Youth Development Minister Foster Cummings has launched legal action against UNC Senator Jayanti Lutchmedial, giving her until 1 pm today to retract, remove and apologise for “libellous” statements she made about him last Thursday. However, Lutchmedial has warned she has a lot of court clothes.
The standoff arises from Lutchmedial’s statements about Cummings at last week’s UNC “TT Speaks” meeting in San Fernando. She raised allegations in a 2019 TTPS Special Branch report on Cummings.
Cummings denied the allegations, deeming them false.
Yesterday a pre-action protocol letter was sent to Lutchmedial on Cummings’ behalf by attorney Jennifer Farah-Tull. Attorney Christopher George and lead counsel Farai Hove Masaisai are also part of his team.
The letter alleged defamation of character and intentional infliction of mental distress on Cummings’ part via Lutchmedial’s “libellous” statements. The claim also alleged breach of confidentiality and misuse of private information of Cummings.
Farah-Tull’s 22-point argument included that Cummings and his family have had cause to enlist the services of a professional therapist, as the accusations have led to cyberbullying of himself, his wife and children by people who believed Lutchmedial’s statements to be true.
Attorneys gave Lutchmedial until 1 pm today to remove videos of her statement, do public retraction and apologise or High Court application for interim injunctive relief will be made against her. They also sought written undertaking that she wouldn’t repeat the statements and/or will cease from publishing similar defamatory statements and/or allegations against Cummings.
But there will be no apology or removal of the material.
In immediate response, Lutchmedial, an attorney, confirmed receipt of the letter, stating: “After fighting off the strong temptation to throw it in the dustbin, I decided to pass it to my attorney, former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan (SC) - the most capable Attorney General.
“I’d like to inform Mr Cummings and others, in case they’re unaware, that I’ve donned my robes and bands for the past 15 years in defence of truth, justice and the rule of law. As such, I have a lot of court clothes. I strongly advise that they too should invest in appropriate attire for the courthouse.”
Lutchmedial said she wasn’t the author of the report’s statements and, “Maybe, he should sue Special Branch and he may have to consult his therapist and take it to the Lord in prayer.”
Cummings - “Mental, emotional distress”
Cummings’ attorney said Lutchmedial’s defamatory statements painted him in a very negative light “by use of vacuous, misleading and unfounded allegations of scandal, larceny, fraud and corruption.”
The’ attorney’s arguments included:
• Cummings categorically stated that the matters complained of are false. Prior to entering into politics, he operated as managing director of several businesses owned by his family which are well established and have conducted business both in the public and private sector in a most transparent and responsible manner, contrary to the claim in the report of unscrupulous business activity.
• Cummings’ good name and reputation have been tarnished and embarrassment caused by the defamatory statements made.
• The document contained certain markings which indicated it was secret.
• Neither Lutchmedial nor Cummings know the circumstances of the document; or if it represents any final finding of fact which can be relied on by anyone.
• Cummings has reasonable expectation of privacy of information relating to any investigation being done by TTPS. No charges have been brought against him and “the totality of any investigation” hadn’t been proffered by anyone, including TTPS. Therefore, the report “does not lay in any factual context where a fair assessment of its accuracy can be inferred.”
• The manner in which the information was disclosed was inconsistent with the tenor of the document which spoke of allegations being investigated while Lutchmedial “willfully presented it as findings of fact.
• There was no justification or reasonable excuse to disclose the information and a duty was owed to treat the information as confidential.
* Lutchmedial knew/ought to have known that her statements and the report disclosed highly sensitive and confidential inf01mation which Cummings reasonably expected to be kept private.
* Reckless dissemination of such information to the general public has put the life of himself and his family at risk to acts of violence from persons potentially outraged by the allegations of corruption (sic) by him and the allegation which she presented as fact, that he has dealings with a reputed drug dealer and “gang” leader.
* The claim that Cummings “mobilises residents for his own means” is an absolute untruth. Neither he nor any family member had any interest/connection with the property located at Ibis Avenue, Point Lisas.
