Peter Wickham CADRES Press Statement


It has come to my attention that a “wikileaks” Cable which is currently being circulated and quoted in different electronic media has identified me (Peter W. Wickham) as the source of information which formed the basis of several improper allegations that were made regarding two current and one former Caribbean Prime Minister. I consider this a most disturbing turn of events which presents me, along with these gentlemen in a negative light and appears to be based largely on information that I have no knowledge of and never conveyed to the Ambassador Kramer.

Specifically, I can state categorically, that I have NEVER met privately with former US Ambassador Mary Kramer, who is alleged to be the author of this cable. I do recall her entertaining about ten journalists, along with myself in 2006 and at this meeting I made reference to an OAS Document that I co-authored entitled “From Grassroots to the Airwaves” which is in the public domain and makes general remarks about Caribbean political party financing concerns that I am well-known to have. I however did not, at that meeting or at any other time, discuss the intimate details of any specific campaign or concerns about any leader with Ambassador Kramer as is being suggested in the commentary on the cable, because I am not privy to such information.

It would also be misleading to suggest that I was a campaign advisor to either PMs Skeritt, Gonsalves or Anthony and that I knew of “backroom deals” sources of financing or any quid pro quo which is also being suggested. These are aspects of the campaign that I neither have nor ever had any knowledge of and therefore could not possibly have spoken to. I have therefore sought legal advice on my options regarding these allegations which can impact negatively on my professional reputation.

I have already contacted a representative at the US Embassy and discussed my concerns extensively with her and she has advised that they cannot discuss the contents of these documents since there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.

Peter W. Wickham


Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption

15 responses to “Peter Wickham CADRES Press Statement

  1. 164

    I take this with a pinch of salt. What is so special about Peter that, as an analyst what he says or purported to have said, that someone must swing a cutlass at him or his profession.
    A great guy with the ability to generate discussion on any topic. I remember the photos and news item and Peter was lease among the apostles at Mrs Kramer’s official residence at the time.
    There is more in the mortar than the pestle….. we will see.

  2. Sticky Wicket

    Wickham’s Sticky Wicket

    A very sticky wicket, indeed, for Mr. Wickham, for there are several things about his press statement that sound wiggly and don’t sound square at all at all, starting with his last sentence:

    “I have already contacted a representative at the US Embassy and discussed my concerns extensively with her and she has advised that they cannot discuss the contents of these documents since there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.”

    Mr. Wickham states that the US Embassy said they cannot discuss the contents of these documents (the Wikileak US Embassy cable dated February 3, 2006 that is the subject of the controversy.) because “there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.”

    That sounds like either the Embassy is not forthright, or Mr. Wickham. I’ll take Wickham at his word that this is what the Embassy told him but Mr. Wickham would know that this statement by the Embassy is untrue. The Embassy would have an original of the cable. They sent it! The cable has a reference number.

    The Embassy could instantly compare their original cable and the one released by Wikileaks and printed at BFP. Instantly.

    Mr. Wickham is no dummy. He knows the Embassy could verify the accuracy of the WikiLeaks cable instantly, so why is Mr. Wickham talking foolishness “there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.” ???

    Governments all over the world are commenting on WikiLeaked documents that concern them and not one of the WikiLeaked documents has been said to be false or changed by WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks source.

    Foolishness for Mr. Wickham to repeat “there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.” as if he or anyone else accepts that as a valid reason for the US Embassy to not comment. Foolishness for Mr. Wickham to imply that there is some doubt that the WikiLeaks cable is an accurate copy of what Ambassador Kramer sent.

    The second statement that doesn’t sound square is:

    “Specifically, I can state categorically, that I have NEVER met privately with former US Ambassador Mary Kramer, who is alleged to be the author of this cable.”

    Nowhere in the WikiLeaked cable does it say that Mr. Wickham met “privately” with Ambassador Kramer. Is this a straw man put up by Mr. Wickham as a proof that Ambassador Kramer’s report is false? Mr. Wickham could have met with the Ambassador in the company of other Embassy personnel, or the information could have come to Ambassador Kramer through other Embassy personnel who Mr. Wickham briefed.

    Mr. Wickham states that he recalls Ambassador Kramer meeting with ten journalists, but he does not “categorically” state this was the ONLY time he met her. Read his Press Statement again. Mr. Wickham’s Press Statement has lots of wiggle room in it in many places. Read it again.

    The WikiLeaks cable states that Mr. Wickham met with “Emboffs” (Embassy Officers, Officials, Operatives?) “over the past several years to offer his views on a variety of issues.” That is “Emboffs” as in PLURAL. More than one. It could mean two. It could mean “MANY” over the “several years.”

    Mr. Wickham would know how many different Emboffs he met with, who, where, when and how frequently “over the past several years”, but he seizes on Ambassador Kramer without explaining the “Emboff” meetings at all. He doesn’t deny meeting with the “Emboffs”. Instead, Wickham ignores this inconvenient information and, like a magician doing a trick, says “Look at this bright shiny Ambassador in my hand”, hoping that the audience will concentrate on Mary Kramer and forget about his years of meetings with “Emboffs”.

    I presume that each of these “Emboffs” would have written an account of the conversations with Mr. Wickham. That is the standard practice of Embassy personnel from anywhere. Read a Tom Clancy novel or Ambassador Kramer’s own book to confirm that!

    Ambassador Kramer quotes what she says are Peter Wickham’s exact words.

    “When you have been cussed out by Ralph you have really been cussed at,” said Wickham.

    “Vincentian ganja is a big thing” in the Caribbean, said Wickham…

    Ambassador Kramer also makes general statements such as “Wickham believes the ruling party flew about 400 people to St. Vincent from the U.S. for the recent election.”

    “According to Wickham, the largest amount of money came from Leroy Parris, Chairman of CLICO Holdings Limited, a Barbados-based insurance and real estate company.”

    Marijuana growers have considerable influence in St. Vincent, where they are not necessarily considered undesirables but can be quite prominent people, according to Wickham. He thinks there is some truth to the rumors that that certain individuals tied to the drug trade provided funding to Gonsalves’s ULP…

    The word for word quotes and certainty of Ambassador Kramer’s report makes one wonder if there were some hidden tape recorders rolling at these “Emboff” meetings held “over the past several years”, doesn’t it?

    Mr. Wickham states he “sought legal advice on my options regarding these allegations”. One hopes that if he did not say what is alleged and quoted in Ambassador Kramer’s report, that the truth may come forth.

    However, if the “Emboffs” took copious notes and had their tape recorders rolling over “several years” of meetings, Mr. Wickham might find the truth to be very inconvenient.

    The Ambassador’s report was from 2006. How many “Emboff” meetings has Mr. Wickham attended since 2006? What did he say to US Diplomats since 2006 that we don’t know about?

    Peter Wickham’s CADRES Press Statement wiggles all over the place and for me raises far more questions than it answers.

    It is a bit of a “sticky wicket” for Mr. Wickham, isn’t it?

  3. Legislation Now

    @Sticky Wicket

    You’re correct, a private meeting with the ambassador was denied, but not the several meetings with Emboffs over the years, which might even include the US Embassy office at Port of Spain.

    In defense of Wickham he did say that he wasn’t privy to the intimate details of any specific campaign or concerns about any leader, unless he is saying that the information in the cable wasn’t intimate information.

  4. The Spy

    Peter, I see you trying a clinton defense. Your “I have NEVER met privately with former US Ambassador Mary Kramer” reminds me of Clintion’s “I did not have sex with that woman” ( They never asked about the blow job)

  5. what will they think of next

    Wickham, if it was me I would say the same thing that you are saying.

  6. Mac

    Interesting that this is the only place he responded to the leaks.

  7. Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @Sticky Wicket

    You have pointed out some serious cracks in Wickhams rebuttal statement that cast some serious doubt on the legitimacy of his counter to the obvious pressure he now faces.

    Indeed if the conversations were tape, how is Mr. Wickham going to justify this evidence after categorically stating on BFP that he did not engage this Kramer in any talks about the dark doings of regional politicians. This is going to be an interesting development and one that I hope will not go unfavourably for Mr. Wickam – a guy to whom I appreciate for his candid disclosures and ability to espound articulately on almost any topic. Mr. Wickham I wish you all the best with this one. May the truth prevail

  8. Anon

    I am not surprised that Peter Wickham’s chickens have come home to roost. I was in Antigua in 2004 when Cadres did a poll prior to the General Election there.

    I invite Peter Wickham to come back to this forum and tell Barbadians what Lester Bird asked him to do to influence the vote against Baldwin Spencer (then Opposition leader) and for how much money ?

    Thank goodness Baldwin Spencer won.

    And to think that Peter Wickham’s cronies like Mr. Stig Merritt are employed in the Barbados Public Service ( interfacing with critical Ministries) I wonder what sensitive information is being leaked ?

    Wake up Freundel Stuart, more persons needs to be fired.

  9. rasta man

    I hear that the PM Stuart is “beside himself” because of this .Can we really afford two of him????

  10. 82

    @ rasta man

    lol! Very funny

  11. Pingback: Wickham’s Sticky Wicket – CADRES Press Statement wiggles and wobbles | Barbados Free Press

  12. CIA agent

    Coming home to roost chickens wove a tangled web!

    Ha Ha!

    Seriously though, I want to know what else Wickham told the US CIA agents who debriefed him. You don’t think CIA works in B’town? Sure they do and they probably have files on CADRES activities and knowledge4 thanks to Peter Wickham.

  13. Pingback: Barbados: Leaked Cable & CL Financial · Global Voices

  14. Pingback: BREAKING HERE FIRST: More Peter Wickham CADRES secret US Embassy briefings | Barbados Free Press

  15. 238

    Could someone answer this Question: If you are a political professional analyst and the US embassy asks you to analyse the caribbean political land scape and write a report on the diverse demorgraphics and influnces on caribbean elections, would you take the job and if not why not?….knowing it could be a platform to take your company to an international level. Because as I read the “leaked” article some of the views are those shared by the man in the street. I don’t think it took a Mr Wickham to say some of the things echoed in the leaked document.