WITH THE TERRITORY.

WE'LL TAKE A CLOSER LOOK OF AN ELDERLY ST. CROIX RESIDENT WHO SEEKED JUSTICE.

BUT NOW FACES A $44,000 LEGAL BILL.

THIS AFTER THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT A GRANT IN TRIAL REFERENCE FOR PLAINTIFFS WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

C. JACOB GOWER WILL JOIN US TO DISCUSS THE CASE.

CONCERNED ABOUT THE FEDERAL FUNDS AND THE RISKS OF MISSING CRITICAL DEADLINES, WHILE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES MAINTAIN THEY ARE ON TRACK.

WE'LL HAVE MORE.

PLUS, VIRAL AFTER BEING SHARED BY TESLA CEO ELON MUSK.

WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS HAS OFFICIALLY CANCELED ALL CONTRACTS WITH PRO SUPPORT AT THE FOUNDER DAVID WHITAKER PLEADED GUILTY TO BRIBERY AND WIRE FRAUD.

NOW THE COMPANY'S NEW CEO IS PUSHING BACK ARGUING THEY SHOULDN'T BE PUSHED FOR HIS ACTIONS.

WE'LL HAVE THE DETAILS.

AND LATER, THIS WEEK'S PANEL JOINS A CONVERSATION TO ANALYZE THESE ISSUES AND MORE.

COMES WITH THE TERRITORY STARTS NOW.

[ MUSIC ] >>> WELCOME TO "COMES WITH THE TERRITORY."

I'M JANETTE MILLIN YOUNG.

THE VIRGIN ISLAND SUPREME COURT RECENTLY SHUT DOWN A 2021 TRIAL LAW.

LAW THAT AIMED AT ADDRESSING THE BACKLOG OF CIVIL CASES.

THIS DIVISION HAS PROFOUND IMPLICATIONS FOR RESIDENTS LIKE VINCENT LIGER WHO SOUGHT JUSTICE AFTER THE 2021 REFINERY FLAIRING INCIDENT ON ST. CROIX, BUT NOW POTENTIALLY FACES A $44,000 LEGAL BILL.

HERE'S MORE.

ON MAY 12th, 2021, A LARGE FIRE ENGULFED THE TOP OF THE ONLY OPERATING FLAIR AT THE LIME TREE BAY REFINERY, RESULTING IN A RELEASE OF OIL DROPLETS WHICH TRAVELED DIRECTLY WEST, AND PROMPTED THE REFINERY TO ACTIVATE ITS INCIDENT CMMAND.

LIME TREE INFORMED THE ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY IT WAS TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING PRODUCTION.

THE FLAIR RAINOUT INCIDENT IMPACTED HUNDREDS OF ST. CROIX RESIDENTS INCLUDING VINCENT LIGER, WHO CLAIMS THE DROPLETS COATED THE ROOF OF HIS HOME.

HE ASKED FOR COMPENSATION TO CLEAN HIS CISTERN.

LIGER LATER SOUGHT TO COMPENSATE HIS CASE UNDER A 2021 LAW.

AN EFFORT BY THE VIRGIN ISLAND LENGTH SLAYTURE TO ADDRESS THE BACKLOG OF CIVIL CASES.

PASSED IN 2021, ACT 8468 SAYS THAT AN MOTION FOR PREFERENCE FOR ELDERLY PARTY IS GRANTED, THE COURT SHALL SET THE MATTER FOR TRIAL NO MORE THAN 180 DAYS FROM THE DATE THAT THE ELDERLY PARTY MOVED.

AFTER LIME TREE APPEALED THE RULE, CHALLENGING THE LAW'S CONSTITUTIONALITY, AND ARGUING THAT IT VIOLATES THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE.

>> BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE VIRGIN ILANDS WANT TO GIVE ATTENTION.

SO THIS COURT IS NOW IN SESSION.

>> DURING ORAL ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE VI SUPREME COURT IN MAY, THE JUSTICES CRITICIZES THE 2021 LAW.

>> THIS LAW IS GOING TO CREATE A DISASTER FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT JUSTICES.

>> CLEARLY, THE RIGHT TO ESTABLISH PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT, BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO INTO THE PROCEDURES IN WHICH THE SUPERIOR COURT ESTABLISHES.

>> WHAT THIS LAW HAS DONE IS THAT IT HAS GONE INTO THE SCHEDULE OF CASES, IT HAS GONE INTO THE DISCRETION, IT HAS INVADED THE JUDICIAL BRANCH.

>> THE JSTICES ISSUED A WRITTEN RULING IN AUGUST, ULTIMATELY AGREEING WITH LIME TREE BAY THAT THE 2021 LAW WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

LIME TREE'S ATTORNEYS HAVE NOW FILED A MOTION TO COMPEL LIGER TO PAY THEIR LEGAL FEES OF APPROXIMATELY $44,000.

MEANWHILE, LIGER STILL HAS NO DRINKABLE WATER FROM HIS CISTERNS.

>> TO DELVE DEEPER INTO THE ISSUE, WE'RE NOW JOINED BY ATTORNEY C. JACOB GOWER, WHO REPRESENTS VINCENT LIGER.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> LET US BEGIN BY ASKING YOU, WHAT HAS BEEN MR. LIGER'S EXPERIENCE SINCE THIS OPINION HAS BEEN RENDERED?

>> WELL, SINCE THE OPINION HAS BEEN RENDERED, I THINK IT'S ONE OF CONTINUED FRUSTRATION.

YOU KNOW, AS YOU ADDRESSED IN THE OPENING, THAT THE OIL SPILL, THE RELEASE WAS IN MAY OF 2021.

IT'S BEEN AMOST THREE AND A HALF YEARS.

AND AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, A TRIAL IS NECESSARY, RIGHT?

YOU CAN'T GO FOREVER WITHOUT GETTING JUSTICE FOR THIS KIND OF CONDUCT.

AND SO LIKE IF I HAD TO PUT IT IN ONE WORD, IT'S FRUSTRATION.

>> SINCE THE FLAIRING INCIDENT, EXACTLY HOW HS THIS AFFECTED HIM?

>> WELL IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE INCIDENT, MR. LIGER IS OVER 80 YEARS OLD.

YOU IMAGINE HE TAKES ALADDER, HE PUTS IT OUT IN FONT OF HIS HOUSE.

HE CRAWLS ONTO HIS ROOF AND HE SEES HE'S GOT THIS POLKA DOTTED OIL STAIN, WHERE YOU CAN SEE THERE IS HYDRO CARBONS ON HIS ROOF, AND THEN TAKES HIS FINGER AND WIPES IT, AND REALIZES, WELL THAT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, RIGHT?

IT'S NOT SAP.

IT'S NOT MOTOR OIL.

IT DOESN'T BELONG THERE.

AND SO SINCE THAT PERIOD OF TIME HE'S BEEN LIVING WITH, YOU KNOW, A ROOF THAT WAS COVERED IN OIL, AND WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, RIGHT?

THE CISTERN IS DESIGNED TO CATCH RAIN WATER THAT COMES OFF YOUR ROOF, SO ANY FOREIGN CONTAMINANT THAT'S ON THE ROOF MAKES ITS WAY INTO THE CISTERN.

SO AS A CONSEQUENCE OF OIL HITTING THE SIDE OF HIS HOUSE, AND HITTING ON HIS ROOF, HE HAS BEEN LIVING, AND HIS WIFE HAS BEEN LIVING WITH CISTERN WATER THAT HAS HYDRO CARBONS IN IT.

SO YOU CAN IMAGINE WHAT YOU USE WATER FOR I YOUR EVERYDAY LIFE.

BATHING.

WASHING.

COOKING.

AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THERE'S A DROP OF OIL IN EVERY SINGLE TIME H TURNS ON THE FAUCET, BUT HE IS LIVING A LIFE, YOU KNOW, WITH A SOURCE OF WATER THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY CLEAN, RIGHT?

AND WE TAKE IT FOR GRANTED, MANY TIMES.

YOU TURN ON THE WATER, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE CLEAN.

HE DOESN'T HAVE THAT PIECE OF MIND.

>> CERTAINLY SOUNDS LIKE A DIFFICULT SITUATION.

HOW DID YOU COME TO RPRESENT MR. LIGER WITH THISES SITUATION AND WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO TAKE THIS CASE ON?

>> ACTUALLY, I HAD GOTTEN PHONE CALLS.

I HAVE CLIENTS ALL OVER THE WEST END OF ST. CROIX, AND I'VE BEEN REPRESENTING CLIENTS FOR SOME TIME FOR PROBLEMS ON ST. CROIX.

MY PHONE WAS RINGING OFF THE HOOK WITH PEOPLE THAT HAD BEEN EXPERIENCING THESE PROBLEMS.

IN FACT, I STARTED GOING DOOR- TO-DOOR WITH PEOPLE CALLING ME, AND I JUST SAID TELL ME ABOUT YOUR CISTERN SITUATION IS.

I JUST HAD SO MANY PEOPLE CALLING ME THAT I JUST WENT TO THE BASEBALL PARK AND THE ATTORNEY SPREAD, THERE'S AN ATTORNEY AT THE BASEBALL PARK.

AND ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO CAME UP WAS MR. LIGER.

AND HE AND I HAD TWO OR THREE CONVERSATIONS, AND EVENTUALLY, HE SAID I'D LIKE YOU TO BE MY LAWYER.

>> CAN SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS - - >> MR. LIGER IS JUST A VERY IMPRESSIVE PERSON.

>> HOW DID YOU COME TO THE UNDERSTANDING THAT BOTH OF YOU WANTED TO HAVE THIS CASE EXPEDITED, AND THEN YOU WENT ONTO USE THE CURRENT LAW THAT THE JUSTICES DECIDED WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

>> MR. LIGER HAS A VERY SIMPLE CASE.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF COMPLICATED CASES IN THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

MR. LIGER'S IS NOT A COMPLICATED CASE.

LIME TREE CAME OUT, DID AN INSPECTION, FOUND THE OIL ON HIS PROPERTY.

SO WE KNEW WE HAD SOMETHING THAT WAS PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD.

NOT A COMPLICATED CASE.

I'M NOT GOING TO RUSH HEAD LONG INTO TRIAL, AS A PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY IF I CAN'T PROVE MY CASE.

AND I DIDN'T NEED YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS TO PROVE MY CASE.

AND WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO GET INTO COURT, AND TO HAVE A JURY OF MR. LIGER'S PEERS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, SO THAT HE WOULD HAVE COMPENSATION, IF HE WON, WOULD HAVE COMPENSATION TO BE ABLE TO CLEAN HIS CISTERN.

>> SO YOU REFER TO THIS CASE AS BEING VERY SIMPLE.

BUT WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION WHEN THE VIRGIN ISLAND SUPREME COURT STRUCK IT DOWN?

STRUCK DOWN THE LAW THAT YOU WOULD HAVE USED TO GET THIS CASE HEARD RIGHT AWAY?

>> WELL, I WASN'T TERRIBLY SURPRISED.

WHEN WE WENT TO ORAL ARGUMENTS, THE WRITING WAS SOMEWHAT ON THE WALL.

WE HEARD FROM A COUPLE OF THE JUSTICES.

THEY WERE NOT RECEPTIVE TO THE LAW.

THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY CONCERNS ON THEIR PRT THAT THE LEGISLATURE WAS STEPPING ON THEIR TOES.

AND SO WHEN THE OPINION CAME OUT, IT DIDN'T COME AS A SHOCK.

IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I HAD EXPECTED SINCE THE ORAL ARGUMENTS.

>> DURING THE LEGISLATIVE HEARINGS BEFORE THE 2021 LAW PASSED, OR WAS PASSED, SENATORS DISCUSSED THE NEED TO DISCUSS COURT BACKLOGS, AND EXPEDITE THE CASES FOR THE ELDERLY.

PARTICULARLY THOSE OF SENATOR MILTON POTTER IN THEIR OPINION, DECLARING THE LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

LET'S LISTEN TO THE BRIEF CLIP FROM SENATOR POTTER.

>> CLEARLY THE JUDICIARY HS THE ULTIMATE SAY AS TO HOW IT CHOOSES TO MANAGE ITS DOCKET.

YOU KNOW?

AND I GUESS IF NOTHING ELSE, THIS BILL WOULD SEND A MESSAGE THAT THE LGISLATIVE BRANCH IS CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DOCKET IS NOT MOVING AS SWIFTLY AS IT SHOULD.

>> GIVEN THAT THE SUPREME COURT USED SENATOR POTTER'S REMARKS TO JUSTIFY DECLARING THE LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGISLATURE'S INTENT?

>> WELL, I SYMPATHIZE OR I UNDERSTAND WHY THE COURT WAS -- YOU KNOW, SENATOR POTTER SAID WE'RE SENDING A MESSAGE.

SO IF I'M ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT MESSAGE I WOULDN'T TAKE IT TOO LIGHTLY EITHER.

BUT AS TO THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT SENATOR POTTER WAS GETTING AT IS I DON'T THINK AN EXPEDITED TRIAL IS A MATTER OF PROCESS.

IT'S ALSO A MATTER OF SUBSTANCE.

IF YOU CAN'T GET A TRIAL FOR A YEAR, TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS, FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, AT SOME POINT IT BECOMES SUBSTANCE.

SO LOOK, WE ALL GET OLDER.

GOD SPARE LIFE.

BUT IF YOU'RE OVER THE AGE OF 80 IN THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO MOVE YOUR CASE TO EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION, WITH THE BACKLOG, IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT.

THAT'S NOT TO SAY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE JUSTICE IN YOUR LIFETIME, BUT AT SOME POINT, PROCESS BECOMES SUBSTANCE IF YOU DON'T GET JUSTICE IN YOUR LIFETIME, OR IF YOUR TRIAL IS TEN YEARS FROM NW.

>> SO IF LIGER DECIDED TO USE THIS LAW, WICH IT WAS LAW, HE DECIDED LET'S GO DID AHEAD TO USE IT TO OUR ADVANTAGE, NXT THING YOU KNOW, IT'S STRUCK DOWN, AND NOW LIME TREE IS QUESTIONING LEGAL FEES.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THESE FEES THEY'RE ASKING FOR, AND HOW DOES THIS IMPACT MR. LIGER?

>> MY REACTION TO IT WAS FRANKLY, WHEN I SAW IT, MY JAW DROPPED WHEN I SAW IT.

THIS IS NOT A FIGHT THAT MR. LIGER TOOK ON LIGHTLY.

HE DIDN'T PUT CONTAMINATION ON HIS OWN ROOF.

HE DIDN'T ASK FOR CONTAMINATION.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT LIME TREE DID.

HE DIDN'T DO IT, HE'S ASKED NOTHING MORE IN THIS CSE THAN SOME MEASURE OF ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY FROM LIME TREE TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT.

AND CERTAINLY, ASKING FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES TAKES THIS CASE IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.

IT DOES ANYTHING BUT MAKING THINGS RIGHT.

>> EXACTLY.

HE STILL DOESN'T HAVE DRINKING WATER FROM HIS CISTERN, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS TRUE.

AND LOOK, AS LONG AS THIS CASE REMAINS IN LITIGATION, LIME TREES THAT EXPRESSED EVEN AS THIS CASE PROGRESSES, THEY MAY WANT TO COME TEST HIS CISTERN AGAIN.

SO YOU KIND OF HAVE TO PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE UNTIL LIME TREE SAYS, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE DONE WITH ANY ADDITIONAL SAMPLING.

>> SO YOU SAY PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE.

THAT MEANS THAT THE CISTERN I STILL CONTAMINATED.

HE CANNOT USE THE CISTERN WATER AT ALL.

THERE'S NO CLEANUP.

THERE'S NO RELIEF, AND YOU'RE SAYING PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE?

I MEAN, IT'S THERE, CORRECT?

>> IT IS THERE.

AND LOOK, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S BEEN A PASSAGE OF TIME.

I CAN ARGUE WITH THE EFFECT THAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THREE HURRICANE SEASONS, AND IT RAINS, AND CISTERNS OVERTHROW.

BUT THERE HAS NOT BEEN THE EMPTYING OF THE CISTERN, THE SCRUBBING, THE PRESSURE WASHING, SOAP AND WATER AND THE REFILLING.

THAT PROCESS HAS NOT HAPPENED.

AND THAT'S -- BUT ALSO REMEMBER AS WELL, IT'S NOT AN INEXPENSIVE PROCESS TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

MR. LIGER IS OVER THE AGE OF 80.

YOU KNOW, LIKE MOST OF THE WEST END OF ST. CROIX, HE LIVES ON A FIXED INCOME.

IT'S A TALL ASK TO ASK SOMEBODY THAT DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, HE DIDN'T CONTAMINATE HIS OWN CISTERN.

IT'S A TALL ASKING TO HAVE SOMEBODY GO OUT OF POCKET TO FIX SOMEBODY ELSE'S POBLEM?

>> UNDERSTANDABLE.

WHAT CAN BE DONE TO REACH JUSTICE FOR MR. LIGER AND OTHERS?

>> TERE ARE, BESIDES MR. LIGER'S CASE, THERE IS A CLASS PROCEEDING AS WELL.

AND IN THAT CLASS IS THOUSANDS, AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THAT ARE SITUATED JUST LIKE M. LIGER, AND I KNOW, AND ME AND THE OTHER ATTORNEYS THAT ARE WORKING ON THAT CASE ARE CONFIDENT THAT AT THE END OF THAT PROCEEDING, THAT SOME, YOU KNOW, SOME MEASURE OF JUSTICE IS GOING TO B DISPENSED.

BUT ALSO, IN MR. LIGER'S CASE SPECIFICALLY, THE TRAIN, THE METAPHORICAL TRAIN IS BACK ON THE TRACKS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT A TRIAL, PROBABLY 16 TO 18 MONTHS FROM NOW.

THAT'S A TRIAL A SET.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT LIME TREE HAS AGREED TO.

AND, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S WHY H SOUGHT EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, BY THE TIME TRIAL HAPPENS IN EITHER THE CLASS CASE OR THIS CASE, IT'S GOING CAN TO BE FOUR AND A HALF, FIVE YEARS, MAYBE LONGER BETWEEN WHEN THE INCIDENT HAPPENED, AND WHEN THERE'S AN ULTIMATE RESOLUTION OF THESE CASES ON THE MERITS.

SO THE TIME WILL COME.

THERE WILL BE A TRIAL ONE DAY.

THERE WILL BE A JURY OF, YOU KNOW, PEERS THAT WILL BE SITTING ON THAT JURY.

BUT I'M VERY CONFIDENT THAT AT THE END OF THIS ROAD IS GOING - - IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING.

>> SO ATTORNEY GOWER, WITH JUST A COUPLE OF MORE MINUTES.

WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY TO THE COURT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE?

>> WELL, I DON'T HAVE A MESSAGE FOR THE REFINERY.

I'LL LET MY SPEAKING, OR MY TALKING IN COURT, AND MY COURT FILINGS DO THAT.

BUT TO THE LEGISLATORS, IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH GOING TO ELIMINATE THE BACKLOG, I BELIEVE, SHORT OF APPOINTING SOME ADDITIONAL JUDGES.

AND SO, LOOK, I KNOW MONEY IS TIGHT.

MONEY IS ALWAYS TIGHT.

BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE LEGISLATURE TO GET CREATIVE, JUST MAYBE FIND SOME WAY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE ON THE BENCH.

TO THE JUDICIARY, LOOK, I PRACTICE EVERY DAY, AND I'M NEVER GOING TO CRITICIZE TEM FOR A VERY DIFFICULT JOB.

BUT WHEN I CAN DO, WHAT I'M HAPPY TO DO IS I WOULD ASK THE JUDICIARY TO HOLD LAWYERS MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO MOVE THEIR CASES.

MANY TIMES, YOU KNOW, AND LOOK, I'M JUST AS BAD AT IT, ASKING FOR THE EXTENSION, ASKING FOR TWO MONTHS WHEN SIX WILL DO.

ASKING FOR EXTENSIONS ON THE 10- YEAR-OLD DOCKET.

HOLD OUR FEET TO THE FIRE.

I CAN CHALLENGE THE JUDICIARY, DON'T LET SOME OF THIS STUFF DRAG OUT.

IF YOU'VE GOT A LAWYER THAT'S TAKING THEIR SWEET TIME, TELL THEM NO.

NO.

GET YOUR CASE TRIAL READY, AND LET'S GET A MOVE ON.

>> WELL I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE TIME THAT YOU SPENT EXPLAINING ALL OF THESE ISSUES BEFORE US WITH THE LIGER CASE, AND I WISH YOU WELL.

COMING UP -- >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WE'LL HEAR FROM THIS WEEK'S PANEL, BUT FIRST, LET'S LOOK AT THE ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION.

>> MR. SPEAKER, THE REBUILDING EFFORTS OF THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS WILL REQUIRE AN EXTRAORDINARY LEVEL OF COORDINATION AND COOPERATION BETWEEN THE LOCAL AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS.

>> THAT WAS DELEGATE TO CONGRESS, STACY PLAYSKET ON THE HOUSE FLOOR, MONTHS BEFORE HURRICANES.

NOW MORE THAN SIX YEARS LATER, PLASKET IS CALLING FOR BETTER COOPERATION BETWEEN HER OFFICE AND THE VIRGIN ISLAND'S GOVERNMENT, AS CRITICAL FEDERAL FUNDING DEADLINES APPROACH.

IN A RECENT LETTER TO ALBERT BRIAN JR., PASKET'S LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR WAS APPARENTLY IN RESPONSE TO A SEPTEMBER 19th LETTER FROM THE GOVERNOR ABOUT RUN COVER OVER, MEDICAID, AND TREASURY BOND ISSUES.

IN PLASKET'S RESPONSE, SHE STATED SHE WANTED TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE OF FEDERAL FUNDING DEADLINES.

SHE WROTE, I HAVE BECOME AWARE OF UNRESOLVED ISSUES WITH CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROPERS.

INFORMATION THAT IS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DECLARED DIRECTLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

THE RCHMOND POWER GENERATION PROJECTS.

SHE STRESSED THAT HER OFFICE HAD NOT RECEIVED THE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM THE BRYANT ADMINISTRATION TO ASSIST IN CONVERSATIONS WITH FEDERAL PARTNERS.

BUT THE OFFICE OF DISASTER RECOVERY OFFERED A DIFFERENT ACCOUNT.

THE ODR DIRECTOR SAID THE TERRITORY IS ON TRACK TO MEET FEMA'S DEADLINE, CLARIFYING THAT PROJECTS ONLY NEED TO ACCEPT FEMA'S FIXED COST OFFERS BY THE DEADLINE.

>> THESE ARE ALL FIXED CAP GRANTS.

SO IN THE FEMA PROCESS, THE COST IS OFFERED TO THE TERRITORY, AND WE HAVE TO ACCEPT IT, AND THAT'S THE DEADLINE.

>> WILLIAMS FURTHER NOTED THAT THE POWER GENERATION PROJECTS WERE ALREADY ACCEPTED, AD JUST FIXED PROJECTS REMAINED TO BE FINALIZED.

PLASKET IN HER LETTER ALSO MENTIONED THE ODR CONTRACT WITH CH TO M HILL.

PLASKET STATED, MY STAFF CONTACTED THE OFFICE OF DISASTER RECOVERY REQUESTING AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE DECISION RATIONALE.

THIS INQUIRY DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE.

BUT THE ODR DIRECTOR SAID -- >> I'M NOT SURE WHO THE INQUIRY WENT TO, BUT I PERSONALLY DID NOT RECEIVE AN INQUIRY.

ONCE THE CASE WAS FILED, WE HAVE PROTOCOLS ON HOW WE WOULD SPEAK OFFICIALLY ON THE MATTER, AND I'VE NOT RECEIVED -- I'M NOT AWARE OF THE REQUEST.

PLASKET QUOTES A LETTER ABOUT THE NEED TO TRANSPARENCY, STATING THE PEOPLE OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS NEED AND DESERVE TRANSPARENCY.

IN OTHER NEWS, SACY PLASKET IS DRAWING ATTENTION ONLINE AFTER A VIDEO CLIP FROM HER MSNBC INTERVIEW LAST SUMMER WAS SHARED BY TESLA CEO ELON MUSK.

IT SHOWS HER DISCUSSING FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP.

>> HE NEEDS TO BE SHOT -- STOPPED.

>> ALTHOUGH SHE IMMEDIATE WILL HE CORRECTED HERSELF, MUSK SAID THE DEMOCRATS HAVE ASKED FOR TRUMP TO BE SHOT AND NOW TWO HAVE ANSWERED THAT CALL.

THE TWEET HAS GARNERED OVER 27 MILLION VIEWS.

>> PLASKET IS A FULL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLAND IN CONGRESS, FREQUENTLY APPEARED ON PLATFORMS.

THIS VIRAL CLIP RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT THE IMAGE.

PLASKET GAINED SIGNIFICANT ATTENTION AS THE FIRST NONVOTING DELEGATE TO SERVE IN PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SECOND IMPEACHMENT TRIAL PLAYING A KEY ROLE IN PRESENTING EVIDENCE RELATING TO THE JANUARY 6th CAPITOL RIOTS.

>> HE FANNED THE FLAME OF VIOLENCE, AND IT WORKED.

>> PLASKET HAS CONSISTENTLY HIGHLIGHTED HER EFFORTS TO BRING POSITIVE ATTENTION TO THE VIRGIN ISLANDS ON THE NATIONAL STAGE FOLLOWING THE 2024 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION, SHE EMPHASIZED HER MISSION WRITING IN A FACEBOOK POST GOING TO THE CONVENTION IS ABOUT LETTING DECISION MAKERS KNOW WE ARE PRESENT AND NOT TO BE FORGOTTEN.

IT'S WHY I CAN TEXT A NEWS ANCHOR TO SAY YOU SAID PUERTO RICO AND FORGET TO SAY THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

IT'S WHY THEY CRRECT THEMSELVES ON AIR.

IT'S WHY WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS CAN GRANT THE VIRGIN ISLANDS -- NOT JUST BEING PRESENT BY USING THE TIME TO ADVOCATE AND CHAMPION OUR ISSUES.

AS THE CLIP CONTINUES TO CIRCULATE, MANY ARE WATCHING TO SEE HOW IT MIGHT IMPACT PLASKET AND THE NATIONAL PERCEPTION OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

>> SOMEONE WHO OPENLY ADMITTED AND HAS PLED GUILTY TO DEFRAUDING THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS I WOULD THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPRUDENT FOR THE GOVERNOR OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS TO PROCEED DOING BUSINESS WITH THAT ENTITY, GIVEN THAT WHAT HAS COME TO LIGHT.

>> AT A RECENT PRESS BRIEFING, RICHARD MOLTA EXPLAINED WHY THE GOVERNMENT CANCELED ALL O ITS CONTRACTS WITH THE PRO SUPPORT.

THE ABRUPT DECISION CAME AFTER NEWS BECAME PUBLIC THAT MON ETHOS FOUNDER PLED GUILTY TO BRIBERY AND WIRE FRAUD.

CURTIS JONES IS NOW PUBLICLY DEFENDING THE COMPANY AND PUSHING BACK AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT'S DECISION TO CANCEL HIS CONTRACT.

>> WITH I JUST DIDN'T EXPECT THEM TO PUT THEIR DISLIKE FOR DAVID ABOVE THE SAFETY OF THESE CONTRACTS.

THEIR CONTRACTS WITH US WEREN'T GENEROSITY.

THEY WEREN'T THEM DOING US FAVORS.

IT WAS FOR US TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE CRITICAL SECURITY IN THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, AD THEY DECIDED THAT WAS LESS IMPORTANT THAN THEIR DISLIKE FOR DAVID.

DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING.

>> MON ETHOS HAD BEEN CONTACTED TO INSTALL HUNDREDS OF SECURITY CAMERAS IN ST. CROIX PUBLIC SCHOOLS UNDER A AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION EXECUTED IN FEBRUARY.

MON ETHOS ALSO HAD A CONTRACT WITH THE VIRGIN ISLANDS POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT WAS EXCUSED ON OCTOBER 10th, 2023, AND A CONTRACT AARDED WITH THE SPORTS PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT THAT WAS APPROVED IN MARCH.

THOUGH THAT CONTRACT WAS NEVER FINALIZED.

ALL CONTRACTS WERE OFFICIALLY TERMINATED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2024, BY THE PROPERTY OF PROCUREMENT ACCORDING TO ALEJANDRO.

>> CERTAINLY WAS NOT A HAPPY FRIDAY AT 5:01 P.M.

WHEN THE DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY AND PROCUREMENT SENT THOSE EMAILS OVER.

IT PUTS US IN A REALLY AWKWARD POSITION.

IT PUTS THE SCHOOLS IN AN AWKWARD POSITION.

IT PUTS THE PARKS IN AN AWKWARD POSITION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PAY MY EMPLOYEES AND SUPPORT THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, AND NOW WE CAN'T.

SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR MONEY THAT'S GOING FORWARD?

I DON'T KNOW.

IT'S VERY CONCERNING.

>> FORMER COMMISSIONER ANTHONY THOMAS WHO RESIGNED FROM PNP IN FEBRUARY OF LAST YEAR IS NOW VICE PRESIDENT OF MON ETHOS.

THOMAS TOLD US THAT THE CONTRACT CANCELATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT SET BACK FOR THE MON ETHOS TEAM, BUT THE THE COMPANY REMAINED COMMITTED TO OFFERING SERVICES WHEREVER THEY COULD MAKE A MEANINGFUL IMPACT.

JOINING ME ON SET TO BREAK DOWN THESE ISSUES ARE CLARIFY CLIVE RIVERS, ATTORNEY AT LAW, AND JAMILA RUSSELL.

HOST OF JUST JAMILA.

LET'S WELCOME IN KYE WALKER.

WELCOME TO THE SOW, EVERYONE.

BEFORE WE PROCEED TO OUR MAIN TOPICS I'D LIKE T GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE DISCUSSION I HAD EARLIER WTH ATTORNEY GOWER REGARDING THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION TO STRIKE DOWN THE 2021 LAW AIMED AT EXTRADITING LAWS FOR SENIORS AND THE ILL. ATTORNEY RIVERS, I'D LIKE TO START WITH YOU, ON YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON THE COURT'S DECISIONS FOR VULNERABLE POPULATIONS.

>> THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAD GOOD INTENTIONS IN BRINGING ABOUT THE LAW.

MAINLY BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS GREAT BACKLOG WHEN IT COMES TO CASES, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE DEALING WITH THE ELDERLY, YOU KNOW?

I MEAN, LIFE IS NOT INFINITE.

SO THEY'RE THINKING THAT SOMEHOW, SOME PEOPLE SHOULD GET SOME PREFERENCE.

NOW I UNDERSTAND THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION BECAUSE THE LAW IS SUPPOSED TO BE WHAT WE CALL BLIND, SO IT SHOULD BE FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD.

IT SHOULD NOT FAVOR THE OLD OVER THE YOUNG.

THE RICH OVER THE POOR.

AND SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COURT -- OR THE COURT'S RATIONALE.

BUT THERE HAS TO BE A MECHANISM, AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT IT IS, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE AN AWFUL AMOUNT OF BACKLOGS.

ONE SCHOOL OF THOUGHT MIGHT BE WE NEED TO INCREASE THE NMBER OF JUDGES ON THE BENCH.

I AM NOT QUITE SURE IF THAT WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM, BUT IT CERTAINLY SHOULD.

I MEAN, I'M IN PRIVATE PRACTICE AND I GET A LOT OF CALLS FROM CLIENTS WITH RESPECT TO THEIR CASE, SOME OF IT, YOU KNOW, THEY BELIEVE THAT SOMEHOW THE ATTORNEYS ARE NOT THE ONES MOVING THE CASE.

SOMETIMES THAT CAN BE TRUE TO.

>> IF YOU HEARD ATTORNEY GOWER, HE DID MAKE REFERENCES.

SO YOU CAN SEE WHY SOME OF THE CLIENTS MIGHT FEEL THAT WAY, BUT IN YOUR CASE, YOU DON'T FEEL THAT'S THE SITUATION.

>> IT COULD BE A COMBINATION OF BOTH, BUT CERTAINLY THINGS NEED TO HAPPEN.

>> SO ATTORNEY WALKER, HOW DO YOU SEE THIS RULING AFFECTIVE FUTURE LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO ADDRESS COURT BACKLOGS AND SUPPORT FOR THE ELDERLY, AND THE TERMINALLY ILL?

>> I MEAN, THE LEGISLATURE CAN ONLY DO WHAT IT CAN DO IN LIGHT OF, YOU KOW THE CHECKS AND BALANCES AND THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE SENATORS ARE ELECTED.

THE JUDGES ARE NOT, RIGHT?

SO I THINK TO BRING WHATEVER RELIEF THEY FEEL NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS, I IMAGINE THAT THE LEGISLATURE WILL CONTINUE TO TRY TO MAKE EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THAT CITIZENS ARE RECEIVING JUSTICE IN THE SYSTEM.

SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO CHILL THEIR EFFORTS TO TRY AND BRING SOME RELIEF TO THE COMMUNITY WITH REGARD TO THE BACKLOG OF CASES.

>> LAWMAKERS BEAR SOME RESPONSIBILITY NOW THAT MR. LIGER RELIED ON THIS LAW, AND IT'S FACING SIGNIFICANT LEGAL CHALLENGES.

>> SHORT ANSWER NO.

SENATORS ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY.

THERE IS A BACKLOG IN THE COURT SYSTEM.

YOU HEAR IT ANNUALLY WHEN THE COURT COMES BEFORE THE SENATE FOR THEIR BUDGET CALL.

THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS COMPLEX.

WE DON'T HOLD -- THERE ISN'T ANY MECHANISM TO HOLD JUDGES ACCOUNTABLE.

WE LIVE IN A SYSTEM WHERE THERE IS SUPPOSED TO BE CHECKS AND BALANCES, AND THE COURT SYSTEM IS THE FINAL ARBITOR.

HOWEVER, THE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A MECHANISM IN WHICH TO HLD JUDGES ACCOUNTABLE.

SO IF A JUDGE ISN'T DOING THEIR JOB, YOU CAN'T FILE A PETITION TO RECALL THEM, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ELECTED.

SO WE IMMEDIATE TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO HAVE SOME JUDGES, ESPECIALLY THOSE ON THE SUPERIOR COURT BECOME ELECTED, AND HAVE THE SUPREME COURT BECOME ELECTED WITH THE ADVICE OF THE SENATE.

BUT SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE.

SHORT ANSWER, THE LEGISLATURE IS IMMUNE FROM BEING SUED FROM WRITING A LAW THAT HAS BEEN UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

>> I DON'T THINK THE QUESTION WAS IMMUNITY.

THE QUESTION WAS SHOULD WE BEAR SOME RESPONSIBILITY?

>> IF WE HOLD THAT RATIONALE, EVERY LAW THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS WRITTEN, IF I TAKE SOMEONE TO COURT IN IS SMALL CLAIMS, THE LEGISLATURE HAS WRITTEN THAT I CAN TAKE SOMEONE TO SMALL CLAIMS, DOES NOT MEAN THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD NOW PAY THE DEBT BECAUSE I WON?

I DON'T THINK THAT'S REASONABLE TO EXPECT.

>> ATTORNEY RIVERS, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS?

>> REMEMBER THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN TRIED ON ITS MERITS.

WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT A MOTION THAT WAS DEFEATED, WHETHER OR NOT THE TRIAL SHOULD BE EXPEDITED.

I THINK YOU HEARD ATTORNEY GOWER SAY THE TRIAL WOULD BE IN ANOTHER 12 TO 16 MONTHS.

SO IT'S NOT A TERMINATIVE DECISION ON THE MERITS.

>> IT DOESN'T MEAN MR. LIGER HAS TO PAY THAT.

YOU KNOW THE WORLD IS THINKING THIS POOR ELDERLY PERSON HAS TO PAY.

>> NO.

I THINK THEY HAVE NOW PUT FORTH AN APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES BECAUSE THEY HAVE WON ON A MOTION FOR EXPEDITED HEARING.

HOWEVER, THE MERITS OF THE CASE HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.

THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOR ANOTHER -- ACCORDING TO ATTORNEY GOWER, FOR ANOTHER 16 TO 18 MONTHS.

>> YOU SAW THE LEGISLATURE TRYING TO BRING SOME SORT OF RELIEF.

IS THERE A WAY FOR THE COURT ITSELF TO COME UP WITH THIS RELIEF?

>> YES.

THERE ARE WAYS.

>> CAN YOU MENTION ONE AND I BELIEVE OFF AIR, YOU MNTIONED A SECOND ONE.

>> TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I FAIL TO BELIEVE THAT THE COURT CAN START EARLIER.

I WAS IN -- PRIOR TO COMING TO THE VIRGIN ISLANDS TO PRACTICE, I PRACTICED VERY BRIEFLY IN HOUSTON, AND THE COURT STARTS AT 8:00 A.M. AND YOU KNOW, THEY MOVE A LITTLE QUICKER I SOME INSTANCES.

I DARE SAY THAT MATTERS COULD BE RESOLVED MUCH QUICKER, PARTICULARLY IN CRIMINAL CASES.

I SEE WHERE WE USED TO RESOLVE CASES BEFORE THE CASES GET TO ARRAIGNMENT.

YOU KNOW?

SO THERE ARE MECHANISMS.

IT JUST REQUIRES A DIFFERENT -- A DIFFERENT WAY OF DOING THINGS.

>> SO PERHAPS BECAUSE OF THIS CASE, THEY MAY BE CNSIDERING ON TEIR OWN, BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT THE LEGISLATURE TO COME BACK AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OTHER WAY TO RUSH THEM, CORRECT?

>> I TRUST THAT THEY WOULD LET THEM WORK SOMETHING OUT.

>> I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SHARING YOUR PERSPECTIVES ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO ANOTHER TOPIC.

LET'S TURN OUR ATTENTION TO OUR FIRST MAIN TOPIC, WHICH IS THAT DELEGATE STACY'S RECENT CALL FOR GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY.

GOVERNOR PLASKET SAYS THAT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ISN'T SHARING CRITICAL INFORMATION WITH HER OFFICE.

NOW, DO YOU THINK THERE IS A COMMUNICATION GAP BETWEEN HER AND THE GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION, JAMILA?

>> IT'S BEEN CLEAR THERE'S BEEN A GAP BETWEEN THE CONGRESS AND THAT OF THE GOVERNMENT HOUSE.

WE'VE HAD THE DELEGATE PROJECT A DIFFERENT MESSAGE TO THAT THAT THAT ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN PROJECTING FOR A LONG TIME, AS FAR BACK AS MAYBE THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, AND AS FAR BACK AS THE PREVIOUS GOVERNOR, WHERE THEY'RE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE.

SO I THINK THAT SOMETIMES THE OFFICE OF THE DELEGATE TO CONGRESS IS MISCONSTRUED AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES THEREOF AREN'T ALIGNING WHAT CONGRESS INTENDED THEM TO BE.

>> THE DELEGATE'S CONCERN IS SHE'S THERE IN WASHINGTON.

IF SHE DOESN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, HOW DOES SHE FULLY REPRESENT US?

DO YOU THINK THIS COMMUNICATION GAP HAS ANY -- DO YOU SEE AY DIRECTION FOR IT TO BEING SOLVED, OR IS THERE GOING TO BE A CONTINUOUS COMPETITION AND THERE SHOULDN'T BE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF REPRESENTATION, CORRECT?

>> I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY BEHIND THE ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED IN THE DELEGATE'S LETTER.

WITH REGARD TO THE FEDERAL FUNDING, THE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.

I HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME BELIEVING THAT SHE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO IT.

IN ANY EVENT, THERE'S ALSO ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP IN THE PAST WHERE THE ADMINISTRATION'S INITIATIVES WERE NOT OLY JUST NOT SUPPORTED BY THE DLEGATE, BUT SHE KIND OF ATTACKED THEM.

SO THE BE TALL TRANSACTION IS AN EXAMPLE.

IN THE MIDST OF TRYING TO OBTAIN THE FUNDING FROM HUD, THERE'S THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE IN ONE OF OUR LOCAL MEDIA WITH HER ESSENTIALLY SAYING, THIS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HUD FINANCES.

SO THERE'S AN ISSUE OF TRUST THERE AS WELL.

BECAUSE YOU WANT US TO BE COMPLETELY FORTHCOMING BY THE ADMINISTRATION.

BUT ARE YOU GOING TO USE THAT INFORMATION TO HELP US, OR WILL WE HAVE ANOTHER INCIDENT LIKE THE BE TALL TRANSACTION WHERE WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF TRYING TO CLOSE A TRANSACTION, AD NOW OVER TE MEDIA, WITH OUR DELEGATE ACTUALLY QUESTIONING AND NOW SEEING THIS TRANSACTION IS NOT GOING TO COME TO FRUITION?

SO I THINK THERE'S SOME HISTORY BEHIND THAT CORRESPONDENCE.

>> ATTORNEY RIVERS, DO YOU CONCUR?

>> WELL I WILL LEAVE TE POLITICS TO POLITICIANS.

AND I'M GOING TO COMMENT MOSTLY ON THE LEGAL ISSUES, BECAUSE TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I DON'T GET TO FOLLOW UP ON MUCH OF THE POLITICS, BECAUSE I'M IN MY OFFICE DEALING WITH LEGAL ISSUES.

SO I HAVE NOT, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS TO BE A POLITICAL THING THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH.

>> CHOMPING AT THE BIT, I HAVE TO RUSSELL, SHE LIKES THE POLITICAL ACT OF THIS.

I'M GOING TO MOVE ONTO CAMILLA.

>> JUST TO EXPOUND ON SOMETHING THAT ATTORNEY WALKER SAID, THE DELEGATE IN HER LETTER ELUDED TO BEING PROVIDED INFORMATION THAT THESE PROJECTS WERE IN JEOPARDY, AND WHEN SHE MADE THE STATEMENT REGARDING THE HUD FINANCING FOR THE BE TALL PROJECT, SHE ALSO REFERENCED HER FEDERAL CONNECTIONS GIVING HER THE TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS WOULDN'T GO FORWARD.

SO CLEARLY HER SOURCES ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL AREN'T AS SOLID AS SHE WOULD WANT US TO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE.

BUT JUST TO GO A STEP FURTHER, SHE'S OUR DELEGATE TO CONGRESS.

CONGRESS FOUNDED FIT TO HAVE SOMEONE REPRESENT THE NEEDS OF THE TERRITORY IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

THE GOVERNOR IS ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE TO REPRESENT SO SHE SHOULD BE PUTTING FORWARD THE AGENDA SET BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, WHICH IS THE GOVERNOR AND TE LEGISLATURE.

AND MOST TIMES SHE HAS HER OWN AGENDA, AND IT'S NOT IN LINE WITH THAT OF THE LEGISLATURE, NOR OF THE GOVERNOR.

SO -- AND IF SHE HAD PEOPLE ON THE GROUND IN THE TERRITORY, THEY COULD FOLLOW THE SENATE HEARINGS, THE 34th LEGISLATURE CREATED THE COMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY.

AND THAT COMMITTEE HAS MET IN THE 34th AND THE 35th, AND HAVE CALLED INTO THE OFFICE OF DISASTER RECOVERY, AND WE HAVE SPOKEN AT LENGTH.

WE'VE HAD PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN KEPT ABREAST ON THE DISASTER-RELATED PROJECTS.

IF SHE WAS ON THE GROUND IN THE TERRITORY, FOCUSING ON THE ISSUES OF THE TERRITORY.

>> BUT SHE HAS OFFICES ON ALL THREE ISLANDS.

>> I THINK SO.

>> YOU DON'T SEE THEM.

>> I DON'T KNOW.

LIKE I SAID, I WORK IN THE INSTITUTION.

I KNOW THAT THE SENATE HEARINGS ARE ON TV, AND PEOPLE FOLLOW TV.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, I'M OLD SCHOOL POLITICS.

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU SEND SOMEBODY INTO THE SENATE CHAMBERS.

YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING, AND IF THERE'S A HEARING OF CONCERN, YOU SEND SOMEBODY THERE TO TALK TO THE SENATORS, YOU CAN TALK TO THE TESTIFIERS, AND YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING O WITH THESE PROJECTS.

I CAN'T SAY THAT I'VE SEEN ANYBODY FROM HER OFFICE IN THE CHAMBERS DOING THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

>> SO ATTORNEY WALKER, THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THE GROUND, BUT ARE THEY PAYING ATTENTION?

AND ACCORDING TO JAMILA, MAYBE THEY'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION.

MAYBE THEY NEED MORE LIAISON, THE CONGRESSMAN NEEDS MORE LIAISONS ON THE GROUND.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR WHAT THE RESOURCES ARE OF THE DELEGATE ON THE GROUND.

HOWEVER, WITH REGARDS TO HER LETTER AND IT'S OFFICE OF DISASTER RECOVERY, I THINK IT WAS DISAPPOINTING TO READ THE STATEMENT THAT SHE DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE INFORMATION.

I MEAN, THE OFFICE OF DISASTER RECOVERY IS CONSTANTLY BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE.

THEY HAVE ONE OF THE MOST ACTIVE, AND ENGAGING WEBSITES OF ALL THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES.

WITH REGARDS TO THE RECENT CONTRACT THAT SHE ALSO MADE REFERENCE TO, THE AWARD OF THE CONTRACT TO CH TO M, THEY HAD INDUSTRY DAYS TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IN THE INDUSTRY WAS AWARE OF EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON.

AND THE PUBLIC STATEMENT ABOUT THAT LAWSUIT BEING FILED AND KIND OF SUGGESTING THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE PROCESS WITHOUT PICKING UP THE PHONE AND AT LEAST ASKING QUESTIONS OF DIRECTOR WILLIAMS, YOU KNOW, IT JUST LEFT A BAD TASTE IN MY MOUTH.

I JUST FEEL THAT THE DISASTER RECOVERY PROCESS IS SO IMPORTANT THAT IT SHOULD BE ABOVE POLITICS.

AND THIS IS A SMALL COMMUNITY.

WE SEE EACH OTHER EVERY TIME.

JUST PICK UP THE PHONE AND ASK A QUESTION IF YOU'RE UNSURE ABOUT SOMETHING.

THAT'S HOW WE PROCEED, AND THAT'S HOW WE SHOULD BE UTILIZED IN OTHER EFFORTS IN D.C. ODR JUST CONFIRMED THAT THEY MET THE SEPTEMBER 30th DEADLINE AHEAD OF SCHEDULE.

SO I JUST WANT TO CONGRATULATE THEM, THAT THE DEADLINE FOR ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS HAVE BEEN MET.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE CONGRATULATIONS TO THE ODR.

>> SO LET'S MOVE ONTO ANOTHER TOPIC.

NOW LET'S SHIFT OUR FOCUS TO ANOTHER MATTER INVOLVING DELEGATE PLASKET TALKING.

TESLA CEO ELON MUSK SPARKING WIDESPREAD ATTENTION.

LET'S LOOK AT THE 18 SECOND CLIP AGAIN.

>> HAVING TRUMP NOT ONLY HAS HAD THE CODES, BUT NOW HAVING THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION FOR AMERICANS AND BEING ABLE TO PUT THAT OUT AND SHARE IT IN HIS RESORT, WITH ANYONE AND EVERYONE WHO COMES THROUGH, SHOULD BE TERRIFYING TO ALL AMERICANS.

AND HE NEEDS TO BE SHOT -- STOPPED.

>> SO ATTORNEY RIVERS, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT HOW DELEGATE PLASKET'S SLIP HAS BEEN AMPLIFIED ON SOCIAL MEDIA BY ELON MUSK.

NOW IT'S THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION.

>> ELON MUSK CONTROLS A LARGE MEDIA CONGLOMERATE.

IN FACT, ELON MUSK IS ONE OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO WAS BORN INTO WEALTH AND HAS MAXIMIZED.

IN FACT, IF YOU WERE TO GOOGLE HIS NAME, AND ASK THE QUESTION WHERE IS ELON MUSK FROM, HE SAYS VENTURA.

I VENTORRIA.

I KNOW THERE'S NO CITY OF VENTORIA.

THAT'S IN SOUTH AFRICA.

HE HAS CONTROLLED A WHOLE LOT OF NEWS MEDIA, COMMUNICATION.

IT'S CLEAR IN MY OPINION WHEN I SAW THE CLIP, THAT IT WAS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE AND NOT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AS MAXIMIZED, OR PUT ANY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO.

BUT I THINK IT'S BEEN SKEWED.

IN FACT, THERE'S NO QUESTION BECAUSE I'VE HEARD FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS THAT ELON MUSK IS ONE OF HIS BEST FRIENDS.

SO I THINK WE SHOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, ACKNOWLEDGE IT FOR WHAT IT IS.

IT WAS A SLIP, AND WHAT HE'S USING TO MAXIMIZE TO PUT PRESIDENT TRUMP IN THE BEST LIGHT POSSIBLE.

>> SO JAMILA, YOU'RE A MEDIA PERSONALITY.

WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THIS?

IT JUST COULD BE AN INNOCENT SLIP, AND YET IT'S BEEN AMPLIFIED, BECAUSE OF 27 MILLION VIEWS AT THE LAST READING, HAVE VIEWED THIS CLIP.

WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHTS?

>> IT'S CLEAR IT WAS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE.

JUST LIKE I JUST DID.

BUT THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME THINGS CALLED A FREUDIAN SLIP, WHICH I HOPE IT WASN'T.

BUT WHEN YOU ARE A MEMBER OF, YOU KNOW, YOU SERVE, AND YOU SERVE AS A NON-VOTING DELEGATE, I THINK THAT TOO MUCH OF THE PRIORITY OF OUR CURRENT DELEGATE TO CONGRESS FOCUSES HEAVILY ON THE NATIONAL POLITICAL SCENE.

AND DOES NOT ALIGN, OR REPRESENT THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE TERRITORY.

AND AT NO TIME HAVE I SEEN, OR AM I SEEING ENOUGH OF WHERE THE DELEGATE IS USING ENOUGH OF HER TERRITORY TO PUSH FORWARD.

WE JUST GOT $180 MILLION IN RUM COVEROVER.

WE HAD ONE RUM COMPANY IN ST. CROIX, WE'RE GETTING AN EXCESS OF $2 MILLION.

WE'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET THE $13.25 MADE PERMANENT ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL.

WE HAVE TO REMAIN AND MAKE FRIENDS ON BOTH SIDES, I THINK THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, YOU KNOW, A PRIOR DELEGATE, WHICH IS DELEGATE DONNA CHRISTIANSON.

WHILE SHE'S A STAUNCH DEMOCRAT, NO ONE CAN EVER QUESTION HER ALLEGIANCE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, SHE WAS ABLE TO MOVE ACROSS THE AISLE TO REPUBLICANS TO PUSH THIS NEED FORWARD.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PLASKET REPRESENTS US IN CONGRESS.

>> I DON'T THINK IT REFLECTS POORLY ON HER.

I DON'T THINK IT REFLECTS POORLY ON THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

I THINK IT WAS CLEARLY A SLIP OF THE TONGUE.

I THINK THAT OTHER PARTY, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ARE DESPERATE IN THEIR TRYING TO BRING UP AN OLD VIDEO FROM LAST YEAR AND TIE THAT SOMEHOW TO WHAT HAPPENED TO FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP.

MY CONCERN HERE IS NOW YOU'RE PUTTING A TARGET ON OUR DELEGATE'S HEAD, AND I DON'T APPRECIATE THAT, BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T DESERVE IT, AND IT'S NOT WARRANTED BECAUSE IT WAS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE.

THAT'S REALLY MY CONCERN HERE.

I DON'T THINK THIS REFLECTS POORLY AT ALL.

>> LET'S MOVE ONTO OUR FINAL TOPIC FOR TODAY.

THE GOVERNMENT HAS RECENTLY CANCELED ALL CONTRACTS WITH MON ETHOS AFTER THE FORMER OWNER PLED GUILTY TO FRAUD AND BRIBERY.

MEANWHILE, THE CURRENT CEO IS DEFENDING THE COMPANY SAYING THEY CONTINUE TO OFFER VALUABLE SERVICES TO THE COUNTRY.

SO IS THE GOVERNMENT RIGHT IN CANING THE SERVICE AFTER WHITAKER'S CONVICTION, OR SHOULD THE COMPANY BE RECONSIDERED UNDER ITS NEW LEADERSHIP?

>> M PERSPECTIVE IS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT.

IN FACT, I TOOK A PUBLIC POSITION TO NOT NECESSARILY THE CONTRACT ITSELF, BUT HOW IT IMPACTS THE CRIMINAL CASES THAT MON ETHOS WAS INVOLVED IN, BECAUSE I AM A CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER.

AND I BELIEVE THAT CASES THAT HAS TAINTED, O EVIDENCE THAT HAS THE -- HAS BEEN TAINTED FIRST CASE OF THOSE CASES SHOULD BE REVIEWED, AND IN FACT, I BELIEVE THAT IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE TO REVIEW THOSE CASES, AND NOTIFY ALL DEFENDANTS, DEFENDANTS COUNSELS WHAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE IMPACT.

BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN WHAT WE CALL FAIRNESS AND DUE POCESS.

AND IF FOR ANY REASON, DEFENDANTS WERE UNAWARE OF WHAT INPUT THIS MAY HAVE HAD ON SOME OF THESE CASES, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO HAVE THE CASES REVIEWED, AND HAVE NECESSARY CONVICTION REMOVED.

WITH RESPECT TO THE CONTRACT ITSELF, WHETHER OR NOT NEW OWNERS CAN GO FORWARD, THAT IS LEFT FOR ANOTHER DAY.

MY MAIN CONCERN WAS -- AND STILL IS, THAT DEFENDANTS SHOULD BE AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY, NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL REPRESENTS THE PEOPLE, AND THERE'S AN OLD SAYING, AN OLD SUPREME COURT SAYING THAT SAYS THE PROSECUTOR IS ALLOWED TO GIVE HARD BLOWS FOR THE UTMOST BE FAIR.

I THINK IF MON ETHOS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE AND DAVID WHITAKER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT -- >> THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I WANT TO GO TO ATTORNEY WALKER.

DOES CURTIS JONES NEW OWNERSHIP MITIGATE PREVIOUS CONCERNS, AND SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT RECONSIDER ITS DECISION?

>> I THINK WITH REGARDS TO THE MON ETHOS ACCOUNT, I THINK IT WAS CLEAR THAT CONTRACT NEEDED TO BE TERMINATED.

IT WAS, YOU KNOW, IT CAME ABOUT BASED ON THE FRAUD THAT M. WHITAKER MADE UPON WITH THOSE FAKE DEVICES, NUMBER ONE.

TO ME, THAT'S GROUNDS ENOUGH FOR THE CANCELATION OF ALL OF THOSE CONTRACTS.

WHAT CURTIS JONES IS DOING IS TRYING TO SAVE HIS COMPANY.

AND WHAT HE'S DOING IS NOW TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, DIVERT EVERYONE'S ATTENTION AND SUGGEST THAT THERE'S SOME ISSUE WITH THE GOVERNMENT HERE.

THE ISSUE CLEARLY IS WITH THE CONTRACT.

AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING ATTORNEY RIVERS SAID.

I HAVE HAD FIVE CASES SO FAR THIS YEAR.

I HAVE A TRIAL NEXT MNTH.

ALL OF A SUDDEN, I HAVE A PHONE DUMP IN A CASE INVOLVING THE AG'S OFFICE, WHERE I'VE NEVER HAD A PHONE DUMP EVER FROM THE AG'S OFFICE, IN ALL THE YEARS THAT I'VE STUDIED CRIMINAL LAW.

SO I HAVE CONCERNS AS TO WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE FOCUS SHOULD BE.

THE CONTRACT WAS TERMINATED.

THERE'S GROUNDS FOR THE TERMINATION.

LET'S MAKE SURE THIS DOESN'T HAVE A RIPPLE EFFECT IN OUR COMMUNITY.

>> SO THE OFFICES OF THE COURT CONCUR THAT THESE CONTRACTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN TERMINATED.

BUT WHAT MIGHT THE IMPACT BE ON THE COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY THE COOLS, TE PARKS, ET CETERA?

>> I DON'T THINK MON ETHOS ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT CAN INSTALL A CAMERA.

AND I DON'T FEEL THAT THE COST OF THESE CAMERAS WAS THE LOWEST COST POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD HAVE HAD.

I THINK THE CONTRACT WAS GOTTEN INTO FRAUDULENTLY, AND I'M NOT WITH ESQ BEHIND MY NAME, BUT I THINK THERE IS A LEGAL TERMINOLOGY, FRUIT FROM THE POISONOUS TREE THAT THEY THROW ALL THE EVIDENCE OUT.

SO I THINK THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS NEEDED TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE WILL FIND THAT WE HAVE A PROBLEM.

I THINK THERE ARE OTHER CONTRACTORS THAT CAN INSTALL CAMERAS, AND THAT MON ETHOS WAS NOT THE ONLY PERSON IN THE WORLD THAT COULD DO SO, AND WE COULD WORK WITH A COMPANY WHERE THE OWNERS ARE LEGITIMATE, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PERPETRATE A FRAUD ON THE PEOPLE OF OUR TERRITORY.

>> SO THERE IS YET ONE MORE QUESTION OF ETHICS, AND THAT IS DOES THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE FORMER COMMISSIONER BECOMING THE VICE PRESIDENT OF MON ETHOS RAISE ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST QUESTIONS IN YOUR MIND?

ATTORNEY RIVERS.

>> I'M NOT SURE.

I'M NOT QUITE SURE.

WE'LL PUNT IT OVER TO ATTORNEY WALKER.

ATTORNEY WALKER, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT?

>> ON THE FORMER COMMISSIONER NOW BEING AN EXECUTIVE WITH MON ETHOS?

>> YES, THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT.

>> WITHOUT MORE, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IMPROPER THERE SO LONG AS HE DID NOT USE, YOU KNOW, ANY INFLUENCE FROM THAT POSITION, OR ANY INFORMATION FROM HIS PRIOR POSITION IN A NEFARIOUS WAY TO SUPPORT MON ETHOS.

I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE LIMITING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EMPLOYMENT AFTER THEY LEAVE GOVERNMENT.

>> DO YOU THINK IT'S A GREAT BODY OF -- OR A GREAT NUMBER O CASES THAT COULD BE IMPACTED?

OR WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT?

>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A LOT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, APPARENTLY IT WAS SPREAD OVER TWO YEARS.

SO IT SHOULD NOT BE A LOT, BUT ANY AMOUNT IS SIGNIFICANT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE'S LIBERTY.

BUT YOU KNOW, JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, I NOTE THAT -- >> QUICKLY.

>> EVEN IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ONCE YOU HAVE SECRETARIES OF VARIOUS AGENCIES, ONCE YOU LEAVE THE GOVERNMENT, THEY END UP WITH COMPANIES THAT TURN AROUND AND DO BUSINESS FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

SO I'M NOT QUITE SURE IF MR. THOMAS LEAVING TO GO WORK WITH A COMPANY, YOU KNOW, IS A CONFLICT IN AND OF ITSELF, IN AND UNTO ITSELF.

HOWEVER, I AGREE WITH ATTORNEY WALKER THAT IT, YOU KNOW, ONCE THE ETHICS SHOULD NOT BE.

>> THAT IS ALL THE TIME WE HAVE.

THIS HAS BEEN REALLY A ROUGH CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION.

THANKS TO THE ENTIRE FINAL.

THAT IS ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR THE SHOW TODAY.

BE SURE TO TUNE IN NEXT SUNDAY AT 1:00 P.M. FOR AN ALL NEW EPISODE OF "COMES WITH THE TERRITORY."

IN THE MEANTIME, TUNE INTO THE WTJS NEWS FED WEEKDAYS OR BY DOWNLOADING THE WTJX APP.

FOR ALL OF US HERE ON THE WTJX PANEL CLUB, TAKE CARE.