BY GABRIEL PRINCEWILL
A serious row has erupted between a talent competition judge and a pub in Westcliff Essex, over a vibrant singing competition involving a prize reward of £500 and a paid gig on top of that. A competition lasting 6 weeks was organised by the Plough pub, and was graced with the attendance of Simon Cowell look alike – Andy Monk who has been in high demand since Simon shot to fame. Monk who has over 30 years experience as a DJ was greeted with delight and much pleasure- his presence spiced the already well promoted event that saw a pub filled in attendance with tight security at the entrance. Many surrounding the highly demanded Cowell look alike, taking selfies and having autographs signed. Andy looks almost the spitting image of X factor judge , Simon Cowell and could easily pass as a a twin. If Simon Cowell has any real brothers, I doubt any would have as striking a resemblance as this amiable man does.
Eye of Media was invited to the event to enjoy a series of excellent displays by top aspiring singers, some of whom I could not help thinking should be in front of the real Simon Cowell and camera crews for entertaining television. Thousands flocked to the pub- known for its weekly Karoke displays, to experience night after night of quality singing. The event , organised by Terry Punsrett , 35 was top rated, Participants had all contributed £5 each to take part, and contestants gave their very best, in pursuit of the attractive £500 prize dangled before them. Each passing day of the well advertised competition showcased a good deal of singing ability capable of probably rivalling the pool of talent seen at the popular X factor show on television.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar
Unfortunately, things turned sour when after a six weeks of talent displaying and public voting, eventual winner , Donna Bruce was selected as the winner. Her victory was alleged to have been rigged by the competition organisers. Kerry Woodford, 35 – an experienced Judge of five years,- was later thrown out of the bar after she raised strong objections against the process that produced the winner. Kerry, 35, told eye of media that she saw judges pocketing the name of her act Jahnell rather than presenting it for counting. She insists the show was a sham and that judges orchestrated the eventual outcome.
Jahnell Vibas, 20 works in a hospital, but it a talented singer. Many praised the quality of his voice, some even said he sings like an a angel. However, his prospect of winning the competition went out of the window when he walked off stage half way through his final song. His partner claimed the wrong track to his song was the wrong track, but said he could not definitively say if it was deliberately put there to put him off guard. He did say it seemed all too suspicious .
Furious Kerry, an experienced judge insists ”it was all a fix , the pub organisers fixed all of this! She claims Terry, who is best mates with the Anthony- the boyfriend of Donna, who was also the eventual winner, fixed the results. ”After the show , I saw Jahnelle’s name on the floor. So many pieces of paper with his name were on the floor instead of a basket. They set Donna up to win, she insisted. ”Terry decided who went through to the next stage, and this was not professional. He made all the decisions until the quarter finals. Judges should decide who progress to the next stage”, she said. Kerry also claimed that she saw Judges making ‘cut throat’ signs to Jahnelle whilst he was singing.
Kerry’s story was echoed by Wendy Harrison, 36, who also attended the competition. Interestingly, Wendy’s daughter was also in the competition but went out in the semi finals. ”it was obviously fixed, Wendy asserted, it is strange we could not hear Jahnelle’s track on the final. Asked who she thought was the better singer out of Jahnelle and Donna, she said ” they are different. Donna does shouty song but Jahnelle does high pitch songs. They are very different. So, it is purely a matter of opinion who is actually better, I put to her, ‘”may be, but the important thing is that it definitely looks like they made up their mind that Donna would win rather than put it to a vote. They promised a paid gig for the winner, but Donna said she will have her’s in December”.
”If you are given a paid gig, you would go at the earliest opportunity, not December. I don’t think they gave her the £500, it went to the pub. If they gave her the £500, they would do it publicly. It looks a robbery”, Wendy said. However, the manager of the pub, Anthony Ettinger claims the pub will be hosting the promised paid gig for his girlfriend in October- a claim the aggrieved parties dispute, but one we could not definitively ascertain.
INTEGRITY
When the Plough was approached by eye of media, the authorities there defended their position by saying it was put to the public vote, who made a decision on the winner. Amid a torrent of abusive language by unrestrained revellers in the pub, the mother of the winning singer simply said the complainant was ‘mad’ and a ‘sore looser’, but fell short of accounting for the questionable framework in which the competition was structured. The bar manager- Anthony Ettinger,30 ironically nick named Tinie(he is over 6 foot tall and also broad) told Eye of Media ” the public counted the votes in front of the judges, and in full view of the audience, there was no fraud involved.
Tinie disputes he is good friends with Terry, claiming they are just ”colleagues”. ”I don’t go out for a drink with him or anything like that, our relationship is simply one of work colleagues”, he insisted. Tinie also disputes that Terry Pumsrett decided who got to the next stage of the competition. However Kerry, her wife Sarah, and her Friend Wendy all insist it was he who called the shots until the quarter finals. The saga was further complicated by the fact that Pumsrett’s boyfriend, Robert Harrison, 40, was also a Judge on the panel for the competition. This worsened Kerry’s faith in the integrity of the contest . The charge being levied against the pub was that the whole affair had been a farce, and therefore fraudulent. Why did she not object to the arrangements from the outset, I asked Kerry? ” Terry was not meant to decide who gets to the next stage, she asserted. It was all throw on us so suddenly. I didn’t imagine they will do what they did”
Kerry argues that the vast majority of the public were friends of Donna . However, garnering support in the form of orchestrating attendance for support is strategic, not fraudulent. It can be seen as reflecting the popularity of a given contestant- though this will make it more of a popularity contest as opposed to a talent contest. The downside to orchestrating public support is that such competitions will not necessarily deliver a winner based on genuine assessment, but rather on partisanship. It could also be viewed as a way of a contestant’s talent being endorsed by those who find them popular.
There might not be a way round avoiding popularity contests for competitions conducted in a public place except Judges or individuals with no affiliations to any of the parties make the decisions. However, the more worrying claim was when at the end of the competition, members of the public were asked to put the names of their preferred winner in a basket, later to be counted to determine the winner and recipient of the £500 prize. Kerry insists she saw her acts name on pieces of paper on the floor and was shocked to see that. more worrying was her claim that she saw the name of her act, Jahnelle Vibas on the floor after the show, indicating that the public vote was not fully put forward for counting, rather some was dashed on the floor and others were pocketed.
Bar manager,Anthony Ettinger, who goes out with Donna Bruce strongly denies Kerry’s version. The votes were counted in front of the panel and the public, nothing like what she is saying happened”, he insisted. Jahnelle walked off stage in the middle of his song for the finals, how can he expect to win”?, he asked. Kerry Woodford jumped to visas defence ” they turned the microphone off whilst his track was playing and they had the wrong track on. On top of that I saw some the Judges making a cut throat sign at Jhnelle whilst he was on stage. He just lost faith in the integrity of the competition and left. The whole thing was a sham”
Looking at it based on the facts, the framework of the event was manifestly flawed , and smacks of the rigging alleged to have taken place. This doesn’t mean it was actually rigged, but that the circumstances looked dodgy and suspicious. We point out that just because it looked dodgy does not mean it was rigged, but the circumstances raised doubts.
Jahnelle Vibas was too upset to talk to eye of media, but his partner Kenny told eye of media ” there has been a lot of slagging off on facebook, he doesn’t want to talk about it. Asked whether he felt the competition was rigged, he said ” well, it just looks a bit odd how the wrong track was put on for his song and we could hardly hear what he was saying. Manager Anthony Ettinger disputes the wrong track was put on, but this is one of those cases where you have to think there is no smoke with no fire. Why would 3 different people say it was the wrong track and his voice was distorted, if it wasn’t? In the same breath, it is worth criticising Jahnelle Vibas walking off stage without clearly voicing his objections. This he should have done even if he was upset. This still does mean he cannot legitimately feel aggrieved if he has been robbed of what he could have won. Ettinger insists the gap in the number of votes wasn’t even that much, about 5 votes between them.
A statement from the lease holder of the plough read ”tenants are allowed quiet enjoyment of their premises and unless any specific breaches of the lease are occasioned we have no ability to take any formal action, certainly not for alleged breaches where the aggrieved parties or police has no interest in pursuing charges. ”This does not mean we have not brought the matter to our tenants attention that does however prevent any censure as on an evidential basis there is no case to answer”.
The issue here is that there was no quite enjoyment of premises. Rather, there was a talent competition that led to charges of fraud and bitter feelings that the process and been corrupted. There is no police interest in the dispute that happened, eye of media have learnt that threats had been made on Facebook as tempers boiled over the results and the reaction to the results.
Eye of media will play the final track of both finalists in our video section online in a couple of days for readers to decide who they think was the better singer. It may just be a matter of opinion, but let’s have your comments when you hear it.
