Friday, March 6th, 2009: Grenada Today’s efforts to destroy the leadership of the New National Party in particular the Political Leader and Deputy Political Leader, Dr. Keith Mitchell and Gregory Bowen are well known and less and less accepted. These efforts are closely supported by those of Anslem Clouden. The public has listened to and seen the outcomes of the various allegations made by these two people and must understand why they will continue notwithstanding the heavy embarrassment that they face after each occasion. It is not only politics; it's mainly about money for their pockets. The case against Gregory Bowen and six others, brought by Grynberg in New York has been thrown out. While the Judge indicated his decision since in October of last year, the written Judgment was released only on February 19th 2009. The written opinion of the judge is very revealing. Firstly Grynberg brought a case against nine persons wherein he accused eight of them of paying bribes to Gregory Bowen (the other defendant) to get the former Minister to terminate the agreement he had with Grenada. While he also accused Bowen of asking him for a bribe, and two Russians (Fridman and Blavatnik) of promising to furnish bribes to Grenadian Officials in the future, the case was for damages for termination of his contract. The lawsuit never asked the judge to pass judgment on Bowen for asking for a bribe, or on British Petroleum, Lord Browne the Chairman or any of the others for paying bribe money to Bowen and other Grenadian Officials. Grynberg simply wanted US$500million from any of the defendants who could pay. From the opinion and judgment, it was clear that the sovereign state of Grenada was on trial and not Gregory Bowen (page 12 of the opinion). Hence had Grynberg succeeded Grenada would have been exposed with the other defendants to US$500million. Anslem Clouden presented an “Expert” opinion to the NY Court for Grynberg on Grenadian Law. The court rejected Clouden as an expert. (Page 14 of the opinion) The following questions must be asked. How much was Clouden paid by Grynberg? Were these payments also for other activities related to the July 8th elections? Why did a US judge reject Mr. Clouden? Is it because he Clouden was never properly constituted a Lawyer because of his education? Or does it have to do with his knowledge or experience? We know that the US system has much more access to information from Canada where Clouden studied law than the OECS does. Maybe Mr. Clouden could provide the answers. Mr. George Worme should also tell the public whether he received monies directly from Grynberg or through Mr. Clouden for bringing the various stories in his newspaper. Why is it that George Worme placed in his newspaper the testimony of Bowen before the ICSID Tribunal and not Grynberg’s? In his testimony in London Grynberg admits to being found guilty of defrauding investors of their monies and hiding the proceeds in his wife’s trust to avoid seizure; made his usual false accusation that the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance of Dominica and the President of the Central African Republic asked him for bribes as well. Worme also did not print the testimony of James Bristol the Attorney-General, in which he degraded and blamed government workers to seek to have Grenada lose the arbitration. How much was he paid by Grynberg? It is not only the Attorney general James Bristol who is associated with and working for jack Grynberg! Three of the defendants did not make an appearance before the court. Of the three one was not served and so was excused. Grynberg sought to have default judgment entered against the other two. So outrageous the judge felt the case was that he took the very unusual course of throwing out the case even against the defaulters! The information provided to the court by Grynberg’s friends in Grenada showed Lev Model, Lev Korchagin and Edward Vasilev as founders of Global Petroleum Group Limited and the judge intimated Lev Model was the Chairman of that company. The document providing evidence that over $4million was paid into the account of the government of Grenada by Global Petroleum Group (for defending the arbitration in London) was also submitted in June 2007 (page 7 of the opinion). This was one of the documents submitted to the Public Accounts Committee comprising of the Prime Minister, Minister for Finance and Minister for Tourism among others. How could one claim that Bowen or any person advise Global Petroleum Group Ltd. to pay monies to its Chairman (itself) instead of Government? All these people know that the government received the monies for the arbitration. This was the latest story put out by the Grenada Today about the so called Russians and investigation by the government. It is not only the US$500million that was at stake. Had the case been lost, any US citizen having a commercial contract with the government in Grenada, if aggrieved by the latter’s action in the execution of the contract, can sue any Government Minister or Officials who acted on behalf of the government in a court in the USA notwithstanding the Government took the action in its own jurisdiction. No public servant or Government Minister will be safe! It is clear to all that the case was politically motivated and that it was politically expedient to have the case hanging during the elections to benefit the NDC. When the case was thrown out the first time, those who stood to benefit had the case amended and brought back. On the 19th February, 2009 the judge ruled “With Prejudice”. No further amendment and return tactics can be used. SOURCE: NNP News INSIDE GRENADA NEWS (The information contained in the above article reflects that of the author and not necessarily those of the Inside Grenada Team)