The demolished Dread Shop structureDemolition of “Dread shop”In a press release by the Mayor and City Council (M&CC) on Friday, it was indicated that the demolition of the 48-year-old business known as “Dread Shop” at the Stabroek Square, Georgetown, did not breach any court order.According to the release, the “Dread shop” was an unlawfully erected formation, as it fell within the district of the “council area” as stated under the Municipal and District Councils Act, Chapter 28:01. It was stated that numerous reports were made to the M&CC, alleging the involvement of immoral activities being permitted at and around the entity.The M&CC’s statement highlighted that notice to vacate the premises was given to the “Dread Shop’s” owners by the council in ample time. It was then the proprietors began engaging the courts without informing Council. Thus the Mayor and City Council contended they were never restrained by any court order, since they were not involved in any proceedings pertaining to this matter.It was further highlighted that had the council been aware of an existing court order against the removal of the illegal structure; they would have abided by the judicial orders.Proprietor of the business Anthony Forde’s lawyer Nigel Hughes however, had accused City Hall of disobeying the court order. According to Hughes, the dispute over the “dread shop” is presently ongoing in the Court.“This has got to be the most outrageous act I’ve seen in a long time because [the matter is] actively going to mediation on the recommendation of the Court of Appeal and then they failed to turn up at the mediation and the Court of Appeal still has conduct of this matter and they believe they can disregard this act,” Hughes posited.The attorney explained that after he called the City Engineer on Thursday afternoon, Town Clerk Royston King then confirmed that demolition had indeed happened.“I believe that where people decide that they are not going to obey the law of the land and where they are not going to obey the outcomes of the court proceedings to deal with this particular piece of property then we are in a very dangerous state,” the attorney had posited.Hughes had further said: “There is a dispute right now between Mr Patterson’s Ministry and the City Council about who actually owns this square because it was donated by the Russell family [while] the Ministry [of Public Infrastructure] claims it is their territory and the city council claims it is their territory.”Meanwhile, also slated for demolition is the nearby “Island Snackette” which has been in operation for a similar time.Proprietor Abeola Fung told this newspaper that her family has invested “millions of dollars” to improve the standard of the business. They claimed that City Hall said their structure will also be torn down. Fung further related that some years ago City Hall had approved a plan for rehabilitation works to their structure.City Hall has been relocating vendors and stall owners in a move it said will see a transformation of the Stabroek Market Square. While some vendors have welcomed the change, others have protested the short-shrift initiatives of City Council, viewing them as “unfair” and “uncaring”.
…says he took employer’s vehicle on joyride to “show off”A remorseful yet humorous Mark Anthony, called “Unruly Boss”, a labourer of no fixed address, appeared unrepresented before Chief Magistrate Ann Mc Lennan to answer a complaint mad by his employer, Rajiff Singh of La Penitence (Georgetown), that he had taken Singh’s motor van, GSS 1970, valued at $3.35 million, without permission, and had abandoned same on the Agricola Public Road after it had run out of gas.Anthony pleaded guilty to the offence, and told the court that he is 24 years old with no fixed place of abode — living “all over in a lot of places”.Anthony had previously worked with the complainant’s father in the interior, but had recently been fired. Despite being the one to have fired Anthony, Singh had taken him under his roof, as Anthony had nowhere to live when he returned to Georgetown. In return for being provided with food, clothing and shelter, Anthony was expected to lend a hand on the businessman’s premises, and had been working as a labourer for the past two months.On Boxing Day last (December 26, 2017), Singh left his premises in care of Anthony and went to visit relatives in Kitty. However, as he was driving north along Vlissingen Road, Anthony cruised past him in motor van GSS 1970.At a traffic light, Singh made eye contact with Anthony, causing Anthony to speed away in a nervous state. The alarmed employer then made a report to the Ruimveldt Police Station, and Anthony was subsequently arrested and detained at the Kitty Police Station. The motor van was found abandoned on the Agricola Public Road the following day.In court, Anthony readily admitted to the offence, but said he had no intention to steal the vehicle. “I just went on a lil’ show-off drive. I didn’t intend to steal,” Anthony pleaded.He said he was forced to abandon the vehicle after it had run out of gas, and he had given his girlfriend the keys to the vehicle for safekeeping.The Chief Magistrate fined Anthony $30,000, with an alternative of two months in jail for default of payment.“I will spend the two months, and I will try to behave myself,” he assured the court.