Rivers’ election challenged

| 13/06/2013

rivers swear.jpg(CNS): An eleventh hour petition filed in the Grand Court is challenging the election of Tara Rivers as a member of the Legislative Assembly for West Bay. The petition has been filed by attorney Steve McField on behalf of John Gordon Hewitt, the husband of Velma Powery-Hewitt, the UDP candidate who came in fifth in the district poll. The court action is asking for Rivers' election to be overturned, as it claims she holds an American passport and did not fulfill the residency requirement to qualify as a candidate, and return Hewitt as the fourth elected member for the district. However, if successful, the petition may instead trigger a by-election because of the significant votes polled by Rivers that could have gone to other candidates had she not stood for election.

Hewitt's claim centres on the fact that between October 2006 and May 2009 Rivers was resident in London, where she was working for law firm Allen & Overy. Rivers has said that during that period she was studying and therefore had a legitimate exception to the requirement in the election law that states all qualified candidates must be resident in the Cayman Islands for seven years before Nomination Day.

Hewitt also states in the petition that Rivers was born in the US and continues to hold a passport through her own act, which also disqualifies her from office. The petition states that the returning officer, Delano Solomon, failed in his duty to ascertain from Rivers whether she was resident for a period of seven years before Nomination Day or if she was still an American citizen, and was therefore wrong in accepting the nomination.

The petition states that Rivers' nomination was null and void and, as such, Velma Powery-Hewitt, the petitioner's wife and UDP candidate who was fifth in the poll, should be returned as the duly elected member for West Bay.

Rivers ran as a candidate with the Coalition for Cayman. However, she was invited by the new premier to join the PPM government as minister for education and employment after she was elected to the Legislative Assembly in a dramatic victory as the second elected member.

Her removal from office would not alter Alden McLaughlin's majority, since former premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly officially joined the PPM, giving the party 10 out of the 18 seats, and both Winston Connolly and Roy McTaggart have also joined the government benches, but it would throw the front bench into disarray.

Should the challenge be successful and Hewitt was returned, the UDP would have four candidates, which together with the two independent members would leave the opposition benches with six members across from a PPM government of 11.

However, a successful challenge may not see Hewitt automatically returned because further challenges may result in a by-election as other candidates could legitimately argue that if Rivers had not participated, the significant votes she attracted could have gone to candidates other than Hewitt.

The petition was filed in Grand Court on 12 June, just hours ahead of the three week deadline provided for in the law for any qualified voter to object to the election result. It was filed by Steve McField, who is no stranger to the election challenges. Following the 2009 election, McField had spoken widely about Dwayne Seymour and Mark Scotland's failure to fulfill a constitutional requirement to gazette their business interests with government by the deadline and questioned their qualification.

However, in a controversial turn of events, McField  joined the UDP legal team defending an action filed against the two Bodden Town candidates by six voters. That action was filed after the three week deadline as an originating summons, which was thrown out by Chief Justice Anthony Smellie.

The details of the objection were never aired as the chief justice found the law suit was not the vehicle for the challenge and the voters should have filed via the petition, as provided for in the election law, before the deadline.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Politics

About the Author ()

Comments (261)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Dazed and Confused says:

    Can you serve two countries? What if Tara runs for US presidency and still holds here title in Cayman can this been done? Does the constitution allows for this?

    Lots of questions, someone please explain.

    • Anonymous says:

      The constitution does not allow for this. Running for office, like renewing a passport, is an act of allegiance to a foreign power.

  2. Anonymous says:

    This response is also nonsense. The writer's point is that full time students in the UK are for the most part exempt from council tax. Council tax is nothing to do with income tax, as you obviously mistakenly think.

    As for her time there being part of the student process, her bio on Conyers Dill & Pearman's website indicates she was called to the bar in the state of NY and in Ontario in 2006. It could be argued that this marked the end of an education process, even if practicalexperience was still to be obtained. Further, per that website she is not listed as being admitted to the bar in England, but is in Cayman as of 2009. It is not necessary to work in the UK to obtain the experience to be admitted to the bar here and this period of her life certainly requires explanation.

    On a different but related subject, I believe she is 35 years of age. If she still has a current US passport, as has been suggested, then given that a US passport expires generally after 10 years, she must have re-newed her passport within the last 10 years. Renewing a passport as an adult, ie after the age of 18, is interpreted as a reaffirmation of citizenship if that citizenship was obtained by birth and is enough to disqualify her under the constitution.

    I like Tara as a candidate, but if the country is going to start a new period of honesty and openness in government it cannot be business as usual when issues of this nature arise. Honesty in government and blind support of Tara no matter what are irreconcilable bed fellows.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Really? And just how do you (or even they) know they are Caymanian? 

  4. Anonymous says:

    Why wait until now to challenge Tara’s election? Just wondering if this would even be an issue if Velma had been elected? I think not. It is obvious that the ppl elected who they wanted the represent them and clearly it was not Velma Hewitt!! When fox can’t get grape he call it sour!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Why wait until now?  Maybe because that is what the law says?  No-one was saying "how dare they file so late" when the amateurish challenge to the Bodden Town UDP candidates was filed at the deadline last time.

    • Anonymous says:

      That is so asinine, it has been placed before the courts and they will decide not you nor me, not UDP or PPM or buzzard and hazzard, the courts. Kapish.

  5. Anonymous says:

    This is such a 'storm in a tea cup'.  Tara is a highly educated lawyer who has clearly addressed this issue before she made the decision to run.  If the UDP really thought there was any substance to this they should have challenged her before the elections. This is just another one of their strategies to undermine her energy and the good work she could do for WB in particular.  Shame on you Gordon! Shame shame.!  

    • Anonymous says:

      I wish it were not so. I am a fan of both the Rule of Law and Tara. I am no fan of Gordon Hewitt.   I am however reminded of Voltaire's quote:

      "I disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

      Gordon possibly has a case. I do not like it, but he should have a fair hearing of it. Permit him that.



  6. Anonymous says:

    Tara we supported you and believed in youbut questions are being asked, for one;  Why didnt you sign the decleration? ….big problem. ….You knew your committments to the US then why did you take the oath after election? …..committments to the Queen and country……You with your education and knowledge knew what you were doing so tell me why. …..lastly,  you worked  in the UK with that 7year period so you must have paid Social security and Income tax………cannot be erased so where does that leave you? …..You must tell me why, and how such simple errors occurred……You see because you did not sign the declaration, you cannot be fined but it has to be asked. ….Why did you not sign it if you were being honest, ….So as one of your supporters , I need to know the truth along with the the entire country. ….Tell it as it is ………You will be respected and forgiven.


  7. Anonymous says:

    Two points to consider.1) As I voted for Tara I would be disappointd if she is not allowed to serve. However, the law is the law and the courts will have to decide. IF she is not allowed to serve the only fair solution is to have a total re-vote for ALL of West Bay. (2) Being a citizen of the USA should not be a disqualification. XXXX

    • Anonymous says:

      I agree with you on 1). Regarding 2) – being a citizen of the United States (or China or Cuba for that matter) from birth is not the problem.  The act of allegiance to a foreign state by renewing and maintaining her passport is. In this modern world, ask yourself if you would have difficulty with her were she Chinese and as an adult, committed an act of allegiance to that foreign power.

      What if her country, the United States, calls her.  "Minsister Rivers, this is your President calling. Your country needs you. Please close down the financial industry in the Caymans. We want it in Delaware. We will assist you with the cover story as to how to spin to your colleagues that this is a good idea. Thank you. "

      That is why our Constitution (like that of the United States) denies office holders the ability to be under allegiance to "any foreign prince."

      May God Bless America (and the Cayman Islands) – although not necessarily in that order.





  8. Anonymous says:

    I think that CNS should delete the comments from every idiot who does not understand that Tara is NOT disqualified because she has a US passport or because she was born in the US. Under our constitution she is allowed to run for office in Cayman because she has US citizenship through birth. After that is established, whether or not she has a US passport is irrelevant. Come on people, it can't be that difficult to understand.

    • Anonymous says:

      It may not be difficult, but you don't understand the issue, that's for sure.

      A child has no control over where it is born, so non-disqualification simply because an individual is born in another country is fine.

      Willingly reaffirming a second citizenship, by for example, renewing a passport as an adult, is a problem and if Tara has a current US passport, then given her age, she has renewed it and therefore re-affirmed her US citizenship, as an adult. That is a problem.

      • Anonymous says:

        A passport is a travel document ..Why is it being linked to pledging allegiance to a country..How many non naturalized Caymanians holding two or more passports voted in our elections..Should we now disqaualify them from voting?


        Better shut my mouth now before Gordon gets Steve going on that one..


        Only in Cayman…Crabs in a barrel..

        • Anonymous says:

          If you don't like the provisions of the Constitution, or the way they are interpreted, fair enough, but they are what they are and Tara has questions to answer. And the provisions that apply to being able to vote are less onerous than those required to stand for election, as it should be.

        • Anonymous says:

          Google the us passport application form and read it, in particular the notes. You will find that you are swearing or affirming that you have not pledged allegiance to any other foreign power.

  9. Anonymous says:

    I voted for all five of the C4C candidates in George Town, two of whom were elected. However, I am very disappointed to see that the majority of people commenting or voting up or down on other comments, seem to want to ignore the fact that Tara's election may be invalid and don't want to see it questioned. If we simply ignore the requirements as outlined in the constitution as to who qualifies to run for office, we are setting a dangerous precedent. Then what would be next? Would we then allow anyone who wanted to run for office to do so, regardless of whether they met the qualifications? I would love to see Tara retain her seat, but only if she is proven to be qualified under the constitution. I say we allow the process to play out in the courts and let the chips fall where they may.

  10. Snake Handler says:

    What if Rivers is found to be ineligible? If there is a by-election, McKeeva will convince the WB electorate to return a UDP member to empower the opposition.

    Then he will awaken his sleepers in the PPM to cross the floor and Alden is history. He's done it before and would certainly relish the opportunity to do it again.

    Why do you think Alden wanted to put C4C in his government/cabinet? He was insuring against a coup d' état, but alas, he has underestimated the size of the serpent he is wrestling with.

    Cool, eh? McKeeva just has to hope that no pesky hurricanes intervene in the meantime that could result in a period of constitutional suspension as implied in the Hazard Management Law.

    • Anonymous says:

      Nonsense. Putting C4C in your cabinet does not "insure" against a coup d' etat anymore than Kurt having McKeeva in his cabinet in 2000 prevented it then.Having an additional UDP member makes no difference at all to the balance of power.  There is no PPM member who would even entertain the idea of joining forces with McKeeva. Why would they – McKeeva will have his own by-election in another couple of years.   

  11. Kaymanian says:

    Really why would you do this? Why dont you go and challenged your UPD colleagues eligibility. If the people of West Bay didnt want her in, they wouldnt have voted her in. Keep in mind Minster Rivers was very close to beating out Mr Bush for the FIRST elected seat. So if THAT is not enough to show that people want her in, I dont know what is. Go sit down and leave her alone. She is a young educated Caymanian give her a chance to serve and make a difference. Stop trying to put the government front bench in disarray. This is shameful and unnessecary. We finally got a good, honestful government. Lets move this country forward and stop with this.

  12. Anonymous1 says:

    This is shameful we are talking bad about a candidate because she is saying Rivers was not elgible to run int he elections.  We have to look at the principal of the matter, if Rivers felt she was wronged you can bet she would have filed a petition.  Caymanians are too onesided and favour certain ppl and not others.  Everyone should be given the same treatment.

  13. Bilbo Baggins says:

    Hey kids, live abroad for years and then run for the LA anyway – just sign up for community college knitting evening classes.

  14. Anonymous says:

    McKeeva had said all along he’d do this if she was elected..

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually dupicitous McKeeva when asked whether he would challenge Tara re residency said he didn't know anything about that and that he was going to support her.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Are we (Cayman Islands) not citizens of the UK?  So how can her period of residency in the UK be challenged?  I can understand if it were the USA?  Maybe someone can explain…

    • Anonymous says:

      No, about two thirds of Caymanians are British Overseas Territories Citizens. Of those, probably about half are British Citizens. Many non Caymanians are also British Overseas Territories Citizens. Thousands of Caymanians are Jamaican, Honduran, American, Canadian (or other) citizens and have neither British Citizenship or British Overseas Territories Citizenship. They owe loyalty to a foreign power (not to the Cayman Islands or the United Kingdom), hence  the restrictions on elected officials in the constitution. No oath of loyalty or other commitment to the Cayman islands or the Caymanian people is required as part of becomming Caymanian.

    • Anonymous says:

      That might make sense if UK citizens were allowed to vote or run . . .

    • Diogenes says:

      Read the law!  It says residence outwith the Cayman Islands – not the UK.  Want to get upset, well guess who passed the law into effect.  

  16. anonymous says:

    I was wondering when the fun would start!  Here it is!

  17. Anonymous says:

    Surely this is little about who filed the petition and more about whether the allegations in the petition are true or not! I could care less about her being voted in, and much more about whether she lied and filed a false declaration and is now a minister representing me! She must have noticed that others gave up their US citizenship or withdrew from running because they did not live in Cayman for the requisite period of time.  If any of the allegations in this are true it tells us that Ms Rivers who is a lawyer, thought that for some reason the law and rules did not apply to her.  Thats what i care about.  Lets wait to see the outcome.  So far she has been mighty quiet on the allegations made against her.  A simple yes or no will suffice as to whether there is any truth to this.  as the C4C endorsed her after giving due consideration to her credentials, i look forward to hearing what they have to say also!

  18. Slowpoke says:

    Another reason, for why those of us who opposed and voted "no" to this crappy constitution, based on its outdated thinking, should be proud.

    • Anonymous says:

      Wrong. The issue is not one which was created by the new constitution. All of the relevant provisions were inherited from the old constitution. Voting no for the new constitution would have caused us to retain the old constitution and would have done nothing to avoid this situation.  

    • Just Commentin' says:

      May you live long and prosper!

      You are one of the few people on this forum that have expressed how bloody poor and moronic the constitution is. The people who drafted it should hang their heads in total shame.

      At least you and I can stand proud amid the sea of abject morons who should also hang their heads for voting "yes".



  19. Anonymous says:

    Good evidence will be her Council Tax status while living in London.  That will be part of the hsitoric documentary record.  I will bet a tremendous amount it will not indicate she was a student.

    • Anonymous says:

      If Tara is as public natured as she says, she will have no problems agreeing to provide this documentation.  In fact I would have thought she would make it publicly available as soon as she can.

    • Anonymous says:

      Nonsense!  Working in the UK fulfilled the practical requirement necessary for her to receive her professional qualification. It is all part of 'the student process' to obtain the professional qualification. Whatever she was paid was not 'big bucks' but just enough to allow her to live.  That means it had to be enough to pay her taxes and her 'tax status' has absoultely nothing to do with her 'student status'.  

  20. Anonymous says:

    Whether it is Velma or her husband or mckeeva or whoever it is doing this they should be ashamed to stoop to this level to impose Velma's representation on the people of this country against the wishes of the people of this country. The fact that Velma came in fifth in HER OWN DISTRICT in the elections is the clearest imaginable indication that THE PEOPLE of Cayman DO NOT WANT her representation. I very sincerely hope and pray thatthe powers that be will uphold THE WISHES OF OUR PEOPLE as the ONLY LAW and THE ONLY DEMOCRACY in our democratic country where democracy has been scorned to death and made a  supreme mockery of by the UNITED DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 

    • Anonymous says:

      Rules are rules. If Tara broke them, then let’s do the right thing! She created this drama. Note: She should have been open and honest from the get go.

      • Anonymous says:

        If you won the lottery I am quite certain you would not refuse to accept it because someone said you pushed ahead of them in the line to buy their ticket.

    • Anonymous says:

      As a C4C supporter I am disappointed that you want the wishes of the people to be the "ONLY LAW." I'll bet that most of us don't want to pay taxes/duties, but, that is the law. In a democracy, the wishes of the people are often trumped by the law, and if we simply ignore the law, then were does that leave us? I sincerely hope that Tara does remain in office, but only if she is qualified, under the election law.

      • Anonymous says:

        Laws exists for one sole and single purpose my friend, and that is to safeguard the interests of the general public. The public has spoken in regards to which of Tara and Velma it wants to represent it and any law that exists (for whatever Godly or ungodly or out dated or out moded reason it may exist) that has the power to counteract the general public's interest in the interest of one or two uneducated, selfish sore losers is very simply and plainly innappropriate and should not exist and most certainly should not be used for this purpose. Let me repeat, to PROTECT the general public's interest is the reason ALL laws were created in the first place. End of story.

      • Anonymous says:

        If we simply ignore the law in instances such as this that leaves us swimming in common sense. I understand there are people out there who ill advisedly woted for Velma over Tara who will insist on following 'the law' to disrupting our government and costing our country yet more millions of dollars unnessarily and in the simple interest of having their own ignorant way. That does not mean that either they or the law is either right or in our best interests. The people have spoken and Tara WILL remain our preferred representative.

    • Dred says:

      Well looking at the comments here I am going to go against the grain.

      If she is not qualified she should step down !!

      The fact is the fact….

      I recall saying 4 plus years ago that Mark and John John if they werr MEN they too should have stepped down but we know now in retrospect they are not and that for them to go down we would have to put them down and we did just that.

      I can’t sit here and say that then and not say it now. It would sadden me if she was not qualified and would stay in office. It is a testament to one’s character. I fully expect this of UDP because none of them have character but not her. I will leave you with thia biblical quote.

      What does it profiteth a man to gain the world and lose his soul.

      • Anonymous says:

        If a law exists that allows the courts to replace a more suitable and preferred representative of our country for a less suitable and less preferred individual against the wishes of an entire country and in favor of one or two ill meaning individuals then very clearly it is that law that needs to be addressed and not the matter of who the people chose to be their representative.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Being an Associate means articles have been completed ppl.  full fledged lawyer already called to the bar.

    • Anonymous says:

      This some kind of rat ass joke goin on here ????? me asks to now.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Jim Bodden had to give his up, end of story!!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Jim Bodden did not have US citizenship as a birthright. The key issue is birthright, see below:


      "and who at the date of his or her nomination for election possesses no other citizenship save for any right he or she may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his or her birth outside the Cayman Islands";

    • noname says:

      ‘End of story’ has such a patronizing finality to it. You sound ultr powerful

    • Anonymous says:

      To: Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 06/14/2013 – 08:28.                    That was under the 1972 Constitution.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Tara's refusal to sign the questionnaire allows the starting point to be an inference that she was aware of grounds upon which her candidacy could be questioned.  From what has been stated so far, working full time in a law firm in London for the period would disqualify her, as it was clearly the primary reason for non-residency.  Tara should do the right thing and resign.  That would increase her prospects of election at the first election for which she is eligible.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Seriously this just isnt the doing of Velma, Gordon or Steve McField Mr. Bush is behind this 100% percent  if the people of West  Bay want  Velma in we WOULD Have put her in we voted for Tara. What is wrong with you people figthing  to keep una on people down. Mr. Hewitt  would you have Challege Tara if your wife came in 6th NO so whats the problem may be we the people of this country should start challenging present and pass MLA's for the damage they have cause to this  country and just may be we would have a clean sweep. I have never seen a bunch of adults that act like lil children in my life  and una talk about the youth atleast we know when to walk away from a situation when we win or loose. A Young West Bayer that voted for Tara and will vote for her again.

  25. Anonymous says:

    This was already investigated by the elections committee.  Velma and McField are really questioning Kerney Gomez's decision to let her run.  If I know anything about Mr.Gomez's knowledge of the rules Tara election is solid

    • Diogenes says:

      Same Mr Gomez that allowed two chaps in Bodden Town to run last time , eh?  Not looking like a solid track record ofensuring candidates were eligible.  

  26. Anonymous says:

    Two things USA passport and not domicile 7 years!!! If everybody has to meet this criteria so should Tara!!! So much for love of country looks more like love of Tara!!! West we deserve better, as a voter I demand a by election.

    • noname says:

      How in god’s name can you say west bay deserves better when you people gave dirty willie boom boom bush the top vote?!?! What do your words even mean!?

  27. Whodatis says:

    There is no question that Tara Rivers has a few questions to answer.

    If not on the issue of citizenship, then definitely that of residency within the last 7 years.

    That being said, and in the absence of knowledge of international standards, I believe the 7 year requirement is somewhat out of touch with the modern world.

    More and more people are having to travel for work related training, development, qualifications etc.

    Therefore, in essence, the requirement could be translated into; "make yourself a better Caymanian, but be prepared to sacrifice your contribution to your country as a result."

    Furthermore, I endorse the prospect of traveled and experienced individuals in positions of power in my country as it brings a bit of much needed (international) context. Ironically, these types of people tend to be the higher educated and trained.

    It appears as if we have some work to do as it regards qualifiable candidates. Nevertheless, the rules were in place at the time of Tara's nomination, and as a qualified lawyer, she was well aware of whether or not she had a right to be in the runnings.

    The situation appears to boil down to either ignorance or dishonesty on her part, neither of which are sound qualities to kickstart a career in politics – regardless of who may take offense.

    Her one saving grace will be if she was in fact obtaining further qualifications and not just "experience" during her stint in the UK.

    This will be very interesting indeed.

    *Her likeability and or the dislike toward an individual(s) that may benefit from her being disqualified is completely irrelevant to this matter.


    • Diogenes says:

      Well said. 

    • Turtle's Head says:

      My god, I agree with Whodatis!

    • Anonymous says:

      Ignorance or dishonesty? So you are assuming that the challenger's allegations are correct before they've been tested in court? 

      • Whodatis says:

        Good eye!

        I understand how my comment could be interpreted that way – however, that was not my actual assumption.

        Honestly, I was too lazy to clarify the point at the time of posting.

    • Anonymous says:

      That is fine until you find some foreign national granted Caymanian status who does not even consider Cayman home run for office and get elected by 20% of the population who are just like them and seek to use the office to further the interests of persons who want to be here, over the interests of those who are.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Steve Mcfield ain’t no fool. I doubt he would take on a case like this if it wasn’t legit. The UDP knew long ago of this womans situations and they chose to play this out to the 11th hour! Mckeeva has around a long time, he know when to strike! Poltrix. Such a dirty game.

  29. CYNICAL says:

    Steve McField ? Obviously, even “McKeewa” has lost faith in him – otherwise Steve, rather than Alberga, would be defending him on the charges he is currently facing in the Grand Court. Clearly the Hewitts cannot afford to go ” First Class “.

    • Anonymous says:

      McField is a constitutional lawyer, why would bush use him its a criminal matter. 

      • Anonymous says:

        McField is a criminal defence attorney who moonlights as a 'constitutional expert'. Why did Dwayne Seymour have him as his attorney for his criminal matter? McField is actually part of McKeeva's team for his criminal trial.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Well why did he get involved in the criminal matter of an MLA accused of assault ?

      • Bingo says:

        Constitutional lawyer!  UDP lawyer more like.  And he was good enough for Mr Seymour for a criminal defence.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Constitutional Lawyer……give me a break the man’s a 3rd rate lawyer at best….we have so many better Caymanian Lawyers….having a big mouth does not make u a good Lawyer.

      • Anonymous says:

        The Owner of the Sacred Vessel used McField's services in a criminal matter. Ah haaaaa!

  30. SKEPTICAL says:

    Mr & Mrs Hewitt have lost any credibility they might have had – if the voters of WB had wanted Velma as one of their MLA’s, they would have given her the votes she needed to be elected, in the first place – the votes were not cast on the basis of ” eligibility ” – but the person the people wanted. Why would she want to be a member of a ” Club ” that doesn’t want her – or maybe the salary of an MLA will help to pay the family bills. She would be unlikely to bring anything of substance to the table as an MLA – like that other irrelevant WB member – Capt. Eugene.

  31. Anonymous says:

    KeKe initiated this madness! He’s a sore looser!

    Gt voter

  32. Anonymous says:

    CNS, I seem to remember this issue of her working abroad being addressed at the very beginning when she announced her candidacy. Please check this out. Thanks.

    CNS: We reported on it at the time. Here

    • Anonymous says:

      She refused to sign the “questionnaire” on Nomination Day? What were the questions?

    • Anonymous says:

      Right or wrong I don't want Velma in office, you ask why? Her husband had to file this in court, why didn't she????????? You want someone lke that running the country?  Welll funny though Mark and Dwayne got away with it four years ago, but no one challenged it within the corrct time limit. 

  33. Anonymous says:

    Guys tara may be fine with the us citizenship issue but uf she was working full time in london she broke her residency requirement. Even if she was also studying at some stage there. I hope it works out but if the surhorities turn a blind eye because she is popular that does not make us a better country. Lets have it checked out and be fully honest with the result.

    • Dred says:

      Well it is what they did in 2009 in BT. I know two wrongs don’t make a right but lets see how our Judiciary goes at this.

    • Garfield says:

      Law students must serve time as full time interns in law firms before they can become qualified. Sometimes it can be as much as 2 years depending on the jurisdiction. Believe that is what Tara Rivers was doing with Allen & Overy in London.

      • Anonymous says:

        That is called "working", not "studying" and that is why she was not eligible.  Did she qualfiying for student deductions to Council Tax in London?  That is the critical question, and the answer will be "No".

        • Anonymous says:

          While I agree with what you’ve said, there are many other ways that this could be passed off. If she did her pcl in the UK, she would get exempt from counsel tax. However if she did a “training contract” and had to pay taxes, it can still be seen that she is training. It is all about the definition which most lawyers who have been down this road can easily argue. Doing a training contract does not mean you have a job per say, you have to successful complete it and hope you have one afterwards.

    • Anonymous says:

      This sounds like a case of a big bowl of sour grapes.

      I'm a GT voter and haven't followed Tara closely during her campaign. But if she was completing her articles in London, that is a requirement for qualification to practice law. I consider that a part of her studies. People travel signifcantly for work; and some who complete periods of training or internships or international placements abroad for work as well. Training in the UK is invaluable experience and I personally am glad to finally see candidates possessing global competitve experience. I want her representing my islands.

      Apparently she addressed this "issue" earlier on and I look forward to reading up on it. I think I saw CNS post a link to the article.


      • Anonymous says:

        You obviously don’t know law when you are n associate you have been called to the bar. To be called to bar articles are already completed.

  34. sickntired says:

    Tara was born in conneticut ppl its a fact!!

    • Anonymous says:

      If that is true, and her parents were settled there when she was born, how is she Caymanian?

      • Anonymous says:

        Because her parents are Caymanian fool

        • Anonymous says:

          How do you know? Because they told you? It takes more than that – Fool!

        • Anonymous says:

          Really, I thought she was born in the United States to an American mother – or at least what I have determined from other posts.

      • Anonymous says:

        You don't have to be born in Cayman to be Caymanian by birthright. There are loads of Caymanians born in the USA whose parents emigrated there. 

        • Anonymous says:

          Not that simple. It depends when they were born.

        • Anonymous says:

          I think you will find the only thing you can be sure of in relation to those persons is that they are United States Citizens (unless they have renounced). Whether they are Caymanian or not can be a much more complicated issue depending on when they were born, whether their parents were married, where their parents were domiciled, and whether they were British subjects – but hell, this is Cayman – who cares what the law says!

        • Anonymous says:

          Perhaps not as many as you (or they) may think, particularly depending on when they were born, and their parents' particular circumstances.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Ssssshhhh, although her parents may not have been living in the United States when she was born that kind of question requires people in authority to follow and apply the law evenly to everyone! Dat ist Verboten!!!!!

      • Anonymous says:

        If least one of her parents was a British Subject and was born in the Cayman Islands,  then provided Tara was a British Subject at birth, she was likely born Caymanian under section 15(a) as read with section 15(e) of the Caymanian Protection law, 1971. However, it seems there may have been some requirement to obtain confirmation of that fact under section 16 of that Law (seemingly the forerunner of today's "entitlement" cofirmations) before her status could be relied on.

        If she was not the subject of an application under s.16, then section 17(2) of the 1977 Revision to the Caymanian Protection Law may cause a problem. That section seems to require that anyone born after 27 March 1972 outside of Cayman is only Caymanian at birth if they are, at birth:

        1. A British Subject

        2. Born to at least one Caymanian Parent; AND

        3. Both her parents were domiciled in Cayman at her birth.

        Whether she was born Caymanian may  therefore depend on the domicile of both of Tara's parents when she was born.

        Domicile for these purposes seems to be that defined in the 1961 Immigration Restriction (British Subjects) Law of 1961. That says that a British Subject is deemed to have lost their domicile in the Cayman Islands if they voluntarily go and reside outside the Islands (except for special or temporary purpose) with the intention of making his home outside the Islands. 

        Any defect in her status will almost certainly have been cured by a subsequent amendment to the Law or an application made by her. 

        Hopefully someone has some good records from when she was a child or Tara subsequently became Caymanian through operation of the law or an express application. Otherwise, good luck sorting this mess out!





        • Anonymous says:

          You could have saved us all a lot of time by posting only this paragraph:

          "Any defect in her status will almost certainly have been cured by a subsequent amendment to the Law or an application made by her".

      • Anonymous says:

        Fair point. Anyone know?

      • Anonymous says:

        They were not settled there, they were there for only a short time.

      • Anonymous says:

        Her mother was born in NY they lived in the states for years her brother got his papers too. Her parents have caymanian parents o guess that makes them caymanians

    • Anonymous says:

      Being born in Conn. is not a problem if as an adult she has not maintained and travelled on a U.S. passport. 

      • Anonymous says:

        That ain’t true she travelled last year and us citizens are required to travel on their us passports,,,,,, do a little research before commenting

    • West Baya says:

      St. Luis Missouri


  35. mccarron mclaughlin says:

    Wow this is a hard one to wiggle out of!! I hoping this can all be explained by Tara very soon.

  36. 4 Cayman says:

    This is really sad and if she knew that she was not qualified to run for office and continue with the hopes of no one challenging her citizenship, this would be down right dishonest and an injustice to the citizens of these islands. Imagine the cost for a trial and for a by election. If this keeps up this country will be busted and no matter how much berthing facilities, extended runways or sunken ships we sink, the Cayman Islands will never come back!

    Remember we got Sandra catron potentially wanting to sue for an unlawful search warrant and if the charges against Big Mac are dropped, what do you think he’s going to do? CUC rates just went up and you know everything else is going to increase and follow. I know I won’t be able to afford to live here anymore.

    Actually I’m starting to sense there’s some kind of conspiracy going on here. Not certain if it’s the UK government allowing us to implode or this part of Darts plans so when we sink he can finally take over or it’s just plain old greed that is taking over like how our pirated forefathers lived. Remember a lot of Caymanians are decendants of pirates and that’s why we live like crabs in a bucket especially to our fellow Caymanians.
    Alden you have your job cut out for you!

    • Anonymous says:

      Pirates, now where did you get that?. Name one family that is from Pirates. folks running from Europe and Jamaica but Pirates.

      • Cayman GT says:

        Hear hear. Our forefathers were not pirates. Missionaries and land owners that freed slaves and lived in harmony for hundreds of years as the peaceful “island that time forgot” go downtown to the National Museum and educate yourself about our proud heritage before you start spewing such nonsense.

        I’m proud to be 7th generation Caymanian (from a founded church not a pirate ship!)

        • Anonymous says:

          I thought that they were deserters from Cromwell's army.

          • Anonymous says:

            Walters, Eubanks and Bowden. But don’t dare suggest that., they were British.

          • Anonymous says:

            There is no evidence that they were deserters. Check out Founded Uponthe Seas – Craton. 

          • Anonymous says:

            Nathaniel Glover wrote that "it is a well-established fact that the first settlers were two soldiers from the disbanded army of Cromwell who came here about the year 1658 from Jamaica, whose names were Walter and Bowden…who came here for the purpose of catching turtle". Craton (Founded Upon the Seas) explicitly debunked "the deserters from Cromwells army" idea which seems to have been circulated.

        • Anonymous says:

          it's only lately that the churches have been re-fitted as pirate ships

  37. Anonymous says:

    Many people questioned Tara's unwillingness to her residency issue.

    It seems she may have taken a gamble here, won with many of her former running-mate Bernie Bush's UDP voters.

    We have to be consider how easily people want to replace Mr Bush with ANYONE even if their character is questionable too, because they have an education? I respect Tara's credentials and I too was a supporter from her first race in 2000 BUT if she wasnt eligible to run this time, she just wasn't and despite any dislike of UDP or this action, no one……McKeeva didn't make me follow blindly and sorry but neither will Tara or any politician.

    Also, would anyone really consider that working full-time in London and taking a correspondence course online means a person was in school?? just a different angle to consider, in case she mentions the course/programme was a correspondence course.

    While we're on disclosure, with utmost respect, what is all the work she did with our youth since 2000? Apparently she was living in other countries, been home for 3 years, had a child & was workign as a lawyer, but I never knew of any work she did except for radio appearances etc since Nov 2012 at the start of her campaigning.

    PLEASE, PPM SHOULD not get behind another C4C ie Mervin, over their  own candidates, like Woody Dacosta. If they do PPM should just give up on West Bay representatives. Unless PPM is saying C4C is now another sub-group of PPM? Hope not.

  38. Anonymous says:

    Velma? God help us!

  39. Anonymous says:

    If Tara has a US passport then where was she when other candidates declared themselves unable to run for exactly the same reason?

    The blame needs to be focused and Tara should explain to her supporters how and why she didn't make full disclosure.

  40. Anonymous says:

    This is going to be a very tough case for Steve to argue. As a Sacred Vessel, he cannot deny that Tara's rightful place is in the House.

  41. Anonymous says:

    If her employment abroad was full time then that should be the end of the story and the challenge should succeed.  Her employment records should be obtained from Allen & Overy and these third party documents will be the best evidence of the issue. 

    • Anonymou says:

      The Constitution says that absence  shall be disregarded: "(b)  attendance as a student at any educational establishment;"  if she was going to school, even part time, this might make it OK.  It says nothing about working while going to school.

      • Anonymous says:

        It would even then turn on the predominant purpose she was in London. Studying for the New York bar, as some suggest was her course of study, may not be sufficient.

    • Anonymous says:

      There shouldn’t even be a story, but the failures of officials to follow the law, particulary where it is unpopular, is very frightening.

    • Anonymous says:

      We finally get a good respected, capable and honest government, and now someone has to mut self before country. Now is not the time to be tinkering around, we have a country to save.

    • J Salasi I. -111? says:

      Bredren all. Remember this who de cap fit let them wear it. If the challenge is legal then Ms. rivers and her Attorneys will know and have to answer it before the courts. after all we live in a society where we all want equal justice for all, and we want all of us to be responsible under the laws don’t we?. So ona stop de fighting so early in the morning and let justice take its course . so Jah say, say.

  42. Stop Blaming Mac says:

    Just because you dont like Mac STOP blaming him for every crap thing that happens.   How do you know that he did not abstain from this confrontation. Mac is a smart man like him or not. THe fact that Tara is so popular in West Bay he is smart enough to try to appear to support her and not tear her down.  He is no idiot!   So I bet you its some idiot that wants the seat and thinks it will be handed down and not earned that is stirring up this crap.

    • Anonymous says:

      Let's be realistic. There is absolutely no way that Velma would undertake this without Mac's approval. And it is McKeeva's style. And it is McKeeva's lawyer representing.

    • Anonymous says:

      Dream on!

    • Anonymous says:

      Thought this was expected, from the rhetoric during the campaign.  Bad blood flows through some people's veins.

  43. Anonymous says:

    Well excuse me!!! Nobody has been off the island more than McKeeva Bush! And to add to that fact, is the fact that he was off island on our expense! If nobody has removed him yet, I really don't see how they can possibly remove Hon. Tara Rivers. I can tell you one thing, Velma Hewitt didn't get my vote in May and she won't ever get it!  I rest assured that Tara covered all the bases on that issue.  She aint no dummy.

  44. Anonymous says:

    No difference between Tara and Cline – from the point of citizenship that is. She got it as a birthright and therefore does not have to give it up. 

    Tara, you have my support.

    PPM member. 

    • Anonymous says:

      As a supporter of Tara I am afraid you are wrong. If indeed she possesses U.S. citizenship and as an adult has travelled on a U.S. passport she will be disqualified. The law on this is very clear.  See s. 62 of the Constitution and case law on that wording from the courts of other jurisdictions.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Americans are not alowed to travel to United States on a foreign passport so she would have to give up US citizienship to travel to the United States.  And coming from a Caribbean country, she can't travel on her US birth certificate.  She would have to travel on a passport.

        • Anonymous says:

          Caymanians are not forced to travel to the United States, so I am not sure what your point is.

          • Anonymous says:

            My point is that if she wants to go to United States and that is where most of the planes leaving the Cayman Islands go, she would as a US citizien have to travel on her US passport.  She would have to renounce US citizienship to not longer be an American.

      • Just Commentin' says:

        What case law? What other jurisdictions? We pray thee tell us!

      • Anonymous says:

        It does not matter if you are a US citizen, it matters whether it is a birthright and therefore, you do not have to give it up to run for election:

        "and who at the date of his or her nomination for election possesses no other citizenship save for any right he or she may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his or her birth outside the Cayman Islands"

        It's pretty clear folks. 


    • Anonymous says:

      The law is the law, you cant hold duel citenzenship and run for political office in the Cayman Islands. Once you obtain a US passport, it means you are stating your allegiance to old glory.

      I love Tara, and would like to see her as a leader, but it is what it is. 

      • Anonymous says:

        It is what it is and it would have been that way before the election. If there were issues they should have been addressed before she was elected. Fyi she did not "obtain a US passport" by choice. She was born in the US, and thus "obtained" the passport by virtue of her birth in the Country. Cline is my friend, however, his situation, in this regard, is the same as Tara's and he was not challenged. I think that Velma was certain of victory, certain she could have been swept in on the good old coat tail. Now she is just plain vex and a sore loser. Get over it! Not only did Tara get in, she nearly beat McKeeva too! And Velma just barely beat Mervin by 7 votes. As I said before, GET OVER IT!

        • Anonymous says:

          I hope, for her sake, that Tara's situation is not the same as Cline's.

      • Anonymous says:

        Is it?

      • Anonymous says:

        How come Cline could run for election several times? It all depends on whether it was a birthright or not. Remember Sharon Roulstone explaining that she had to give her US citizenship back but that her sister would not have?

        • Anonymous says:

          Cline were just lucky to get away with no one challenging him.

        • Anonymous says:

          First of all Cline no longer holds a valid passport. I understand his expired and he never took any positive steps to renew it. That’s the difference between him and Tara.

          • Anonymous says:

            You don't need a passport to be an American.  Until recently, Americans travelled on their birth certificates.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ummm… not renewing your passport has nothing to do with the issue. This morning on Rooster Cline claimed to have renounced his U.S. citizenship.

        • Anonymous says:

          Because no one challenged Cline. It does NOT depend on whether it is a birthright or not. Sharon R. has that completely wrong. Section 61 is subject to S. 62. Read S. 62 of the Constitution. 

          • Anonymous says:

            Cline was on Rooster this morning and said he renounced his US citizenship.

            • Anonymous says:

              Yes, I heard that too. He was cagey about exactly when that renunciation occurred though. Was it before the 2000 elections when he was first elected? Or even before nomination day for the 2013 elections? I doubt it.  

    • Anon says:

      Dear me, and here I was hoping that the 'left behind' UDP had slithered away under a rock somewhere for Good!

      Please tell me it aint so! 

      Tara my girl, keep your head up and remember you are were you are becasue the country chose you –  we want Tara! Not Velma or anymore UDP stooges!


    • sickntired says:

      There is a big difference she got in and he didn't so no need to challenge her.

      • Anonymous says:

        Hedid not get in this time but he was in the Asembly for many years while possessing US citizenship/passport. I do not think her cointry of birth should be an issue but the issue would be her residency status for the period before election. I think though that if she lived and worked abroad but did not initiate any process to change her nationality status or have intentions to permanently reside oveseas, consideration should be allowed to have her remain as a  member. Are we going to deprive a competent qualified local person of a position in society which they can fill with honour just because they had overseas work experience?

  45. Knot S Smart says:

    Next thing they will be claiming is that Foolio should replace Alden…

  46. Anonymous says:

    If there's a by-election, you'll finally get to see how OMOV works. One seat in one district, one vote. Looks like a UDP seat to me.

    • Anonymous says:

      Not bloody likely in a 2-way race.  

      • Anonymous says:

        What two way race?  Who says it will be a two way race?

        • Anonymous says:

          Yes, you will probably have UDP spoilers like Dwene. 

          • Anonymous says:

            UDP spoilers like Dwene?! You are crazy.  Dwene is so far removed from the UDP he barely speaks to the man!  You know nothing about Dwene.  Further it is people like you that tried to make that stick on Dwene in WB but West Bayers know better.  If anyone in West Bay believes that McKeeva Bush presence does not define them it is Dwene Ebanks – that was his mantra during the campaign.  Go away…you slanderous snake

            • Anonymous says:

              Maybe we're talking about different Dwenes. I am talking about who hoisted McKeeva on his shoulders after the 2009 elections in celebration of victory.

    • Anonymous says:

      I would suggest two seats, two votes. Second place gets Mac seat when he is removed.

  47. Anonymous says:

    Why was this filed on behalf of her husband? He wasn’t the candidate! Is he more upset that Velma didn’t get in than she herself?

    It is difficult to believe that Tara didn’t address this issue, in light of all broo-hah on this subject during the campaign. In any case, if she is disqualified, there has to be a by-election – no automatic return of Velma as the 4th elected member. If the people of West Bay wanted Velma more people would’ve voted for her, whether Tara ran or not.

    West Bayer

    • Anonymou says:

      Gordon filed because he was told to!  They will have to argue that she was not a student since she has birth right as far a US goes.

    • Anonymous says:

      Politricks my dare watson, politicks.

  48. Anonymous says:

    Foolio's fund raising is going to work now, Cayman. And uncle you know who is eager to lap it up.

  49. Anonymous says:

    Section 61(2)(b) of the Constitution qualifies a person for elected membership in the Legislative Assembly if that person has a close family connection with the Cayman Islands and is a British Overses Territories citizen.  According to the section, ther person can qualify to stand for election if they were born outside the Cayman Islands, had at lease one parent or grandpart born in the Cayman Islands and who is Caymanian and "who at the time of his / her nomination for election possesses no other citizenship save for any right he/ she may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his/ her birth outside the Cayman Islands".   PUT THIS TO BED PEOPLE!!!!  TARA IS DULY ELECTED AND QUALIFIED.  THIS IS JUST A PATHETIC ATTEMPT BY THE UDP TO CAUSE TROUBLE.

    • Anonymous says:

      The same old dirty politicks replay, when they are disgruntled and want to have their way.  It is not so rosy sitting in the nest that has spoilt or unhatched eggs, is it?  Figure.

  50. Just Commentin' says:

    Clearly, 61.(2)(b) of the Constitution applies in this case as to who is a "qualified citizen" in regard to standing for election:

    (2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(d), a qualified citizen is a British overseas territories citizen by virtue of a connection with the Cayman Islands, who either—

        (a) at the date of his or her nomination for election possesses no other citizenship and is pursuing no claim to any other citizenship for which he or she may be eligible; or

        (b) was born outside the Cayman Islands, has or had at least one parent or grandparent who was born in the Cayman Islands and is a Caymanian (or if deceased would if alive have been a Caymanian at the date of nomination for election), and who at the date of his or her nomination for election possesses no other citizenship save for any right he or she may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his or her birth outside the Cayman Islands;

    Ms. Rivers, unlike "naturalised" U.S. citizens, had a "birthright" to U.S. citizenship and under the U.S. Constitution and Immigration laws did not have to pursue any claim to citizenship; application for and possession of an American passport is contingent on possesson of citizenship and does not constitute a "pursuit of claim" to citizenship She was and is not merely "eligible" for American citizenship, she obtained that at birth.

    The passport is simply a travel document. It will be interesting to see how a legal challenge regarding U.S.  passport possession as a disqualifying factor for candidacy for natural born U.S. citizen/Caymanian dual nationals would fare in court. This matter needs to be settled once and for all and I should hope that Ms. Rivers and the PPM has the resolve to rise to battle on this point.

    One the matter of residency and physical presence, things are a bit less clear here. She was apparently resident for the required time but may have failed the test of physical presence. The Constitution provides for exceptions to the requirement that: "in the seven years immediately preceding the date of his or her nomination
    for election the number of days on which he or she was absent from the Cayman Islandsdoes not exceed 400.  A lot will be riding on how "attendance as a student at any educational establishment" is interpreted, where the school she was studying was located, as well as if she was actually attending classes in the UK and working as a further academic requirement of her courses.

    After seeing the controversy and withdrawal of a candidate over the issue of passport and citizenship, I should think that Ms. Rivers would have sought the advice of a attorney experienced in such issues before continuing her candidacy.

    It is going to be interesting how this all plays out.


    • Anonymous says:

      i dont get it…you just posted it,  it says " and possesses NO other citizenship"


      if she has US passport she is not qualified !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      over and out

      and i mean OUT !!


      • Anonymous says:

        Why don’t you try reading the entire sentence.

      • Anonymous says:

        You have got to be a Mac supporter! No damn sense!

      • Anonymous says:

        HELLLLLOOOOOO…. it says "no other citizenship save for any right he or she may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his or her birth outside the Cayman Islands". Which means, another citizenship which is a birthright is OK.

        • Anonymous says:

          This "birthright citizenship" idea is not in the constitution. Having a right to a citizenship is not the same as posssessing and exercising that citizenship.  

        • Just Commentin' says:


      • Just Commentin' says:

        Dear 18:34




        Anybody home in there?


        Did you read and see the alternative clauses?


        Yeah.."over and out"…YOU!     Byeeeeee!

  51. Anonymous says:

    The people of West Bay have spoken, Steve McField and Mr. and Mrs. Hewitt. What on earth is your problem?????

    • Anonymous says:

      I think we should say Mr. Hewitt for now

      • Anonymous says:

        It is fairly obvious to me that, for whatever reason he may have to do so, Mr. Hewitt is allowing himself to be used as a scapegoat here. That bag of sick unscrupulosity in West Bay is very obviously very much alive and well. Accept that you lost the elections UDP, hopefully forever but at least for the next four years. And there is nothing on earth Velma can do to change that. 

        • Anonymous says:

          Most likely not a scapegoating scenario but perhaps his own desire for prestige?

  52. Anonymous says:

    Hmmmm Interesting. So just let me understand…if a law is being broken, is it is ok in this instance?

    • Anonymous says:

      Oh yea! we are Caymanian! we can break any laws and move on. Pathetic!!!

  53. Anonymous says:

    This is Mac using Velma again ! Is it a coincidence that Steve is the Attorney on record ??? I think not !!!

  54. Anonymous says:

    There was a west Bayer named Hewitt,
    Who told lawyer-man Stevie lets do it,
    The results I will wrestle
    to be this country’s vessel,
    By a scheme not a plan I’ll persue it

    You’re welcome

  55. Anonymous says:

    The Cayman Constitution would seem to require a by-election.


    Secion 86 (2) reads:  

    (2) Whenever any person vacates his or her seat as a member of the Legislative Assembly for any reason other than its dissolution, an election to fill the vacancy shall be held within two months after the occurrence of the vacancy, unless the Assembly is sooner dissolved or the date on which the Assembly must be dissolved under section 84(3) is less than four months after the occurrence of the vacancy.


    I don't see how the court could possibly read that to grant the relief the petition asks and hand the office to the fifth place finisher.



    • Lawyer says:

      As it reads, "vacates…….for any reason other than its dissolution".  So, if the votes for Tara are deemed null and avoid, Velma becomes the 4th elected member for West Bay.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Submitted by Lawyer (not verified) 

        Most definately not verified.

        • Anonymous says:

          If you are really a lawyer, I hope you argue better than you spell.

        • Just Commentin' says:

          I beg to differ…

          "Laywer" is "verified" indeed!  Verified as a fool!

      • Anonymous says:

        Huh? I hope you are not really a lawyer because you would be an incompetent one.

      • Anonymous says:

        Apparently English grammar is a a bit of a problem for Lawyer (unverified).

        The constitution reads, "Whenever any person vacates his or her seat as a member of the Legislative Assembly for any reason other than its dissolution…"

        The word "its" refers to the Legislative Assembly. No one is proposing to dissolve the entire Legislative Assembly over this matter.  

        The Constitution specifies the means to fill an individual seat shold it become vacant.  The process requires a by-election, not giving the seat to the runner-up.



      • Anonymous says:

        Dat you, lawyer Steve?

      • Bingo says:

        Try reading – "an election to fill the vacancy shall be held".  An election, not just appoint the runner up.  .  

  56. WHAT !!!!!!! says:

    I know UDP was desperate and grasping at limbs and now they are grasping at straws blowing in the wind..Poor old Mr Hewitt thought he was going too have honorable wife and get too travel with the pack…West Bayers if you have too vote VOTE for MERVIN or PPM say NO too VELMA

  57. Anonymous says:

    Policy is policy guys, if we are Willing to bend the rules for someone who is of “good character”, the we will also have to bend it for the lowest scum who we all despise!
    This is the reason that Cayman is where it’s at today. We make exceptions for the minority and those we want to put on pedestals. If she is wrong then so be it.
    If a criminal asks to be pardoned because he has only made one mistake that was senseless, then an equivalent criminal can ask for the same because if he got his second chance he would have not gone any further.

    Nothing against Ms Rivers, I think she will do a fabulous job, but so would the candidate from BT who had to be removed for the same situation.

  58. Rorschach says:

    It certainly can't be any coincidence that this is announced on the very same day that the details of all of Mac's charges is announced…be mindful that Mac is the Master of misdirection…anything the UDP does is always meant to distract from what is really goin on ..

  59. Anonymous says:

    Velma is not educated & these islands need educated people not like our keke! I hope she’s not elected!


  60. Anonymous says:

    Caymanians are allowed and encouraged to have more than one citizenship.  We need to amend the rules and move on.

  61. Anonymous says:

    silly, silly Mr McField and sore looser Mrs. Hewitt. The elections are over…get on with your lives and lets get this country up and running again….cannot believe this nonsense!!

  62. Anonymous says:

    Should Tara be replaced by anyone else in West Bay other than Mervin due to by-election, then I've lost faith in West Bay.


    • Anonymous says:

      Truly make these comments with due respect, if velma is not a good choice due to her 'education' how can any sensible person pick Mervin over her except for C4C/party die-hards??? Velma has real life experiences just like Mervin, Mckeeva and Bernie, no formal education by any of them, yet West Bayers put them in the top six. Same principle McKeeva won on…..wont matter who C4C/Tara runs with there will be straight voting mentality, thought West Bayers wanted real change?

      In the recent line-up of those who didnt get a seat:

      Dwene Ebanks and Andrea Christian have more education and training in finacial services than Mervin.

      Ray Farrington has more education and experience than Mervin.

      Woody has more experience and education than Mervin.

      Yet Mervin, Velma, Bernie got more votes than those 4 former candidates….so PLEASE don't claim Mervin is the best choice because he has similar qualifications and experience as Tara, his votes were based on political strategy. Yes, he has done well and is admired as an activist but if you're going to compare apples please compare apples with apples.


      Bottom line, elections are usually won through popularity, money and being able to manipulate the population.

      If you think it's based on intelligence, why didn't Charles Clifford, Bo Miller get in? I know, let's have Bo run for West Bay, he missed teh mark in North SIde, George Town, maybe West Bay's the ticket!



      • Anonymous says:

        Ok, then. Simple, Velma was not popular, she did not win and that is the end of it. Tara did, the people spoke and voted for Tara. If this challenge is even successful, which I am sure it won't be, Velma will not be voted in.

  63. Anonymous says:

    I don't think the "University of Allen & Overy" is on the list of accredited institutions.

  64. Anonymous says:

    And the Madness somehow continues.  If there ever were a final argument to completely dismantle the UDP stupidity machine, this is it.  UDP and their fool, fool supporters still coming up with ways to waste the Government's money and the people's time.

  65. West Baya says:

    If for any reason there's a by-election, that dont mean Hewitt will get in. I will vote for Mervin instead!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly…. and Mac is probably theadvisor in this. Its ok though…. Mervin will be elected if this goes down.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Or Woody.

        • Anonymous says:

          Woody should not run. He was well behind Mervin. Instead he should give his support to Mervin (if it comes to that). DO NOT SPLIT THE VOTE on this, PPM!  Velma should be taught  lesson she will never forget.  

  66. Anonymous says:

    Great news she should be challenged she was not a student at the time.  Being an associate means you have been called to the Bar.  She is an american as well.  West Bayers demand a by-election.

  67. Anonymous says:

    Are you kidding me? If this is true (that she holds an American passport) then it is a major and costly mistake on her part. Did other candidates not have to forfeit their's in order to run?

    • Anonymous says:

      I'm replying to my own post. I've now been made to understand that if you were born in the USA then you're ok to run, and that the passport issue is with someone who got US citizenship through other means. Her main problem seems to be her residency qualifications based on her time spent in the UK from 2006-2009.

      • Anonymous says:

        That is a fallacy which people like CG are promoting. It does not matter how you acquired your citizenship if as an adult you are under an acknowledgement of allegiance to a foreign state e.g. by holding their passport.   

      • Just Commentin' says:


      • Anonymous says:

        It is both. By renewing her passport after 18 she has voluntarily affirmed her loyalty to a foreign power.

        • Anonymous says:

          Not renewing her pasport wouldn't mean that she is no longer an American.  She would have to renounce citizienship.

    • Anonymous says:

      You only have to forfeit an additional citizenship if it is NOT a birthright. 

  68. Anonymous says:

    No way, tell me this is not so! A decent woman like Tara who would put her country first over self interests. God help us. Leave Tara right where she is!!!!!

  69. betta says:

    Tara, you have the complete support of me and my family!

  70. Anonymous says:

    All this will amount to is a distraction and waste of public funds. It serves no one except may be Velma. It will not change the govt. The PPM will still be in power. It may possibly mean that WB is not represented in Cabinet and an excellent representative replaced by a substandard one. But my take is that Velma will not get elected no matter what. She was only 7 votes ahead of Tara's running mate Mervin. PPM, if they can prove their case and Tara is disqualified do not run anyone in the by-election. Throw your weight behind Mervin – if it comes to it.     

    • Anonymous says:

      Incredible the extend to which some people will go to cause issues to get a nice size pay check. I knew Mac wouldn't take it well that he was almost beat by a non UDP and a female on top of that. I am sure he does everything in his power to encourage Velma with this nonsense……

  71. Anonymous says:

    Why Velma don't go and sit down! The government should give some careful consideration to the qualification of dual citizens to become elected member in this Country. BUT if during the course of the this unfortunate situation it is found that Tara should be removed there must be by-election. I did not vote for Velma and there is no way my vote can be used for election. 

  72. Anonymous says:

    Please tell me this is not true. I await Ms Rivers’ response with much anticipation…

  73. Anonymous says:

    There was lots of time to protest the nomination, and now it's way too late.  Alden: please change the stupid antiquated language of the law and let's move on to the business of the nation without having to suffer these endless UDP sideshows.  Thanks.

  74. Disgusted! says:

    Tara, you open that can of whoop ass, and open the top wide open!  I will be competely disgusted if Velma gets to take a seat.  Shame on her husband, same of Steve, shame on Velma and shame of the dishonorable Mac.

    • Anonymous says:

      Please…. you mean  the eternally dishonourable Mac.

      Is Steve still on a government retainer?

  75. Anonymous says:

    For goodness sake and for the sake of the people of the Cayman Islands, please let the new government get on with the business of governing and cleaning up the mess that UDP have left behind so that people can survive and start living again. Enough is enough, get Tara to relinquish her US citizenship or step down and give the person who came in fifth her position just as long as it does not give power back to the UDP government. A by-election is a waste of time and we have certainly wasted enough of that. Abiding with the laws of the land was not on the agenda with the UDP government before so please do not play their games with them. 

    • Anonymous says:

      He’ll, I’d give up my US citizenship if it meant less power for the UDP

  76. Polly Tricks says:

    If this challenge is succesful I hope Tara is responsible for the cost of any by-election.  Candidates should be required to declare their eligibility on oath and face consequences if they are not eligible.

  77. Anonymous says:

    Moses Kirkconnel is born in the USA and he did not give up his US passport. As far as I know if you are born in a country then you do not have to give up that passport to run for elections in the Cayman Islands.

    CNS: I have already checked and confimed that Moses Kirkconnell did renounce his US citizenship and gave up his US passport. 

    • Anonymous says:

      Good man Moses, always a statesman!!

      See, there you all go, Moses was born in the US just like Tara, and he knew he had to denounce his allengiance to old glory, to serve in the LA of the Cayman Islands.

      I take my hat off to you Moses!

  78. Anonymous says:

    Please tell me this is not true…  I only voted for Tara.

  79. Anonymous says:

    Tara will shock and awe them clowns with their desperate tacticts.

  80. Anonymous says:

    Jesus wept.

  81. Anonymous says:

    Dear Me – Hell hath no fury like a scorned Bayer!! The people of West Bay voted – let it be. At least they have one representative in the government.

  82. Anonymous says:

    I hope they make a movie when it's all done, Cayman finances will be back on track.

  83. Cheese Face says:

    Some people need to learn to let go, the people voted, YER OOT, goodbye!

  84. Anonymous says:

    Wow You really suck UDP and Mr & Mrs. Hewitt. 


    The whole of Grand Cayman and most of West Bay – even die hard UDP supporters rejoiced at Tara's success. 


    An MLA, a member of Cabinet, the Minister for Education and Labour – that has all the qualities that we have dreamed of and deserve in an elected representative!


    These stupid qualifying rules need to be amended! 


    Who cares if you hold a US passport!


    • Anonymous says:

      Actually, it doesn't matter if you have a US passport, if it was a birthright you don't have to give it up. The wording is "save for any right he/ she may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his/ her birth outside the Cayman Islands".

      • Anonymous says:

        Ummm…no that is a popular idea but is completely incorrect. Section 61 of the Constitution is to be read subject to section 62. Under s. 62 if you are by virtue of your own act under an acknowledgement of allegiance to a foreign state or power then you are disqualified. If as an adult you maintain a foreign passport you have breached this section and are therefore disqualified. Many cases to back me up on this.    

        • Just Commentin' says:

          Many cases? OK. Can you give us references to a couple of these cases or are you pulling facts from same source that Mac frequestly used. (You know the place I am talkin' 'bout.)

          I should maintain that the rather clumsy phrase "pursuing no claim to any other citizenship" will be the weakest point of the challenge.

      • Anonymous says:

        Since her mother was (I believe) a U.S. Citizen when she was born, I am afraid she may be a US Citizen for that reson anyway – not because of where she was born.