PANDORA’S BOX
SOMETIMES I get very upset with my colleagues in the media.

They have this weird concept of professionalism that oftentimes borders on the cruel and/or on abject dishonesty.

Many times – actually, most often they do not competently research their facts, or they skew their facts to correlate with their personal biases to the extent that they murder their credibility by displaying for the world to see a lack of integrity that would have put even Judas to shame.
They are also like cannibals, because even if one of their own goes down they pounce on them, not in a protective way, but like carnivores looking for the biggest and tastiest bite.

Recently the media houses went into frenzy over a story where a resident of Albouystown was accused of bestiality.

The fact that the accuser was a protagonist whom reports state was often an aggressor in an ongoing feud between two neighbours that had lasted for years was not something that they took into consideration.

The story was titillating and sensational enough for media houses to splash the photograph of the accused for days, not caring that if the story was untrue (which most likely it is, given the scenario under which it was created), that the poor gentleman’s life would become an unmitigated hell thereafter.

I wonder how they would react if the gentleman consequently becomes depressed to the extent of taking his own life, or is driven to murder if the provocation becomes too much.

Or I don’t wonder. I know. They would merely see it as another story that would make news for a couple of days, then, like carrions, they would move on to find another juicy story – which does not necessarily have to be true, just scintillating or morbid enough to generate public interest for a day – or two.

Recently a great hullabaloo was created over allegations made by a self-confessed criminal and murderer, who had been motivated to say whatever was expected of him with the promise of rewards beyond his expectations for himself and his family.

The U.S. has a track record (one that Pandora will not speak about today). The USA is famous for its doublespeak and its forked tongue, ask its indigenous peoples. Its judicial arms are lambasting this Government over allegations by known criminals of its complicity in criminal acts, to whit, aiding in the purchase of “spy equipment.”

And the method they used to entrap one of the accused?

They planted a recording device on Vaughn to entrap someone who trusted him.

I am not arguing right and wrong here. I am, however, wondering how an exercise to secretly record an x-rated conversation between a Guyanese Police Commissioner and a member of the opposition is a criminal exercise when placing a recording device on someone to secretly record a confidential conversation is acceptable in an American court of law.

Wiretapping is acceptable in U.S. anti-crime activities, but they have arrogated to themselves the right to judge members of the Government of this sovereign state on allegations by a criminal, whom they have richly rewarded, to say just what they want him to say so that they can score an undeserved victory in the courts – because it is all about winning, not by playing fair, or by telling truths.

Whomever can concoct a more plausible story told by even Satan will eventually convince the undiscerning into believing that red is white and vice versa.

And the Guyanese media has been on a feeding frenzy over mere allegations – by self-confessed criminals at that, to the improbable extent where they are demanding the resignation of a minister of the Government.

And here we come to the theft of someone’s good name.

Anyone can make accusations against someone, but justice systems of every land allow for the processes of the law to prevail before one is judged guilty.

Since the allegations by criminal Vaughn, the opposition – mentors, acolytes, especially those in the media, have been demanding the head of Minister Leslie Ramsammy on a platter.

They have ignored the principles of law circumscribing the protocols determining innocence or guilt; and it is even worse because many of them practice the legal trade – trade being the operative word, because their practice of jurisprudence has nothing to do with adhering to the principles of the law, but in barter of the truth, especially when the stakes are a Government and a country.

On trial is not a criminal for his crimes, which most likely include perjury, but many innocents caught in a web of deceit, and an entire nation is held ransom to persons versed, not only in stealing purses, but in robbing others of their good names in order to pursue their own nefarious agenda.