Editor’s Corner: The Silent Pandemic—Gender-Based Violence


Goal 3: Safety

– Adolescent girls are free from violence and exploitation and are supported by enforced laws, strong and adequately resourced child protection systems and their communities[1].

As I observe the tapestry of female existence in various cultures and communities, one thing seems to be a prevalent chronic issue: gender-based violence. It seems most appropriate that during the season of 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence (November 25-December 10) that something be said about domestic violence.

I needn’t do a poll to see how many have been affected by gender-based violence (whether personally or vicariously) in our country. It has become common place in our society. Our daily traverse to our place of education or employ is riddled with cat-calls, comments on our form/figure and detailed ‘lyrics’ of how and how hard they would ‘love’ us[2]. Try to vehemently deny their advances, and suffer the consequence of being publicly castigated by men and women.

Yes women castigate other women for being offended when being solicited by other men. We blame each other for being attacked by men and usually are passive when such injustices occur as we were never defended when it affected us.

Additionally, a woman may be threatened with physical harm if she refutes the advances of a man. You must be wondering why I have put special focus on the verbal advances of men toward women. This is not violence! Surely a women cannot suffer any harm by a man just wanting to compliment her beauty. I posit that you’re wrong.

There is a psychological harm that accompanies these cat-calls and solicitations. This causes a female to question her dress and feel nervous whenever a man hangs too closely to her. Adversely, some women believe that this is the only way in which a man can display his interest thus they go to great lengths to ensure that they are noticed.

This use of verb age to solicit female attention may be classified under law as an Assault. An assault may be defined as ‘The act of putting another person in reasonable fear or apprehension of an immediate battery by means of an act amounting to an attempt or threat to commit a battery, amounts to an actionable assault.’

This essentially means that verbal solicitation that then espouses or threatens abuse should a woman refuse him may be a criminal offence (or an actionable tort). Our laws in Jamaica support this as do laws in some other legal jurisdictions.

One may feel that this now solves the problem of gender-based violence; we have belled the cat! Charge the men with assault if they try to impute violence upon another (specifically women). Sadly we would be grossly mistaken. There is still it’s darker relative. The Father of gender-based violence: domestic abuse.

Inflicted by all strata’s and classes of society, whether he be preacher or footballer. Whether he be called by ‘Rice’ or any other name, in almost every culture and nation, domestic violence exists.

I would like to say that the men that resort to this barbaric means of ‘discipline’ and ‘control are of a sub-human class rarely acknowledged or non-existent. However, regardless of education or background, domestic abuse is very prevalent in all areas.

Why does this prevail? How can we allow something this horrendous to occur? Through silence and misplaced restraint. Many of us believe that we would be invading one’s personal life and it’s not our place to judge. Many women confide in fellow women, and what do these women do? Remain silent.

Many persons who suffer through domestic violence are fearful about coming forward as they don’t want to be ostracized from their families and communities. The popular line used by their abusers: ‘Who would believe you?’ may flash into their mind. They lose their voice. They lose their ability to escape. Many of us have experienced domestic abuse whether it be personally or vicariously. The pain is unending and never leaves you. It sticks to the bone. Seeps into the marrow.

What goals and targets should we use to end gender-based violence? The targets set forward by the ‘Girl Declaration’ set the tone of what our society should aim to achieve in the near future:


  1. Prevent and eliminate all forms of violence against girls.
  2. Ensure all girls have access to a“girl-friendly space.”

III. Ensure all states have national and sub-national mechanisms to identify, refer and report sexual violence against adolescent girls.

  1. Stop trafficking and exploitation of girls by passing and enforcing laws and policies that hold perpetratorsnot victims accountable.

Our entire society man, woman, boy and girl should have knowledge on the effects of gender-based violence. Attacking one gender destroys the entire society. Whenever we are faced with incidents of gender-based violence, whether personally or vicariously, bear in mind: I am not my sister’s keeper, I am my sister.

Christal Parris-Campbell

Editor-in-Chief, Mona Law Precedent

Publications Chair, Mona Law Society

Girl Engagement Advisory Board Member

Second Year Law Student, Faculty of Law UWI, Mona

© CP-C 2014

[1] Girl Declaration p.6 [www.girleffect.org]

[2] Cat-call (Urban Definition): A shrill call or whistle generally directed at females to get their attention e.g. psst….


Creative Corner: The Addict


There he found himself again. Gasping for air, droplets of sweat frantically racing down his cheek, brushing the imaginary dust off his nose, he had the dream again. It was his second week in rehab; it felt like a year. He had had the dream so many times that it became the norm to wake up almost every night, clutching his chest wishing he could just once more feel that magic powder in his system, but  he could not.

He had to succeed for his wife, for his son and for himself. Each day became harder than the next. His head was pounding demanding for the substance he had abused for so long. As he tried to drift back to the dark trance that was sleep, he recalled all those times he woke up not remembering where he had spent the last hour.

He could not count the number of times his body had been tormented by the bodyguard of a drug lord asking where his payment was. The times when he emotionally hurt his wife were burned in his heart. He hit her, screamed at her, degraded her but she stayed out of love and loyalty.

As he slept he dreamt of his son’s face those hazel eyes of innocence. He had a smile that could light the world twice over. His messy black hair which frolicked in the wind was fondly remembered. Those gigantic ears ready to listen and understand. He was a boy any father would be proud of, and his father was very proud

Finally the smiling sun gently caressed his cheek. He had survived another night. This fact alone gave him hope, shone a bright new light in the dark corner that was his disillusion life. He had newfound determination. He could do it; the chains of addiction that had kept him captive could be broken. Finally, at last freedom was attainable.

By: Chris Goldson

Third Year Law Student

Faculty of Law, UWI Mona

Contributor, The Mona Law Precedent

©Chris Goldson

Cavehill Corner: The Transition between Shores, Life of a Cavehill Student


Name of Student (Interviewee): Romane Duncan

Year of Study: Second

Faculty: Law

Campus: University of the West Indies, Cavehill

  1. What’s the first thing you thought when you arrived in BIM[1]?

Uhm…why does this this place look exactly like Jamaica; the Caribbean is so similar!

  1. Tell me about your biggest culture shock.

So, its not that the customer service is bad, but it’s slow! So I think it’s just a cultural thing, we Jamaicans are probably too impatient! Definitely learning to take a chill pill!

  1. What’s the main difference between Cave Hill/Barbados and Mona/Jamaica? You

Mona is a 24hrs hub, full of life and food at any time of day (Nardo’s), Cave Hill calms after 8pm and if you want food, you know it’s a walk to the beloved Esso!

  1. The weather in BIM is beautiful! It changes more than chameleon’s skin. You always need a jacket as it rains for 1 minute periods! Keeping the temperature cool! It moves from one extreme to the next in seconds though.
  2. Law in BIM is great actually. I mean, I feel like my lecturers are equipped to deliver the content but these lecturers may mark harder. And the schedule is way more stable than at Mona. Cancelled classes are seldom.
  3. What are the main differences between courses taught at Cave Hill and those taught at Mona?

POLICY. As a proud Matthewsian (Hi Miss), I pride myself in seeking the policy behind the law, it’s not that important here!

  1. Describe your weirdest course/lecturer/tutor.

Sampson Owusu. He is just the best, he has a Ghanan accent which adds a new dimension to the technical area of Real Property. Just hearing him say ‘Ray-al Prropaaahtee’, you are interested and want to learn more. And who can doubt him when he was quoted by the Privy Council!

  1. How does it feel to be the last Jamaican group on the Cave Hill-Mona law programme?

I feel like I am being afforded the best opportunity! This idea of Caribbean integration is at the ambit of this programme and to be the last group saddens me. I feel like closing the programme sets us one step backward in achieving a unified Caribbean. Oh and plus every single, deggeh deggeh island is represented here, the true idea of a melting pot, bet yuh neva eat fig pie!!! 

  1. Describe hall life. Does it differ greatly from hall life at Mona?

Uhm…it depends on the hall you live on! So lived on Rex at Mona (mi say a who dem??? Rex Reeeex Nettleford!) where I am used to my own space. It is very similar to Frank Worrel here! But here, I am a Sherlockite(All hail King Fattercock!), it has an amazing family life and definitely where the hype is at! Oh and in the Hall’s battle we destroyed the pussycats of Worrel! So, it’s a change for me (but it’s based on where I was).

  1. How involved are you in on campus activities?

Well, I won both the Inter-Island Debate and Public Speaking Competitions for Jamaica!!! Hip hip? I am an International Mooter going to Rio de Janeiro 2015! And I am an honorary Antiguan! Oh and I act every now and again! #caribbeannational #reallyinvolved

  1. Would you say you’ve become more patriotic since being in BIM?

Oh Gosh! A me say back a yahd! Yes!!! We rep Jamaica though! I get to be an ambassador for the great Nanny as well as for the rushing waters of Dunns River Falls! Blue Drawz?

  1. Do you seize all opportunity to promote Jamaican culture? Is it well received?

Every single one! I have to let them know we are not as violent as we seem to be! That we are really a hospitable people who love farrinas! And the foooooood! Yes they love it! We love it! Yup Jamaica body tun up! Yeah and everybody says Jamaican bad words hoping I’ll be impressed! (I’m not).

  1. Do you miss anything about Mona? If yes, what?

The life! The buzz! My friends! My PLAY foundation! 434 Rex Nettleford Hall! The random gazebos with electricity and WiFi! The 24 hrs library! The law faculty! On time taxi services!!! And the food outlets on campus that are affordable! I now pause to appreciate how convenient it is to buy food at Mona.

  1. How often do you feel homesick? What do you do to rid yourself of the feeling?

Not very often, but Bajan food is an acquired taste (I haven’t acquired itL). So, it becomes really difficult when you want some serious Sunday dinner or our Devon House I-scream delicacy or a hot patty from Tastees…but other than crying (lol), I skype a friend, eat a spoon of Jamaican Chocolate mix and play some yardie music! Nb. Don’t judge me! Mi awrite!

  1. If a Mona student decides to spend a semester at Cave Hill, what is one thing s/he must absolutely do in BIM?

Go on a Catamaran cruise! It is amazing! The country is beautiful and clean and you won’t be certain if you are vacationing or studying! I mean Mona is not near the beach so it a whole new experience! Turn down for what?

Sherese Graham

Second Year Law Student,

Faculty of Law, UWI Mona

Contributor, Mona Law Precedent

Member, Publications Committee

©Sherese Graham

[1] Nickname for Barbados

News and Issues: Raging Hormones Rage Against the Law: The Age of Consent Debate Continues!


Should the age of consent be changed from 16 years to 18 years in Jamaica? Will this change the behaviour of our men towards our children? Will it bring about a change in the attitudes of the youth toward sexual promiscuity? These questions and more may be asked. But what is the real issue?

Teenage pregnancy is still a major issue, our children as early as 10 years old are being abused by our so called “mature men and women” in society. Yes I said women! Women prey on young boys, many are abused and even raped by women[1]. Will the age of consent being changed to 18 years bring about a significant change?

Minister with responsibility for Information in the Office of the Prime Minister, Senator the Hon. Sandrea Falconer, has stated her intention to push for the age of consent to be raised from 16 to 18 years. She believes that, “the time has come for us to look at the age of consent. If you cannot vote until you are age 18 years, you cannot legally drink until you are age 18 years, why then should our 16 year old youth be allowed to have sex. I do not think they should be allowed to consent, because at that time they are not equipped to make decisions,” she stated.

She believes that raising the age of consent will help to counteract the country’s high rate of teenage pregnancy, and address the breakdown of morals in the society. The Minister said that too many children are having children, which they not equipped to care for. This, she said, is leading to a breakdown in the family structure and fuelling the country’s crime problem.

Similarly, Children’s Advocate Diahann Gordon Harrison is pressing ahead with her campaign to have the age of consent in Jamaica moved from 16 to 18.Mrs. Gordon Harrison on November 12, made a presentation before the Joint Select Committee of Parliament examining the Sexual Offences Act, which is scheduled for amendment. She supported her position with data on teen pregnancy, and argued that moving the age of consent to 18 would aid in protecting young women from sexual predators and early pregnancies.

“We’re seeing 25 per cent of babies in Jamaica being born to girls 10-19 years… When 16 kicks in that number spikes quite a bit,” she reported. She added that, even though a child, at age 16, might still be under the care of her parents, the fact that “the law sanctions the free consent to sex,” makes it more difficult to control their sexual behaviour.

I agree with Mrs. Falconer and Ms. Gordon, but changing the act is not enough, work needs to be done community by community, in our schools, in our churches within the public and private sector to protect and guide our children. It has to be the effort of everyone to protect our children.

Parents have the biggest role to play, but many times these are the persons abusing our children, how do we change the mind-set of these individuals? It is so sad that a mother would use her child for monetary gain or a father or stepfather, uncle or relative would use a child for sexual gratification. Putting laws in place is great, but what more will be done Ms. Falconer? What more will be done Ms. Gordon?

A Committee member, Senator Kamina Johnson Smith, was not swayed by the Children’s Advocate’s arguments, however, regarding older men having sex with under-age children, as according to her, “I am not sure that the age of consent is the root of that problem.” She said the country had a longstanding problem of not properly diagnosing its various social problems and therefore being unable to find adequate solutions.

Age of consent laws are here to protect our young people from being sexually exploited by adults. Although some people under the age of consent may feel that they are mature enough to engage in a sexual relationship, others may lack the emotional development to deal with this or to feel confident enough to say ‘no’. However, no matter how old our children are, they should ever feel under pressure to have sex. And the age of consent, doesn’t mean you should be having sex at that age. Our children she be able to ask themselves, ‘Am I legally old enough?Do I really think I’m ready? Am I under any pressure, from others or in my own mind? Do I know what I’m doing? Do I understand the risks? Do I know how to protect myself?

It important therefore, to teach our children and youth to abstain from sex or delay the age at which you first have it. Remember, the safest sex is no sex at all! Be faithful, have sex with one partner who has been tested so you know he or she is not infected with an STD or STI. And make sure they are also not infected with the HIV virus and use a condom every time they do decide to have sex.

This is a global issue, our children are being trafficked, and some engage in prostitution, many are living with HIV and other sexual transmitted disease, it is not easy to change the behaviour and attitudes of our people. Changing the age of consent to 18 will help no matter how minimal, so yes! Let’s move forward and change the age of consent.

Karlia Carty

Third Year Law Student

Faculty of Law, UWI Mona

Contributor, Mona Law Society

Member Publications Committee

©Karlia Carty

[1] However, this is an issue which will have to be discussed in another paper.

Charge Murderers For Killing Foetus Too? A Response to the Children’s Advocate on the status of Jamaica’s Unborn.


In an article published in the Jamaica Gleaner published on November 1, Children’s Advocate Diahann Gordon-Harrison proposed that the existing law be changed in order to establish culpability for persons who have caused the expulsion of a foetus by murdering its mother while still pregnant[1]. The Children’s Advocate, who is a learned attorney-at-law and former prosecutor, made these submissions before a Parliamentary committee reviewing sensitive pieces of Criminal Legislation, namely the Offences Against the Person Act and the Sexual Offences Act, among other pieces of legislation.

Why has the Children’s Advocate made these submissions? Since assuming the role in 2012, she has had the misfortune of experiencing the brutal deaths of 5 pregnant women were killed in that year alone. Surely, it is unfortunate and heinous when any woman who is carrying a child is killed and the foetus expelled without life. It is through this same premise, I believe, that the Children’s Advocate believes that those who murder pregnant women should be held responsible for the murder of two persons in one incident.

As it stands statutorily, Sections 72 and 73 of the Offences Against the Person Act criminalizes abortion in Jamaica. There is no other such offence relating to the expulsion of dead foetuses. When we examine the law of murder in relation to unborn foetuses, we note that the lack of legal attention to foetuses deepens. For the purposes of this article, let us go back to the ancient common law definition of murder.

According to the definition made in 1797 by Sir Edward Coke, which, I dare say, is one of the highlights of Criminal Law class, murder is:

“when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King’s peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc. die of the wound or hurt, etc. within a year and a day after the same.”

Through the definition of murder by Coke, it has been established in English Courts that foetuses do not qualify as “human beings”, and as such, persons cannot be held guilty for murdering them.

This was affirmed in the famous case of Attorney-General’s Reference where the accused was found not guilty of murder by the House of Lords when he caused the death of a foetus by causing serious injury to the mother[2]. The Court in that case also overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal in that in order for a newborn child to be considered a human that is capable of being murdered, he/she has to be fully expelled from the uterus and exist wholly and independently of the mother before he/she can be considered a human being.

There is yet another dent in the Children’s Advocate’s plea for the law to be changed. As a part of her submissions, she has expressed the belief that “life begins at the point of conception and as such, a foetus represents another life that, if lost due to the deliberate action of another who intends to cause death or grievous bodily harm, that act ought to be punishable”.

This belief that life begins at conception is not supported by our common law, neither is it supported by statute. In order for the Children’s Advocate’s dream to be realized, more than one area of law would be changed. It would, from my estimation, require a comprehensive change to the LOCAL definition of the law of murder, where we would either have to rearrange or totally replace Sir Edward Coke’s definition of the law of murder in order to redefine foetuses as human beings.

How would the Children’s Advocate’s belief influence the very hot and controversial abortion debate, which is another issue being debated before the Parliamentary Committee? Is it that with this belief that life begins at conception, the Children’s Advocate is aligning herself and her office with the view of the Conservatives and the Christian community and therefore going against abortion? Does she disagree with the view of many women’s rights groups that a woman should have the right to choose what she does with her body?

Now, I hope not to be regarded as paranoid, sexist, or chauvinistic by tying this issue to something as abortion, but I believe that the issues have become linked. Not only is this an issue one of the pregnant woman as the Children’s Advocate has enunciated, but also, and more importantly, it is an issue about the baby that was to be born alive but unfortunately wasn’t.

It therefore brings us to this point: Can the law be changed? Is it desirable to have it changed? Based on the ruling made by the House of Lords in Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 3 of 1994), one cannot be charged for murder of the foetus, but he can be charged for manslaughter, if he has satisfied all the elements for constructive manslaughter, as the accused in that case did. It is possible that, in the alternative to finding the person guilty of murder, those common law principles may be used in court, or perhaps even codified to hold the accused liable for murder of the mother and the manslaughter of the foetus. That way, we may not have to redefine the definition for murder or make sweeping changes to the law.

If you happen to agree with the Children’s Advocate that the accused should be charged with murder of the foetus, then sweeping changes would have to be made to the Offences Against the Person Act where foetuses are re-defined as persons who are capable of being murdered. On that side, we can also go further and propose that where it has been proven that the accused intended to kill, or even injure, the mother in the furtherance of killing the foetus, that he be convicted of murder. This alternative option or viewpoint would effectively overrule Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 3).

Whichever way you may choose to take by the time you finish reading this article, I commend the Children’s Advocate for contributing to the debate and for her rigorous, proactive leadership in securing justice for, and happiness of our nation’s children and I hope that, should the law be changed, it will be to the benefit of all our nation’s children, both born and unborn.

Markel Virgo

Second Year Law Student

Faculty of Law, UWI Mona

Contributor, Mona Law Precedent

Member, Publications Committee

© Markel A-O Virgo

[1] http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20141101/lead/lead22.html

[2] (No. 3 of 1994) 1998 AC 245

Editor’s Corner: To Have and to Hold, For Consent or Rape…Marital Rape in Jamaica

4-15-Rape-Lawmarital rape

Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded husband, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, [for consent or rape] in sickness and health, to love and to cherish, till death do you part?

If you were paying attention to the recital of these vows above, you would notice a vow not traditionally promised on one’s wedding day. However, this has been an ever present reality for many women after they sign their marriage certificate.

Through the opinions of Sir Matthew Hale in 1800, marital rape has been seen as a redundant principle as “…the husband cannot be guilty of a rape committed by himself upon his lawful wife, for by their mutual matrimonial consent and contract the wife hath given up herself in this kind unto her husband which she cannot retract.”  Due to this archaic principle, many wives have suffered in silence due to being robbed of their sexual autonomy once signing their marriage certificate.

This is supported by Jamaican legislation in section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act which prescribes that there can be no marital rape unless it occurs under five specific circumstances:

  1. Spouses must be separated and living separately and apart;
  2. Where there is a separation agreement between the two spouses;
  3. Where either party has initiated divorce proceedings;
  4. Where an order has been made against the husband for the protection of his wife;
  5. Where the husband knows that he is suffering from a sexually transmitted infection (STI);

This therefore means that the only way for a wife to bring a claim of rape against her husband is if the marriage has all but deteriorated or if he is a known philanderer who has contracted an STI and does nothing to cure it. Surely this cannot be 2014! We live in a time where a woman’s sexual rights has now been clearly defined through law and society and sexual rights are no longer a sensational issue. Are you telling me that the law would allow marriage to become an avenue of sexual exploitation against women?

Do not misunderstand me. I do believe in the sanctity and relevance of marriage in today’s society. It may never be seen as obsolete as it serves a beneficial purpose for spouses. However, the fact that a woman could sign away her rights of sexual autonomy and her freedom to refuse sexual intercourse goes against equality and the institution of marriage. Generally, a woman would not willingly choose to be sexually exploited upon marriage to the love of her life.

British courts regarded this in 1992 and in R v R, they rendered void the doctrine that a woman could not be raped in the confines of a marriage. Jamaica, by this time, had ratified the ‘classical’ belief through legislation. In 2009, there was a glimmer of hope. The Sexual Offences Act was under revision and the chance to adapt the legislation to common law position on marital rape became a possibility. The act was updated to include that men and women who conducted sexual offences against children should be criminalized but marital rape was evidently excluded from the revision.

On October 16, 2014, the Sistren Theatre Collective sought to rectify this gross wrong at a joint select committee reviewing the Sexual Offences Act. Although their view was shared by the Justice Minister Mark Golding, Senator Lambert Brown dissented with his counterparts. Believing that the law would invade the privacy of a matrimonial union, he posited that changing the tenets under which marital rape will occur would radically alter the foundation of marriage. He went further to add that a husbands’ doubt of consent from his wife may prompt him to engage in sexual intercourse where consent is ‘sure’. Senator Delroy Chuck concurred that trying marital rape will bring to the fore intimate information about the union. This, he believes, will make an already broken marriage irreparable.

Those concepts posited have been refuted through law and practice. As expressed by Litrow Hickson, a member of the Sistren Theatre Collective, an act practised in the privacy of ones’ home does not negate its criminality (such as Domestic Violence). Additionally, consent is a necessity regardless of whether intercourse is being utilized for economic gain. Bringing a case of rape before the court is already an invasion of privacy as women have had to place their entire sexual history and interactions on the stand for excessive scrutiny. However, many women still come forward knowing that risk as they value their sexual autonomy. Married women should not be muzzled and should have their day before court should they want it.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women posits that gender-based violence is an act of discrimination and stymies gender equality. Allowing for marital rape to continue will also cause the women of tomorrow to apprehend fear when they consider the limitation of their sexual autonomy and equality in marriage.

Even if the law is subsequently revised and adapts the common law position of R v R, the sociological impact of centuries of gender bias in marriage will still have to be reformed. The Girl Declaration, heralded by the Girl Engagement Advisory Board, is one such initiative that seeks to remove stigma against girls and women socially, economically and through education and health rights. Changing the law, along with using this initiative as a tool will help to change societies’ view of women’s sexual autonomy in marriage and establish the truth that RAPE IS RAPE, regardless of the situation in which a woman may find herself.

Christal Parris-Campbell

Editor-in-Chief, Mona Law Precedent

Publications Chair, Mona Law Society

Girl Engagement Advisory Board Member

Second Year Law Student, Faculty of Law UWI, Mona

© CP-C 2014

Creative Corner: Deep Waters


Deep waters as am I. I close my eyes and picture heaven as if I’m about to die…..

Each time I come up to gasp for air,

 My head sinks deeper and deeper…. Deep waters, surrounding me, no way out, no way to flee..

 I try my best to get some space, I’m trying to find a happy place.

 No one knows the sadness I bear, no one sees the love I have to share.

I’m in too deep, deep waters as if I’m about to drown, each time I remember I can’t swim, I go deeper down…

Deep waters as am I. I close my eyes and picture heaven as if I’m about to die…..
I feel as if no one can be of any aid,

 I question my existence and why I was made. I try to regain some strength to see the good in this all, I try my best to trust no one, just in case I fall.

In these deep waters, one can never be too sure, one seeks to find the shore.

 Deep waters, sinking deep, no longer floating away in an abyss.

 Deep waters, mistreated, used, torn dismissed.. Deep waters as am I. I close my eyes and picture heaven as if I’m about to die…..

Saskia Barton

Second Year Law Student