Viewers may remember that in an interview, which was aired in October and November 2013, Burgess alleged that she approached Edmond Castro to sign 200 visa recommendations for which she paid him $2,000 dollars each. That was right around the time when the Elvin Penner Immigration Scandal was raging. Castro asserted that this allegation was false, and that it hurt his reputation. He demanded a retraction and an apology, neither of which were given, and so he sued them to try to clear his name.

His attorney, Rodwell Williams, opened today's hearing by submitting to Justice Abel that the defendants cannot prove that Castro was involved in any visa hustle, and so, Castro's reputation has suffered unnecessarily for it.

Alvarine Burgess's defence is that what she said was the truth, and she can justify the accusations she made. Channel 5 has different platforms of defense against the claim. The first is that indeed Burgess' comments are true. Secondly, they also claim absolute privilege due to the integrity in public life laws, which governs the conduct of public officials. Finally, Channel 5 claims qualified privilege, common law afforded to the media and the press as fair comment.

The entire day was spent with Castro on the witness stand, where Godfrey Smith cross-examined him based on his written testimony that the allegations are false. He asked Castro about the Code of Ethics that Elected Politicians must follow, so that they don't demean their high office, allow for their credibility to be questioned, or use their public office for personal gain. From there, Smith directed an inquiry into Castro's removal from Cabinet in 2010, then the scandal involving him at the Belize Airport Authority, and then, finally, his role as recommender for Asian Nationals for visas, individuals whom he did not know.

All of these were very trying times for Castro in his tenure as an elected official, and it has to be bad timing that all these issues are rehashed only 2 weeks before he must defend his position as the UDP standard bearer for the UDP in an open convention. Under Smith's cross-examination, Castro conceded that his integrity was called into question when he was fired from Cabinet after a woman alleged that she paid Castro to acquire land for her, and claimed that he swindled her. He conceded also that it was bad judgment accepted a cheque from the BBA, a Department which he was in charge of as a Minister. That money was used to cover his late mother's funeral expenses.

As to the visa scandal itself, he admitted that he did not know or even meet any of the Asian Nationals he recommended. He also conceded that in hindsight, he knew that something was wrong when he gave his signature for what can be described as a "visa hustle". He also accepted that after consideration, he was risking his reputation by signing these recommendation letters. He also admitted that he knew that Burgess was being paid to get these visa recommendation letters signed by him, and by that reasoning, his ministerial office did facilitate the visa hustle.

Castro rejected, however, the suggestion that he was paid any money, much less $2,000 dollars for each letter he signed. He also denied that he knowingly participated in this visa hustle. He maintained that he only helped Burgess by signing the letters because she was a longtime friend who came to him with the financial difficulties that her husband was ill and needed expensive medical treatment available out of the country. He claims that Burgess asked him for money to cover the expenses, but he didn't have it, so he did the next best thing and signed the letters so that she could earn the money as visa expediter.

Castro was then cross-examined by Burgess' attorney, Anthony Sylvestre, who chose to confront Castro's attorney with 21 Asian Nationals he recommended. His response to that was that his secretary crafted the letters with all the necessary information, and he claims that he only signed them after they were finished.