisement 323
Head of the National Workers’ Institute for Research and Education, Joseph “Burns” Bonadie. (IWN file photo)
Head of the National Workers’ Institute for Research and Education, Joseph “Burns” Bonadie. (IWN file photo)
Advertisement 219

Lawyer Maia Eustace says trade unionist Joseph Burns Bonadie has lost, in the court of public opinion, the case about her alleged connection to sex tapes of a voice sounding like a senior Unity Labour Party official having “phone sex” with a much younger woman.

Eustace, who is daughter of Leader of the Opposition, Arnhim Eustace, however, told I-Witness News on Wednesday that she is not sure if she would sue Bonadie over the matter.


Addressing a rally of the Arnhim Eustace-led New Democratic Party (NDP) in Walvaroo on the weekend, Ms Eustace said that Bonadie had accused her of being connected to “the sordid affair”.

“I am giving Burns Bonadie 24 hours to provide the evidence of my connection and Madonna Barbour’s connection to the sordid affair. Bring the evidence so we can put this matter in that coffin right there,” she told NDP supporters

Advertisement 271

Eustace told I-Witness News that Barbour is her secretary and mother of the woman whose voice is allegedly on the sex tape.

Asked why she had given Bonadie the 24-hour timeline, Eustace told I-Witness News there is a court of justice and a court of public opinion.

“So, the reason I was giving him 24 hours is because he has to have a reasonable time within which to prove his allegation, failing which the court of public opinion decides the matter.”

She said Bonadie alleged on radio last week that she and Barbour were connected to the sex tapes, which Eustace denied.

She said she has the option of taking legal action against Bonadie but hasn’t decided if she would do so.

“But, in the interim, we have an election and public opinion absolutely matters. It is the people who are going to determine who to vote into government. And so I have put it to the people to decide this issue, which is why I say there is a court of public opinion.

Lawyer Maia Eustace. (IWN photo)
Lawyer Maia Eustace. (IWN photo)

Burns Bonadie put me before that court, actually, because people have been discussing for quite some time since this allegation whether or not Madonna Barbour and I were involved,. We were not involved so we said to the court of public opinion we would like him to prove his allegation.”

Eustace has been campaigning on behalf of her father and the NDP and Bonadie, who is the government’s advisor on labour matters, is a spokesperson for the ULP.

Eustace said Bonadie has not contacted her nor provided any evidence of her involvement.

“I would assume that the court of public opinion would judge him, will assess that he has not come up with proof and they will dismiss his claim.”

Asked if she thinks that the court of law will make such a conclusion if the case ends up there, Eustace said, “Absolutely.

She told I-Witness News that she has no idea how the sex tapes came to be made.

Bonadie told I-Witness News separately on Wednesday that he had not heard from Eustace.

“She has not written me. I heard that she said things, but I am waiting on the letter,” Bonadie said.

4 replies on “Burns Bonadie has lost in court of public opinion — Maia Eustace”

  1. Clement Percival says:

    Write him, Maia. Like the Government and Party whose mouthpiece he is, he is nothing but but a loud mouth bluffer!! You may be too young to be familiar with this, but ask your parents about an the RCA record label of decades ago. it was entitled ” His Master’s Voice” and pictured a dog barking into a megaphone. Nuff said.

  2. Maia you must be seen to do the right thing, Gonsalves said he was in the right when he wrote to those who he claimed offended him.

    I think the formula is a letter from you or your lawyer asking him for an apology in two or more newspapers and on the radio station where he made the comments or claims and payment of the sum of EC$250,000 for restortutive damages to your previously unblemished and good name and character.

    After all in a court of law the onus is on him to prove that what he said is true, not on you to prove it wasn’t true.

    The man has got away with so much muck on the radio over the last few years, it is time for him to get his comeuppance.

  3. What the hell difference does it makes? Blame anyone but the the person who’s voice it is on the tapes make no darn sense they are so sick. No better than Judas selling their soul for some dollars. Then again maybe the old man hair dye is now affecting his brain.

Comments closed.