President Jagdeo implied I was a homosexual; now this?

Jan 26, 2014 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

I have a very long history of political activism. It began when I was as young as fourteen. Maybe it is in my blood. I have opposed every head of government in this country including Forbes Burnham, Desmond Hoyte, Cheddi and Janet Jagan and Bharrat Jagdeo.
In my decades of opposition politics, some heads have been nasty with me, particularly Mr. Burnham. He stopped me from working after I graduated from UG with the President’s Medal and after I returned from serving the Grenada Government in 1983.
So bitter was Mr. Burnham that he even extended his poisonous mind to my wife. For this I am unsure I can forgive him. My family should have been left out. Of course I will not forgive President Jagdeo for victimizing my wife at her work place, GO-Invest, just before the 2011 elections.
Before he died, Cheddi Jagan took some swipes at me over several serious charges I made against him. They included his nasty hypocrisy over his rejection of Clive Thomas for the position of Vice-Chancellor of UG, dismissal of Malcolm Harripaul from Customs and Excise, and covering up of corruption by his protégés.
In all these decades of torrid opposition activism, the thousands of governmental sycophants that vilified me have never accused me of homosexuality. And I believe the reason for that is that I have never been a homosexual and I am not a homosexual. Of course I do not have any objection to the practice and legalization of homosexuality, but I was never and I am not a homosexual.
I married Janet Kissoon over thirty-five years ago and one of my philosophical views is that the female gender is a phenomenally attractive species.
Where and how Mr. Jagdeo, when he was President, got that impression of me to make his public accusation of me being a homosexual, is not something I am concerned about or was concerned with at the time.
But I can honestly tell my readers it was one of the political controversies in my life that attracted the comments of thousands (not hundreds) of citizens who came up to me with the identical question – how can President Jagdeo of all people say that about you?
I think I must have replied in a certain way which I can’t remember, but I do know a large amount of inquirers asked me if I thought the President was a homosexual himself. I can distinctly remember saying I was not interested in that question and about the President’s personal life.
So let’s move on to another terrible accusation against me that surfaced in the Jagdeo-Kissoon libel trial. But quickly before we do so, I recall that Mr. Jagdeo turned fifty years last week. He is not married and is not a parent. My simple advice to him is that being married to the woman you love and fathering a child are experiences of joy that words cannot define.
Now there is the claim that I may have had to face a charge of plagiarism leveled against me during my academic career. This was put to me by the lawyer for Mr. Jagdeo during his cross-examination of me as reported in this newspaper in its October 29, 2013 edition. I never commented on that inquiry although it was reported in the press. I wanted to wait until I was finished with the witness box.
On Friday my testimony ended and now I feel more comfortable in discussing the allegation.
In all my decades of opposition politics from Burnham right up to Ramotar, including Jagdeo, never was an insinuation of plagiarism made against me.
I was schooled at three universities, went right up to the doctoral level, and never had a statement of plagiarism made against me. I taught for twenty-six years as a teacher at UG and opposed vigorously every Vice Chancellor, and my detractors at UG never accused me of plagiarism.
Where did the lawyer for Mr. Jagdeo get that information from? It could not be from the real world.
My lawyer was a bit annoyed, because once you say these things in court it implies that it must have come from some quarter, and though no proof was supplied, it may or could influence the courts. No evidence was led of a charge of plagiarism in the libel hearing. But my point, as my lawyer advised me, is that these things should not be said in a court hearing if no evidence can be produced.
What happened if it was a jury trial and though no evidence was tendered, the jury believed it? After all it was said in court.
I think this is the danger I have learnt about a court trial. Now that my testimony is over, I can say I found one thing about cross-examination that is totally unacceptable – a witness is compelled to answer yes or no. So have you stopped beating your wife? Answer yes or no. Yes sir. So it meant that you once beat your wife. What happened if you never laid a hand on her?

---

---