Dear Editor,

When Trotman was granted that injunction against Anthony Welshman; in essence that order was to prevent him from speaking to, or publishing in the press such allegations. The order simply stated that, while this matter remains an allegation one cannot go about spreading such rumours because it remains an allegation and nothing else.

However, that gag order did not exclude Trotman from prosecution, nor did it, in any way, gave him immunity from prosecution; far from it. Karen D’Souza of Red Thread, in a political capacity, erroneously penned that notion.

That gag order placed the accuser in the spotlight to do either of two things – apply to the High Court for redress or shut up. Welshman Jr. has decided to go to court and all eyes would be there when this matter begins.

Before I go any further, I would like to delve into a few areas of pertinent interest. Trotman is operating under the age-old PNC tactic of bullyism, where you throw your weight around and expect the accuser to go away. In fact, you go to the High Court and get a restraining order and literally gag the victim from telling his story.

You are telling the world, also, that the alleged victim is a lunatic and an unstable person who is led by diabolic forces; and you do all within your might and power to humiliate and degrade your accuser. This is typical behaviour of a bully (I really wanted to use the other “B” word).

If I may pose the question – could you ever imagine a government functionary of the PNC Government ever taken to court on any matter? I said any matter, because certainly the one brought by Welshman could never have seen the light of day in the political atmosphere that existed then.

Both accuser and his story would have “evaporated” into thin air. This is the arrogant point of reference from which Trotman operates: But he is mistaken, because under the new dispensation one must give an account of their actions – something Glenn Lall has to face up to.

Well, the truth is you would look a fool in the eyes of the world, seeing the matter would be dealt with in a court of law. The charges against you will read “rape and buggery of a minor.” Very serious and very embarrassing would be the result; that is, the Speaker of the House hauled before the court on such horrible charges.

Judging from the fact that it is already in the public domain he may want to explore the possibility of a settlement. May I remind my readers that a settlement is a guilty verdict and an admission of guilt? In either case he has no choice in this matter with such a mountain of evidence stacked against him. At this stage Trotman would have to resign from the position of speaker of the house.

With such a high level matter before the courts Trotman is left no other alternative but to resign. I call on him to do the noble thing.

NEIL ADAMS