Welshman’s attorney says his client was offered $3M
–to say PPP/C engineered sexual assault allegations
JOHNNY Welshman, who has levelled accusations of sexual assault against Speaker of the National Assembly, Mr. Raphael Trotman, was offered a $3M settlement, on the condition that he publicly states that the Ruling Party asked him to make the allegations.
The explosive disclosure was made by Welshman’s attorney, Mr. Peter Hugh, in a statement released yesterday.
‘Mr. Johnny Welshman has been approached with offers of settlement in the sum of three (3) million Guyana Dollars on the condition that he makes a public statement that the PPP/C asked him to make these allegations’ – Johnny Welshman’s attorney, Mr. Peter Hugh
“I am informed by my client that despite the filing of the libel suit and a matter being investigated by the Guyana Police Force, Mr. Johnny Welshman has been approached with offers of settlement in the sum of three (3) million Guyana Dollars, on the condition that he makes a public statement that the PPP/C asked him to make these allegations. When he refused to accept any settlement or to lie

and say that the PPP/C asked him to do anything, his life was threatened,” Hugh said.
According to the attorney, the threat on Welshman’s life has since been reported to the police.
“These threats upon Mr. Welshman’s life could well be constituted as attempting to pervert the course of justice, and I trust that the police will investigate these threats to my client’s life, and unearth the individual or individuals responsible,” he said.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
Welshman’s attorney added that since the allegations were made, “grand conspiracy theories” have been peddled.
“There seems to be tactical accusations of grand conspiracy theories implicating Mr. Johnny Welshman in a plot by a political group to bring into disrepute the character and reputation of Mr. Raphael Trotman, by publishing accusations in the print media and on a social network,” he said.
Hugh pointed out that his client is not affiliated with any political party. “I believe the assertions and claims that Mr. Johnny Welshman is politically motivated are meant solely as a distraction from the very serious allegations made by Mr. Welshman,” he said.
The Attorney also questioned the Speaker’s actions in support of the claim of a political plot.
“If Mr. Raphael Trotman initially thought that Mr. Johnny Welshman’s allegations were a political plot by a political party, then why didn’t he come out immediately upon hearing of the allegations and expose this plot?” Hugh said, adding:
“Why was a public statement only made by Mr. Raphael Trotman and his supporters after the matter was reported to the Guyana Police Force? Why is there so much effort to connect Mr. Johnny Welshman to a political party in dealing with the allegations he made?”
Hugh’s contention is that the assertions that the allegations are grounded in political plays are being made before the Police investigation is completed, and can only be viewed as an attempt to intimidate Welshman, and discredit him as having some motive for reporting the matter to the Police.
“The public chastisement, embarrassment or humiliation of a complainant by the alleged perpetrators, their servants, agents, supporters, sympathizers or anyone in my humble opinion is an attempt to tamper with a witness and in some cases may amount to an attempt to pervert the course of justice,” Hugh said.
DISCREDITING WELSHMAN
Welshman’s counsel also addressed claims that he is mentally unstable, among other efforts to discredit him.
Said Hugh, “Mr. Raphael Trotman claims that Mr. Johnny Welshman is mentally unstable, and is only making wicked assertions, yet he would recommend a mentally unstable young man for a job, with not one, but with two reputable businesses operating in Georgetown.
“It could reasonably be inferred that up until a report of the allegations was made to the Guyana Police Force, Mr. Raphael Trotman did not hold the view that Mr. Johnny Welshman was mentally unstable.”
As to the matter of a settlement, Hugh enquired, “…why would Mr. Raphael Trotman entertain and engage in talks of settlement, and offer Mr. Welshman a sum of money if he honestly believed that Mr. Johnny Welshman was a mentally unstable young man making wicked accusations, and being used as a pawn in a plot by a political party.”
What’s more, he said the fact that Trotman has even moved further to secure an Interim Injunction restraining his client, whether by himself, his servants or agents from publishing or attempting to publish whether in print or any electronic media any material relating and or pertaining to allegations of sexual assault.
Noting that Trotman himself is featured in the local media on the same subject, Hugh said, . “This seems to me to be attacking someone who cannot respond, reply or defend himself. In fact, since the granting of the Interim Injunction, Mr. Raphael Trotman has gone on the offensive in the media, and has been openly attacking and attempting to discredit Mr. Johnny Welshman.
“Several individuals posting in the social media who may or may not be affiliated to Mr. Trotman and/or the Alliance for Change (AFC) have been attacking Mr. Welshman, and publishing scandalous, degrading and offensive material which could be libelous in its own right. Why is the victim of an alleged sexual assault being treated in this manner?”
CONVENIENT BANDWAGON ACTIVISM
Welshman’s attorney noted that sexual violence is often a traumatic and damaging experience, and that no civilized society ought to allow a complainant to be degraded by public chastisement, embarrassment or humiliation in their quest for justice.
“The alleged allegations made by Mr. Johnny Welshman against Mr. Raphael Trotman were of a sexual nature which allegedly occurred when Johnny Welshman was a child. A child is considered a vulnerable victim and is afforded protection by our laws and our Justice system,” he said.
Hugh slammed non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and groups who claim to represent and champion human rights generally, for their silence on the matter.
He said, “These NGO’s and groups rush to the aid and offer counselling to victims even more so when the victim is a child, indigenous person or part of a another vulnerable group. I am greatly displeased with what appears to be convenient and bandwagon activism.
“Is it that these NGO’s and groups are fearful of challenging influential people in our society who seem to behaving in a manner contrary to what these NGO’s and groups claim to stand for?
“Is it that these NGO’s and groups reserve their activism for victims whose alleged attacker is not affiliated with particular political parties or who do not hold prominent offices or positions in society? I am saddened.”
The attorney noted that any victim of an alleged sexual assault must be offered protection pending the outcome of the criminal investigations.
He said, “Mr. Johnny Welshman is entitled to the same protection other victims are afforded. Is he being denied the protection of his rights and afforded protection simply because of who he alleges his attacker is?
“Justice must never be premised or appear to be premised on who is the alleged perpetrator of an offence regardless of their station, position, office or affiliations. Every citizen must be equal before the law. All alleged victims of domestic, transgender and sexual violence must be afforded equal access to justice and equal protection of the law regardless of their socio economic, racial or gender differences.”
The 22–year–old man’s allegations is that Trotman sexually assaulted him when he was 12-years-old. The allegation was first made public via an entry on the popular social media site, Facebook. Since the allegations were made, the House Speaker has been most empathic in his denial of claims that he sexually assaulted the young man in question.