Was Maitland the only one behind girlfriend’s death?

Over three years have passed since the death of Donna-Lee Donaldson, a social media personality, then aged 24. Last Friday (March 13), we all witnessed the sentencing of the accused former policeman, Noel Maitland, who was charged with her murder and preventing the lawful burial of a corpse, as her remains have not been found.

Maitland maintained his innocence, but still received life imprisonment, with no possibility of parole before 32 years and four months, following a guilty verdict by a jury this past January.

The more I examine the matter, is the more I believe that although Maitland was fingered, and might have participated in Donaldson’s disappearance, he did not commit the dastardly crime alone.

The question is who that person would be and what would have been their motive?

Speculation is rife about a certain woman, who fled Jamaica at the time of Donaldson’s disappearance, and who could be someone who is chilling not so far from the island’s shores. If there is any semblance of truth to that, it must be further explored.

There is a question that warrants a simple answer. Could Maitland be protecting someone whom he knows well by not divulging key information, and would it be worth it?

Lead defence counsel in the matter, Chris Townsend, responding to a concern that Maitland showed no remorse during the court proceedings, responded that his client knew that he did nothing wrong, hence there was no need for the now convicted man to behave as if he was sorry for something that he did not do.

This one is quite peppery, and it is now left to the highly competent judges at the Court of Appeal to determine whether or not there is still a ray of hope for Maitland.  

Watch out for those shady land developers

I had an interesting discussion with a close friend of mine last week, which, in the end, led to a similarity of a problem that I have been experiencing for several years.

My friend was relating a challenge that he had, while attempting to collect money from a developer who undertook to build a house on land that he owned on the outskirts of St Andrew, and was dumbfounded by the things that were happening to him, despite reporting the matter to the police, and at one time engaging the services of legal counsel in a desperate bid to retrieve what rightfully belong to him.

Six years earlier, he had sorted out the appropriate documents for the property – including architectural design – and paid money in advance to the developer for foundation work to begin, but there has hardly been any movement, and at times, the developer cannot be found. When the acts of disappearance set in, the usual excuse when the developer is next seen is that he had been engaged in projects overseas, but the building of my friend’s house would begin ‘soon’.

The developer seems to have solid contacts in the police force, for attempts made to get law enforcers involved often turn to nought, and the lawyer who was brought in to take the matter further has been sleeping on the job, despite the payment of a retainer.

How similar does this one seem to my own experience? Almost 16 years ago, I made a full payment, in the millions, on a piece of land in Upper St Andrew, which hardly got off the ground under the then developer, who, eventually, had to sell, and some of those who had made deposits have still not been reimbursed. It is now the site of an elaborate townhouse complex, with units, based on size, sold for a minimum of US$1 million.

The excuses, to this day, have flown like the river Nile, with the developer paying back a little ‘smalls’ on occasion, and giving the same excuses that have become fashionable for a decade and a half.

There is a whole lot more to the story, but I don’t want to divulge certain things now, because quite soon, based upon what has been happening, it seems likely that the Supreme Court will be asked to intervene.

Another strange similarity is the fact that in both instances, both developers are also into politics, one of them at a senior level, for the same party.

My advice to the people of this country: Be careful about who you choose to take on the task of building your property. There are some dangerous snakes out there.

My friend is hurting because the developer, in his case, was highly recommended. In my case, the developer is someone whom I know deeply.

Some people often pretend to be your friend, behave like you mean the world to them, and would make all the sacrifices across the globe to make you happy. 

That is sheer fantasy.

‘Profile’ in focus

As a regular viewer of ‘Profile‘ on Television Jamaica, from the days of Ian Boyne, who pushed the television interview programme to great heights with insightful discussions, I’ve seen a trend these days that could take some adjustments.

Host Archibald Gordon has been steady; he reads the ground well, and unlike Boyne not so long ago, he keeps his questions short, so that the guest does not have to be tickled by any highfalutin verbal onslaught.

So it goes beyond Archie, who has risen to become one of Jamaica’s foremost presenters over the last decade or more, unveiling the results of a promise that was demonstrated while serving as a member of St Jago High’s Schools’ Challenge team.

It’s now a matter of who makes the decisions regarding programme structure – manager of the programmes department, or producer. Now to get to the point: ‘Profile‘ has got to a stage now whereby the normal allocation of 30 minutes per programme seems inadequate. At least 80 per cent of the interviews conducted over the last few months have led to a part two, which kind of seems a bit tacky, because of the standard time involved and it might not be a good idea to have a part two for someone who is not as energetic and exciting to some viewers.

So, the solution is simple. Instead of having ‘Profile‘ as a 30-minute programme, extend it to an hour-long one, beginning at 6:00 pm, and starting Hill and Gully Ride, which is aired from 6:00 to 6:30, maybe a bit earlier, like 5:30 pm.

I am sure that if TVJ tries that, it would be better for most viewers, although I really cannot speak for those in the seeming majority. It is worth trying, and it’s better to hear viewers who do not fully understand that there is one shoot, split into two parts.

Believe me, I had a female cousin visiting me one Sunday, who upon seeking ‘Profile‘ asked the question: ‘Then that lady who was on the programme last week, couldn’t change her dress for this Sunday. A couldn’t one dress-up frock she have’?

The production team would also eliminate the question by those invited to tell their life stories, about why some get 30 minutes of attention, while others get an hour … opening up a question of who is more important, or tells a better story than whom.

Low birthrate surprise

Funnily, I was watching a news programme when a strange disclosure on why the birth rate has dipped in most countries over the last five years.

Those who might have been simultaneously glued to the television set at that time of night would surely be surprised, too, even shocked, that the main reason given for the drop in births, based upon what the supposed survey said, was that more people, women especially, had dogs as pets.

Wow?

I am aware of the love that humans place on their dogs, those in Europe in particular. But not to the extent that the survey determined that man’s best friend, woman’s too, would be interfering with a reproductive process that remains the foremost passion practised by the sexes.

In some European countries where I lived as a student, such as Germany and Hungary in particular, I saw the link between dogs and women express itself in a profound way. For example, I had a neighbour in the apartment complex that I lived in Berlin, Germany, who was wickedly attached to her dog. The young woman was beautiful beyond description, and always greeted me with the broadest smile, but would soon swiftly switch that smile back to her dog, whom she took to work, which was a short distance from home, every day. 

I had never seen that woman leave the house without the dog, which also shared a bedroom with its owner. 

On shorter visits to the Netherlands, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia (now Czechia), Austria, and the Soviet Union, that love, or respect for dogs, stood tall.  

So the study is effectively saying that instead of spending time with newborn babies, dogs are better company.  

In Jamaica, the situation is definitely different. There are not many dogs around which get the White House treatment like those in Europe and North America, so what is behind this nation’s low birthrate?

A combination of factors, naturally. They include the worsening economic situation in the country, the new and liberated woman who puts her profession over raising a family, and the easy access to ‘morning after’ pills, which can be swallowed three or four days after intercourse. Also, same sex attraction comes into the mix.

So, while Jamaican dogs will have to wait a while to press the love button, it must be concerning that greater focus is not placed on the falling birth rate in other places.

Send comments and feedback to [email protected].