“I have the actual videos of their telephones, which is an absolute defense to defamation. It is called TRUTH”.
Those were the words uttered by Miami-based blogger, Kenneth Rijock in response to threats from the head of the local passport-selling outfit known as Citizenship By Investment (CBI) to bring a lawsuit against him for defamation of character.
Ince gave instructions to Ciboney Chambers to write to Rijock asking him to remove the alleged libelous statements from his blog site on the internet and to pay her compensation for libel.
Attorney-at-law, Ruggles Ferguson, acting on behalf of Ciboney sent a letter to Rijock through his email address outlining a list of demands from the CBI head.
In an exchange with THE NEW TODAY newspaper, Rijock said he was not worried if Ince was trying to get a default judgment against him in local courts.
“No way, they need to serve me here, and we have strict rules about such procedures”, he said.
The Blogger maintained that he has evidence to defend himself against any lawsuit filed against him.
“She needs a special court order to serve me outside of Grenada. Any judgment she gets cannot be domesticated in the US. I do not fear court cases in what are now banana republics/dictatorships.
As a public service, THE NEW TODAY reproduces a edited version of Ferguson’s letter that was sent to Rijock.
Mr. Kenneth Rijock Miami
BY EMAIL: firstname.lastname@example.org
RE: KAISHA INCE – SERIOUS DEFAMATION
We act for Ms. Kaisha Ince of True Blue, St. George’s, an Attorney-at-Law and Chairperson of the Grenada Citizenship by Investment Committee. ·On the dates below, you published on the internet via blogpost the following:
1) On December 1st 2017, a blogpost headed ”WILL GRENADA SACK ITS CBI HEAD FOR MISCONDUCT AND CORRUPTION?”. It prominently highlights a photograph ….. of Ms. Ince.
2) On December 2nd 2017, a blogpost headed “BLANKET DENIAL OF GRENADA CBI HEAD IS NOT A RESPONSE”. It prominently highlights separate photographs of Dr. Keith Mitchell, Grenada’s Prime Minister, and Ms. Ince.
3) On December 3rd 2017, a blogpost headed “THE SMOKING GUN: INCRIMINATING TEXT MESSAGES FROM GRENADA’S TOP OFFICIALS”. It carries a photograph of Christopher Willis with the caption, in part, ‘The Cashiered Managing Director of Henly, Henly & Partners Caribbean Limited”.
4) On December 4th 2017, a blogpost headed “HACKERS SEEKS TO CRASH WEBSITES CARRYING OUR THREE ARTICLES ON GRENADA CORRUPTION”. It carries fake screenshots with messages purporting to reflect exchanges on Prime Minister Mitchell’s WhatsApp.
5) On December 5th 2017, a blogpost headed “THE SMOKING GUN PART THREE: TEXT MESSAGES FROM THE GRENADA CBI HEAD”
6). It carries fake screenshots with messages purporting to reflect exchanges on Ms. Ince’s WhatsApp.
The above defamatory publications contain false, malicious, and seriously libelous statements of and concerning our client, exposing her to public odium and contempt and bringing her into disrepute. They are deliberately and maliciously intended to lower her reputation among her colleagues and other right-thinking members of society, particularly those involved in the CBI Programme globally.
Defamatory Publication 1: It portrays, as authentic, certain manufactured text messages, falsely attributed to be exchanges between Prime Minister Mitchell and Ms. Ince, and, further between Ms. Ince and a ‘friend’.
Those false and malicious text messages seek to ‘confirm’ an intimate relationship between the Prime Minister and Ince and to scandalously paint Ms. Ince as a racially prejudiced individual who mocks and dislikes black people.
Defamatory Publication 2 rejects the public denial by Ms. Ince of the malicious falsehoods contained in Defamatory Publication 1. It seeks to justify your defamatory statements as accurate and coming from a credible source. It refers to “screenshots” showing “ALL” the statements quoted in the last article (Defamatory Publication 1) and denies its categorization by Ms. Ince as fake news.
Defamatory Publication 3: You then show a fake screenshot with a purported WhatsApp exchange between Prime Minister Mitchell and Ms. Ince – falsely reflecting the contents as true.
Discriminatory Publication 4 republishes the “incriminating text messages” which purports to be an exchange between the Prime Minister and Ms. Ince” (Defamatory Publication 1). It reflects images purporting to be actual WhatsApp screenshots coming from the phone of Prime Minister Mitchell – screenshots which are fake and wholly manufactured.
Defamatory Publication 5 republishes text messages purported to be exchanges between Ms: Ince and ”’a trusted friend”. Those fake and malicious messages falsely portray her as someone with an ‘anti-black prejudice’. It carries a group photo of Ms. Ince in the company of two white individuals (male and female), all smiling.
All the above defamatory and scandalous statements, which you well know to be untrue, are carefully calculated to destroy our client’s reputation. We refer to, and rely on, the entire content of all five publications for their full force and effect.
The defamatory words meant, and were understood to mean, both in their natural and ordinary meaning and by way of innuendo that our client is corrupt, immoral, dishonest, racially prejudiced against black people and unfit to be head of the CBI Committee.
Those defamatory words further cast our client as someone who receives kickbacks and bribes, involves herself in an illegal diplomatic passport scheme, indulges herself in criminal activity, and is guilty of misconduct.
Based on the foregoing, out client demands:
1) The immediate removal (forthwith) of the defamatory publications, and any other similar publication, from your Website together with an undertaking not to publish or cause to be published the same again;
2) A retraction of all the defamatory publications
3) An unqualified apology, the terms of which are to be submitted to our office for approval before publication; and
4) An offer of damages to properly compensate for the injury to her reputation and the distress caused to her by the defamatory statements.
Please submit your unqualified apology and offer of damages to our office within seven (7) days of receipt of this letter.
Should you fail to comply with any of the above demands, we have been instructed by our client to institute legal proceedings against you without further notice.