Our local history textbooks of the very distant future will say how Jack Warner was a somewhat good man but misunderstood by tens of millions worldwide, including Andrew Jennings, Camini Marajh and a several investigators. Jack would be compared to Robin Hood even though he never shot an arrow or stole from any one person. He would be portrayed in some books as an urban legend, a mythical figure who the skeptical skeptics would say, despite photographs, political speeches and audit reports, never existed. Such kindness and cunning could never lie in the heart of the same man, they would say. The books will present scores of photos showing Jack handing over cheque after cheque to delighted people who worshiped him as a God with money.
History will say he was a man known for his willingness to build box drains for the poor and downtrodden. The books will acknowledge that despite his many flaws and law suits, he would eternally be known for his ability to listen to the problems of the frustrated on a weekly basis and act appropriately, unlike the other Members of Parliament who rose to legendary dignitary status after winning an election. Jack Warner will be known as a man who did some right but no wrong locally.
Like all urban legends, Jack will linger on minds of both the mindful and mindless. His parting would be seen to be an aborted reentry by his friends and backstabbers alike since the Prime Minister could no longer fake ignorance of one man’s deeds twice in one term.