– Over Allegations of Child Abandonment
By: G Bennie Bravo Johnson
The office of former Montserrado County District #3 lawmaker and proprietor of the David G. Barshell Senior School System, Hon. Ceebee Barshell, has denounced allegations linking him to “Child Abandonment and Abuse” – an allegation made by Madam Zoe Ice Henries.
In a statement in which he accused madam Henries of dishonesty, greed, and political opportunism, Barshell on
Tuesday, February 25, 2025, condemned the accusations made by Ms. Henries, which alleged that the former lawmaker had failed to provide support for his son.
Hon. Barshell’s office described Madam Henries as a “liar,” “hustler,” and a “political mercenary” in response to her claims. The statement expressed frustration over her ongoing attempts to tarnish Barshell’s reputation and character.
The controversy arose from allegations regarding financial and child support disputes between Barshell and Henries. Madam Henries, who has two children from the relationship, Matue (24) and Godwin (11), accused Barshell of neglecting his financial obligations and ignoring a court order for child support.
However, Barshell’s office has strongly rejected these allegations, asserting that they are unfounded. According to the statement, Henries demanded financial support from Barshell for personal business expenses and her son’s trip to the Arsenal Football Academy in France. When Barshell declined to meet her additional financial requests, Henries allegedly resorted to threats and disparaging remarks.
Barshell’s office also made it clear that he has provided financial support for his children, including depositing funds for school fees and other necessary expenses. A receipt, dated February 7, 2025, was presented as evidence of a deposit made by Barshell in compliance with a court order for child support. The office emphasized that all payments were documented and that there was no reason for any further legal action regarding his financial responsibilities.
The statement also questioned Henries’ motives and her continued public accusations against Barshell. “What does Zoe Henries want to achieve?” the statement asked, casting doubt on her credibility and raising concerns about her behavior since their first meeting in Ghana in 1995.
Additionally, the office pointed to records showing that rent had already been paid, contradicting Henries’ claims of unpaid rent. They sought clarity on the true reasons behind her accusations.
Barshell’s office accused Madam Henries of trying to embarrass their client and his family, suggesting that her actions were politically motivated in an attempt to gain personal advantage. The office strongly defended Barshell, stating that despite Henries’ efforts to escalate the issue, evidence supports that he has consistently met his financial obligations for his children.
As tensions between the two parties continue to escalate, the legal dispute over child and financial support appears set to continue in the courts. Hon. Barshell’s office remains resolute in its defense against what they describe as false accusations and baseless claims.
The public now waits for a response from Madam Zoe Henries as the legal battle unfolds, potentially having far-reaching consequences for both parties involved.
