The New Today
Local News

Keith Mitchell tells his wife: Come “with clean hands”

Former Prime Minister Keith Mitchell & Marietta Mitchell during happier times

Your client does not come to the matter with clean hands.

This is what former Grenada Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell has told his estranged wife of close to 50-years Marietta Mitchell who has taken steps to divorce him.

THE NEW TODAY has obtained the copy of a letter which female attorney-at-law Kim George has written to attorney Deloni Edwards who is acting for the wife of the ex-Grenadian leader in the divorce proceedings.

The married couple are engaging in what could be a serious battle before the court in the face of moves by Dr. Mitchell to evict his wife from their Matrimonial home in Happy Hill in his St George North-west constituency.

According to the court papers, Dr. Mitchell warned his wife that he is prepared for “a full ventilation of the issues in Court, should it come to that” and that he was confident that the proceedings “would entirely vindicate him.”

The former Prime Minister who is still holding onto the Political Leader position of the New National Party (NNP) in the face of an expected challenge from his Assistant General Secretary Peter David has also levelled his own accusations against his wife.

The letter made mention of what it said was the failure of Mrs Mitchell “to disclose that she is in flagrant breach of her agreement with respect to the Agreement for the New York Property and has consistently refused to abide (by) her own legal obligations.”

“…She has also refused to insure the property (Matrimonial Home) whilst occupying the same and to inform our client when she is leaving the property or returning to the same, despite his several requests,” the letter said in part.

It went on to say: “Our client remains open to continued reasonable and courteous dialogue but wishes to state for the record that he is confident that the history of this matter and a full ventilation of the issues in Court, should it come to that, would entirely vindicate him.”

As a public service, THE NEW TODAY reproduces in full the Kim George letter to Deloni Edwards on behalf of Dr. Mitchell:-

Mr. Deloni Edwards
Attorney-at-law
Law office of G.E.D Clyne
Old Fort Road
ST. GEORGE’S

6th October, 2022

Dear Sir,

Re: Keith & Marietta Mitchell

We write in response to your letter of 15th September, 2022, which, we are instructed to say, omits certain material aspects of this matter as follows:

(i). The parties amicably agreed, in accordance with the fact they had been separated for some time, to dispose of their matrimonial assets both in Grenada and in the United States, in accordance with the following documents.

(a). Owner’s agreement with respect to the property owned by the parties in New York, USA (“the Agreement”) situated at 483 Linden Boulevard Brooklyn New York (“the New York Property”), executed 18th August, 2021.

(b). Deed of Gift of property to your client situated at Westerhall, Fort Jeudy, St. George’s measuring 37, 994 Square Feet – Keith Mitchell to Marietta Mitchell dated 27th May, 2021

(c). Declaration of Trust in relation to the New York property dated 30th June, 2021;

(d). Share Transfer Certificate to your client, of all of our client’s share in the company The New Great House Corporation, which said company owns the premises known as “Mt. Helicon” situated at Lucas Street, St. George’s.

(e). Deed of Gift of property to our client by yours, situated at Diamond, St. Marks measuring 4 Acs. 3 Rds 34 Pls.

(ii). That neither the Happy Hill Property the subject of your letter nor the property situated at Scott Street, St. George’s of which your client is aware, were made the subject of deeds, since they were already in our client’s name and the parties that they would so remain.

Related:  Catholic Church under fire

(iii). That the above-stated arrangements were intended to conclude and all any issues related to ownership and occupation of the properties acquired by the parties during marriage, such that our client has made and continues to make his own living arrangement’s whilst New York even though he is part owner of the property.

(iv). That in light of the above, the Happy Hill property ceased to be and could not reasonably be considered by our client, to be her “home” once the agreements were made and deeds were executed, as they have been.

(v). That further your client has not only been gifted our client’s share in the New Great House property but has gone into exclusive occupation of this substantial asset and has therefore by her own conduct, treated the union between the parties as if it has been dissolved in all but paper.

With respect to the allegations contained in your letter against our client with respect to him permitting labourers to enter into the subject property in alleged violation of your client’s right, as well as the charge that he was “attempting to unlawfully evict her from the said former matrimonial home”, our client considers the same to be most unfortunate and categorically and forcefully denies the same. He is pleased at least, however, that your client concedes that the property is her “former matrimonial home”.

We are further instructed that having been served with our letter, your client did not respond to the same and our client, upon entering the property on or about the 29th day of August, 2022, met the doors to the same unlocked and discovered that your client had not only left the property but had left the State altogether, without ensuring that the same was adequately secured.

Our client believed at the time that yours had vacated the property in accordance with the notice and it was only then that he had the locks changed in order to secure the property.

Our client denies the existence of any agreement for the occupation of the property as alleged in your letter or at all and states that your client had no more than a license to occupy the property, which he was entitled to terminate as he did.

Finally, we note your client’s threat to apply for emergency injunctive relief. We are instructed to say that our client intends, if such a course is taken, to defend the Claim vigorously, starting with the fact that your client delayed for at least 6 weeks before responding to our said letter, our chambers made several unsuccessful attempts to contact yours prior to issuing the demand letter so as to ascertain the status of your acting for yours, and perhaps most importantly, your client does not come to the matter with clean hands, she having failed to disclose that she is in flagrant breach of her agreement with respect to the Agreement for the New York Property and has consistently refused to abide (by) her own legal obligations.

In addition, she has also refused to insure the property whilst occupying the same and to inform our client when she is leaving the property or returning to the same, despite his several requests.

Our client remains open to continued reasonable and courteous dialogue but wishes to state for the record that he is confident that the history of this matter and a full ventilation of the issues in Court, should it come to that, would entirely vindicate him.

We await your response.

Yours faithfully,
Kim George
Kim George & Associates

If you are satisfied with the information provided by The New Today to our many readers, followers and supporters around the world, then you can show your appreciation by making a financial contribution to the effort of our team of dedicated workers.

Giving back is a way of saying thank you for our efforts

Support The New Today