The Leaked Audio Backfired — And Nobody Heard a Plot

Listen for Yourself — Then Ask What Crime You Just Heard

To distract from their own blunder with the Hadeeds, someone leaked the Star Sabga voice recording. Play it. Listen to the whole thing. There is not a single sentence in it that sounds like a "plot to assassinate" anybody. It sounds like exactly what it is: a frustrated citizen venting about a country that is failing her — the same conversation half of Trinidad has at the dinner table every night.

Not a soul who actually listened heard the woman say anything the majority of us don't already think. That is the whole problem with this leak. It was meant to shock you into siding with the state. Instead it does the opposite: it shows you how thin the case is, and how ordinary the "evidence" really is.

A Leak This Clumsy Only Helps the Defence

Whoever authorised this release did not think two moves ahead. If you are the lawyers for Hadeed and Sabga, this recording is a gift, not a threat. It hands you two questions you get to ask in open court:

You cannot leak a recording to sway the public and then pretend the way you got it doesn't matter when the defence asks. The moment this audio went public, the method behind it went on trial too. Jeremie continues to prove he has no long game. Every time he opens a front to look tough, he exposes a flank.

Why Was Her Phone Tapped in the First Place?

Back up from the recording for a second and ask the question everyone skipped straight past. Before there was a leak, there was a tap. Somebody, somewhere, decided Star Sabga's private calls were worth intercepting. So on what grounds? Is she a criminal? Is there a shred of evidence she is running guns, laundering money, or sitting at the head of some organized-crime network? Because that is the only thing that is supposed to put a citizen's phone under surveillance — a real, sworn, evidenced suspicion of serious crime, signed off by a judge.

If that evidence exists, produce it. Show the country the predicate offence, the affidavit, the judicial authorisation. But if it does not exist — if the honest answer is that her phone was tapped because of who she talks to, what she believes, or which political faction she embarrasses — then this was never law enforcement. It was a political operation dressed in a police uniform.

This matters more than it looks. When these cases end, they almost always end the same lazy way: the victim sues the State, the State quietly settles, and the cheque is written out of public money. So the taxpayer — you, the same citizen who never wanted any of this — pays for the abuse committed against another citizen. The minister who ordered it keeps his salary. The commissioner who signed it keeps his pension. Nobody who actually did the deed feels a cent of it. That is not accountability. That is the public being billed for its own mistreatment.

Make it personal instead. If an official tapped a phone or authorised an arrest for political reasons, the lawsuits, the costs, and the consequences should land on them — not be socialised across a whole population that never consented. Because let us be clear about the mandate here: the citizens never supported this arrest. There was no public outcry demanding Star Sabga be silenced. This was done in our name without ever asking us, and now we are expected to foot the bill for it too.

The UNC's Oldest Trick: Leak, Backfire, Leak Again

This is the short-sightedness that defines them. The UNC does not think long term. They react. Something embarrassing lands — the Hadeed mess — so a recording gets pushed out to change the subject. When that recording backfires, watch what happens next: another "revelation" gets loaded for the next news cycle to shift the narrative again. It is the exact same playbook they ran from 2010 to 2015. Release, deflect, release, deflect, until nobody can remember what the original scandal even was.

So place your bets now on whether Anna Ramdass has another distraction sitting in the tray for tomorrow's or Monday's papers. That is not cynicism — it is pattern recognition. Once one leak fails to land, the next one is already being typed.

Now Imagine the PNM Had Done This

Sit with that for a second. If the PNM were tapping phones, leaking private recordings of frustrated citizens, and calling ordinary venting an "assassination plot," Trinidad would be on fire. There would be marches, editorials, international statements, the whole chorus. The double standard is the story. The abuse of power does not become acceptable because the party you like is the one doing it this time.

And make no mistake about what the real threat here is. It is not one woman on a phone. It is a state that feels comfortable recording your calls and releasing them when it is politically convenient. That is the same appetite for watching everybody that we warned about when the surveillance cameras started going up quietly across the country. First they normalise watching your car. Then they normalise replaying your phone calls. Same instinct, different tool.

The Questions That Actually Matter

Strip away the noise and only a few questions are worth answering. Who leaked this audio recording — the one that backfired? Who authorised the warrant, and on what grounds? Was there a warrant at all, or is this a wiretap dressed up after the fact? Because if a citizen can have a private, ordinary conversation pulled and broadcast to smear her, then none of us has a privacy left.

The people who leaked this wanted you outraged at the woman on the tape. Save that outrage. Point it at the people who recorded her, the people who leaked her, and the people who thought a frustrated citizen sounding like the rest of us, was worth jailing over.

Support Our National Socialist Movement.
Solana: 6b3Xx9hQoEvF1PNQ8seWVRH8w4xHHRECZWQCSsWDcGnp
ETH: 0x583D4f1E9be39ea78C00Ee84de0728cd85129346