• Today
    August 21

  • 04:41 AM

Emotional Mottley breaks down in press conference

BARRY ALLEYNE, barryalleyne@nationnews.com

Added 16 May 2018


Attorney-at-law Eliott Mottley QC (right) pausing to get his emotions in check during today’s press conference. To his right, is his attorney-at-law Roger Forde QC. (Photo by Sandy Pitt)

Long-serving attorney-at-law Elliott Mottley, Q.C. broke down in tears earlier today, as he attempted to clear his name in the wake of certain allegations made by former Prime Minister, Owen Arthur regarding an alleged application for waivers from the Inland Revenue Department more than two decades ago.

During a press conference held at the Mottley’s law offices in Strathclyde, St Michael moments ago, Elliot’s eldest son Warren was forced to finish reading from a statement, after his dad choked up during his explanation of applying for a waiver from paying penalties and interest, and not from the payment of income taxes.

Elliott was at the time clarifying that based on records of the country’s Official Gazette, his daughter, Opposition Leader, Mia Mottley, was not acting Minister of Finance during a particular time-frame when it was claimed she had taken up the position because Arthur was overseas on official business.

“For the avoidance of doubt, I wish the public to know that at no time during the period 1994 to 1999, did my daughter ……..,” was where Mottley, while reading, held his face, started to cry, and tried to continue but couldn’t, before Warren took the statement and read, “For the avoidance of doubt, I wish the public to know that at no time during the period 1994 to 1999, did his daughter, Mia Amor Mottley, ever act as Minister of Finance and Economic Affairs of Barbados,” he said, as Elliot tried to recover.

Just before breaking down, Elliott had made it clear that contrary to what Arthur had said in a press conference on Monday, he (Mottley) had never applied for a waiver of income tax payment, but had applied for the waiver of penalties and interest.

Earlier this week, Arthur, in that press conference held at a local media house, denied approving any tax waivers for Mottley, and added that his daughter Mia should clear the air on the matter.

Mottley revealed that after having his personal finances audited for the period 1987 to 1993, it was found that he owed the Inland Revenue Department substantial arrears of income tax, and that in January 1995, the department registered two judgments against him in the sums of $1 031 284.37 and $20 587.91 respectively.

“I categorically state that at no time did I ever apply to  Mr Arthur for a waiver of arrears of income tax which I owed the Inland Revenue Department,” Mottley stressed.

He also revealed that subsequent applications for waivers of penalties and interest on those arrears were made, and approved by the Ministry of Finance.

Mottley’s attorney, Roger Forde, also a Queen’s Counsel, said that defamation litigation surrounding the issue was pending. The pair did not take questions from reporters. (BA)


Dos and Donts

Welcome to our discussion forum here on nationnews.com. We encourage lively debate, but we also urge you to take note of the following:

  • Stay on topic – This helps keep the thread focused on the discussion at hand. If you would like to discuss another topic, look for a relevant article.
  • Be respectful – Meeting differences of opinion with civil discussion encourages multiple perspectives and a positive commenting environment.
  • Do not type in capitals – In addition to being considered “shouting” it is also difficult to read.
  • All comments will be moderated – Given the volume of comments each day, this may take some time. So please be patient.
  • We reserve the right to remove comments – Comments that we find to be abusive, spam, libellous, hateful, off-topic or harassing may be removed.
  • Reproduction of comments – Some of your comments may be reproduced on the website or in our daily newspapers. We will use the handle, not your email address.
  • Do not advertise – Please contact our Advertising Department.
  • Contact our Online Editor if you have questions or concerns.
  • Read our full Commenting Policy and Terms of Use.
comments powered by Disqus


Do you think that marijuana should be legalised only for medical and scientific purposes?