The Tribune

By LEANDRA ROLLE

Tribune Chief Reporter

lrolle@tribunemedia.net

A DEFENCE attorney in the criminal trial of Adrian Gibson and others yesterday accused Water and Sewerage Corporation (WSC) General Manager Robert Deal of “being a criminal” and suggested that he had turned a blind eye to an alleged conflict of interest involving a landscaping contract awarded to the daughter of former WSC chairman Sylvanus Petty.

During a fiery cross-examination, Geoffrey Farquharson, who represents Mr Gibson, repeatedly challenged Mr Deal over the process that led to the awarding of the contract to Mainscape Maintenance — a company reportedly operated by Sylatheia Gierszewski, Mr Petty’s daughter.

“Why,” Mr Farquharson asked, “did you sign the contract if you definitely knew it was a serious conflict and gangsterism at its highest?”

“Are you a gangster?”

The judge swiftly intervened, instructing the witness not to respond to the latter question.

Mr Deal said no one knew the connection between the company and the corporation when the contract was signed.

The defence attorney suggested that the PLP directed contracts to certain individuals, but the witness denied this, insisting that a process was followed in which the project management unit prepared a listing.

He testified that around 15 companies were listed for landscaping work and that Mainscape was simply one of them.

However, Mr Farquharson noted that the department fell under Mr Deal’s remit and questioned how a brand new company, which he claimed was incorporated in September 2021, was selected.

“I’m putting it to you sir that it was Mr Petty who told you to give his daughter a contract,” Mr Farquharson argued, “and that he rooted the request through people who work for you.”

Mr Deal said he had no discussions with Mr Petty about the contract.

He said as far as he was aware, the company received a single contract for several landscaping works in early 2022, which was eventually terminated “when everything came to light.”

Asked if he had ever seen the company’s corporate documents, Mr Deal said he had only seen its business licence at some point.

The attorney shot back: “The business licence doesn’t make up a company, Mr Deal.”

When asked about the contract’s value, the general manager estimated payments totalled over $25,000 annually.

But Mr Farquharson sought to contradict that, suggesting contracts exceeding $260,000 were issued for Mr Petty’s daughter.

“Not that I’m aware,” Mr Deal replied.

When asked if there was a bidding process for the contract, Mr Deal admitted there was no tendering process but said the same approach and pricing structure was used under the former administration when similar jobs were divided.

Mr Farquharson questioned why the witness had filed a complaint in this case but had not done so when the PLP awarded contracts. The witness responded that the same process and pricing had been used in both instances and stated that he had never lodged a complaint about landscaping contracts under either administration.

Mr Farquharson then pressed the witness on when the internal control and compliance division of the WSC and the police would investigate him. However, the judge intervened, noting that the witness could not possibly know what actions the police might take.

The heated exchange was among several that prompted the judge to intervene, cautioning Mr Farquharson for berating the witness and rebuking him for suggesting she was defending Mr Deal.

At several points, she instructed the witness not to answer questions she deemed inappropriate — including one where Mr Farquharson asked: “What do you think is going to happen to you when the government changes?”

Mr Farquharson then shifted his line of questioning to procurement policies.

Earlier, he asked the witness whether the law required disclosing any contract exceeding $25,000 to the public.

Mr Deal said he could not speak to that policy.

“You can’t speak to whether you knew that or not? Stop your foolishness,” the attorney responded.

He suggested that failing to do so amounted to a breach of the law, but Mr Deal said he was not familiar with the specifics the attorney was referring to.

“I’m putting it to you that you are a criminal,” he said, prompting the judge to instruct the witness not to answer the question.

“I’m putting it to you that... after the PLP came to power, you signed more than $260,000 worth of contracts with her within the three months.”

But the witness again denied that multiple contracts were signed.

Mr Gibson, the MP for Long Island, has been on trial alongside Elwood Donaldson Jr, former WSC general manager, Joan Knowles, Peaches Farquharson, and Jerome Missick since November 2023.

The charges stem from contracts awarded by the corporation while he served as WSC executive chairman.

Mr Farquharson, Damian Gomez KC, Murrio Ducille KC, Ian Cargill, Bryan Bastian, Ryan Eve and Raphael Moxey represent the defendants.

Meanwhile, the Crown’s lawyers include Director of Public Prosecutions Cordell Frazier, Cashena Thompson, Karine MacVean and Rashied Edgecombe.