Presiding officer for NWI Veronica John, left, and former Supervisor of Election, Sylvia Findlay-Scrubb and other persons in a huddle inside the courtroom after the judgement on Thursday. (iWN Photo)

Sylvia Findlay-Scrubb who was supervisor of elections during the Dec. 9, 2015 elections, the result of which the court upheld on Thursday, had no comments for iWitness News after the ruling.

After the judgement at the High Court, Findlay-Scrubb spent some time in a circle with some women, including the new Supervisor of Elections Dora James and Rene Baptiste, a lawyer for the government in the case.

At one point, they seemed to be praying.

Asked if she had any comments on the ruling, Findlay-Scrubb who took up the election chief post in 2009, after retiring from the teaching service, said she had “absolutely none”.

Also in the group was Veronica John, who was the presiding officer at NWI a polling station in North Windward.  

Asked if she had any comment, John, a respondent in the North Windward petition, told iWitness News, “I can’t remember. I can’t recall any comments today.”

“I can’t recall” was a popular response given by witnesses for the respondent during the hearing of oral evidence during the trial of the petitions.

John, during her testimony, admitted to refusing to take a voters ballot after claiming that she had seen a flash and heard a click.

The court ruled that there is no rule forbidding the taking of a photo in the polling station and ordered that the voter’s ballot be added to the tally.

John also admitted during the trial that as electors arrived to vote, she told some of them “show me your voting finger”, words of a popular campaign song for the ruling Unity Labour Party (ULP) ahead of the 2015 polls.

Lauron “Sharer” Baptiste of the main opposition New Democratic Party brought a petition challenging the victory of the ULP’s Montgomery Daniel in North Windward.

The NDP’s Benjamin “Ben” Exeter had also challenged the victory of the ULP’s Sir Louis Straker in Central Leeward.

3 replies on “PETITIONS TRIAL: ‘I can’t recall’ electoral officer says after ruling”

  1. The Court of Public Opinion

    Regardless of the March 21 2019 ruling of Judge Stanley John in the matter of the SVG Election Petitions, the Court of Public Opinion who followed the issue closely may give a totally different verdict. Judges have to follow legal guidelines and laws; the public often follows its heart and head in the Court of Public Opinion.

    “Election fraud” is a generic term. Laws, however, are specific. You either followed the law or you didn’t. In the SVG election it has been proved without any doubt that many legal processes were not followed. They may or may not have been mistakes by election officials, regardless, therefore, the law was not observed, perhaps by default but that is inexcusable and unforgivable.

  2. Dear Jolly, when freedom is offered on the cheap, it will never ever be delivered. Invariably the offer itself will always be snatched back as it was emanating from the powerful to the weaker!

    True freedom do comes at a price to those who will pay for it! Too Poor or too weak or cowards will sadly always be in wretched bondage.

Comments are closed.