Provocation leads to 18 stab wounds!

WINSTON Junior Duffriend was yesterday convicted� for the second time�of killing his estranged common-law wife.

This time around, however, his conviction was reduced from murder to manslaughter, when the jury concluded that the woman had provoked him.

Ramkissoon�s cousin, Jennifer Lewis, testified that she was in the kitchen area of the restaurant when she and Ramkissoon shared a joke. Duffriend claimed that he was the butt of the joke.

Being made fun of is a valid defense in Trinidad and Tobago now - for murder. But being abused by a man has NOT been accepted as a valid provocation defense. This seems to me to be really messed up. I guess we have to be really careful about the jokes we make, as violent reactions to such include being stabbed 18 times!

on a happier note - Jamaica's election came off with some violence, but PJ PAtterson has won an unprecedented 3rd term. Seaga has now led his party to 7 consecutive defeats - think he should step down and let the party reorganise itself? Hmmmm?

Politics in Trinidad - the silly season.

OK - so the leader of the UNC party has just offered an "investment" of $1500 for every baby born in 2003. Is this ridiculous or what? This country is overpopulated. We don't have anywhere enough school places, enough jobs, and to encourage more babies to be born? I couldn't believe it when I heard.

If the idea is to improve the economic lot of the people of this country, why not give the $$ to girls who finish high school with good grades and don't get pregnant? Offer them the money towards further education. This will encourage them to NOT get pregnant young, to finish school and set themselves up for a better position in life! But NO...... that's not an option in this topsy-turvy land of ours.

I'm getting fed up!

I just realised that many countries are going to the polls in the next few months and the opinion polls are showing (Germany, Trinidad, Jamaica) that these countries are virtually split down the middle - seems as if (like the US in 2K) no-one wants to elect a government with a strong mandate anymore.

Trinidad has been "kind of" functioning with an 18-18 electoral tie for 9 months now,(voting AGAIN on Oct 7) and there are predictions of 30-30 in Jamaica on October 16. Germany's election was a dead heat until the end...

Do you think that it is a defnite move by voters to deny governments the ability to rule with a strong majority, and always keep the upper hand? Or is it a reflection on the ethnic and other divisions and tribalism that seems to be starting to infect the world?
Let me know what you think!

So I haven't written anything here for almost a month. It is difficult sometimes.
So - now we're into election mode again - it's the 3rd general election in 33 months. Should we call it the annual election?

There are apparently 102 people going up for the election in 36 electoral districts. Of course, the main 2 parties will most likely win all the seats. The main new party - Citizen's Alliance - has a lot of very intelligent middle-class people going up, but ... it seems strange that we hear nothign about what they're planning, what they stand for - or against. We don't even know who is backing them financially. That is definitely disturbing to me, as my main issue is the increasing lawlessness, exemplified by the overt corruption at all levels of society.
I think that this country will become ungovernable if people don't start obeying laws - we don't even obey traffic signals, and the Police don't stop us.

If the ex-Prime Minister can say that it's no-one's business where he suddenly got 100,000 UK pounds while in office, and another Minister won't say where he got $52 MILLION while in office, and nothign is done about them, then... should we find it strange that one has to pay a fee to the cashier to cash a cheque in less than 1 day of standing in line?

What also disturbs me is that the population has reached the point where they seem to take this behaviour for granted.

This is NOT hte way things are supposed to work One is NOT required to pass a bribe to get basic Government services that are provided for free, or for the clerk to do the job that s/he is getting PAID to do!

I find it interesting that the anti-abortion groups have co-opted the term "pro-life" , and placed it in opposition to the term "pro-choice'. By definition, being pro-choice means that one supports the right of the woman to choose her own destiny. So - how does that mean that opposition to life? That does not follow. With respect to the decision of a woman to carry a preganancy to term or not, this is a decision that impacts her life in a profound way. Pro-choice is exactly that. Supportive of the woman's choice, whatever it is. Pro-choice advocates work with women and girls to assist them in an informed choice, whether it is to carry the pregnancy to term and give the resulting child up for adoption, to keep the child, or to abort the pregnancy. Anti-abortion advocates would remove that choice.

Being anti-abortion can in fact mean that one is anti-life, as is shown by the many bombings and other violent acts carried out in the name of the "pro-life" movement in the US and elsewhere. What is clear is that they ar opposed to abortion, as well as to the woman's right to determine what happens with her own body. So - anti-abortion or anti-choice would be a much better name for this movement.

Who are these people who appoint themselves MY guardians and think they have the right to make MY decisions for me? They think that I should not have a choice in determining my life, my future. I notice that many of them are men, who aren't the ones at risk, whatever the choice. They don't go through the pregnancy, they don't have the risk of toxemia, high blood pressure, hemorrage; they don't go through labour, they aren't around to raise the child. Why should they have the right to decide for me? There is a lot of talk about adoption. How many adoptions are there annually, compared to children left in the care of the State? How many of these who are purporting to decide for me have adopted children? How many assist the prospective mother through the pregnancy, with doctor's bills, living expenses, school fees, psychological counselling and other support?

I saw on the TV 6 program Morning Edition, a male representative of the recent march talking about a woman who went through with a pregnancy that was the result of rape, and she was glad. That's good for her. She was in the US, where she had a choice. If she chose not to live with a reminder of a violent attack on her person, she could have. If she chose to have the child, that's her choice. Unfortunately, here we don't have a choice, and there are people actively working to keep us that way.

The same gentleman also mentioned that childbirth was very safe nowadays. WHO statistics graphically contradict him on this point. Childbirth and pregnancy are some of the leading casues of death for women and girls worldwide, even today. We must also consider the number of women and girls who die becasue of illegal abortions, and the resultant cost to the society. Here, if you have the money, you can have an abortion done safely. If you're poor - you may die.

Took another Keirsey test today. Interesting how I change slightly on this test - I've gone from an INTP type - rational engineer, strategic thinker, to more of an artistic type - an ESTP. This will be the 4th different type I've tested in the past 8 years. I've found that I change somewhat according to what I'm doing at the time - right now I'm working with a lot of very creative people in a very flexible environment. Guess that's why I change my way of dealing with people - according to the people I'm working with.


However, according to the Jung test, I'm still the same as I always was. I guess that test measures more fundamental things than the Kiersey.
On the Jung, I'm still the same as always, INTJ, with almost balanced NT (both VERY strong), and a moderately expressed J.

Spent the day today trying to get a dead dog removed from my premises. I called around to every Government agency that I could think of, and they were all unhelpful. Shouldn't a dead animal be of interest to the Health and Safety department of the Government? All they would tell me is that it's a private matter. The dog was rotting, not my dog, and flies were infesting the neighbourhood. Eventually I paid someone $250 to remove it. Suppose I was poor, or a pensioner or otherwise unable to spend that sum to have it taken care of privately? Would the Govt have left it there, causing a health hazard for ever? What is the role and function of the health departments? They are even having problems spraying for mosquitoes int he middle of a dengue epidemic that is killing people here.

Oh well - the trials of living in a third world country !