Full Text | Dayton Campbell's lawyer concerned about new claims in sexual misconduct allegations

Attorney-at-law Georgia Gibson Henlin, QC, has raised concern about the three supposedly signed statements from three unknown females alleging sexual misconduct by her client, People's National Party (PNP) General Secretary, Dr  Dayton Campbell.

The statements have been in the public domain and were shared in the media.

They form part of a defence filed by PNP activist Karen Cross in response to a defamatory lawsuit initiated by Campbell.

The PNP general secretary has stoutly rejected the allegations of sexual misconduct.

In a statement, Gibson Henlin, said Campbell had obtained an injunction against Cross, and the other defendants, Natalee Stack and Michelle Stern, to stop them from repeating defamatory statements pending the hearing of the case.

See full statement by Georgia Gibson Henlin below:

We are concerned at the recent media pronouncements and headlines that repeat Karen Cross' defamatory statements concerning our client. An injunction was granted against Karen Cross and others on the 1st April 2021 to prevent them from repeating the said statements pending the hearing of the case.

Karen Cross was served and was present at the hearing of the application. She did not defend the application on the basis that she now alleges. Neither did she apply to set aside the injunction as she could have on that or on any basis.

We are therefore surprised that statements by unidentified persons that are attached to her defence have made their way into mainstream and social media as true or as if they have been tested for their truth.

The dissemination of alleged statements to and in the media is Ms. Cross' deliberate circumvention of the Court's orders. Ms. Cross and her team could have availed themselves of the facility whereby the court protects the identity of the minors while giving our client a fair chance to respond to the allegations.

Instead, our client was served with a redacted document which conveniently found its way to the media headlines. It also concerns the writer that it is alleged that she was contacted for comment. The facts are that one media house did not disclose the nature of the call because the writer was in a meeting.

Another was told that the writer had not yet seen the document to which he was referring. He advised that the firm's stamp was on it. This confirms that the document did not come from the court's file. Another did not receive a response as the call and a later apology came through at 8:37pm and 8:38pm respectively on the 25th May 2021.

Had we been given an opportunity to comment we would have advised as follows:

1. There is an injunction restraining Ms. Karen Cross and Ors from repeating the allegations. We and our client are duty bound to be equally constrained. Accordingly, our usually responsive client was advised to refrain from discussing the matter.

2. Our client was not provided with any indication of who the alleged “victims” are or whether those “March 2021” dated statements were made available to the police prior to them closing their investigations on the 18th April 2021. One statement reported that Ms. Cross was told of the allegations in 2019.

3. We would be keen on knowing the identities of the accusers as this is necessary for our client's response. It is public knowledge that he denies the allegations.

4. We would want to verify whether the “minors” appeared before the Justices of the Peace as alleged or if only their IDs and the statements were taken to the Justices of the Peace as recorded on the statements.

We would also have anticipated that all responsible journalists would have understood our constraints. We would have thought that they would be equally interested in fact-checking these statements before publication. That was not done.

Consequently, our client a medical practitioner, a senior politician and former member of Parliament has suffered irreparable harm to his reputation. An apology and correction would be in order on these facts.

Therefore, we would like to hope that on reflection each media house will act accordingly. It is imperative in this case where the only thing that we have, after a closed police investigation, is Karen Cross' unsupported allegations.

It is unthinkable that she was enabled by the media to misuse documents only because they are filed in court as a means of perpetuating her falsehoods in breach of a court order. We have instructions to treat with Ms. Cross' defence and actions to the full extent of the law.

Dr. Campbell remains steadfast in his commitment to protect his reputation. He is content to wait on the Court system. However, when his reputation and livelihood take a nose-dive consequent on the perpetuation of these false allegations he must perforce respond.

Follow The Gleaner on Twitter and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.