The Supreme Court of Liberia is set to make a critical ruling on Wednesday, August 28, 2024, concerning the fate of former Chief Justice Gloria Musu Scott and three of her family members. The court's decision will address the life imprisonment sentences imposed on them for their alleged involvement in the death of Charloe Musu.
The case, which has garnered public attention, stems from a unanimous guilty verdict delivered by a jury in Criminal Court 'C' last year. The jury found former Chief Justice Scott and her co-defendants guilty of allegedly using a kitchen knife to fatally stab Charloe Musu, a niece to the former Chief Justice. Following the jury's verdict, Judge Roosevelt Willie swiftly sentenced the defendants to life imprisonment. However, the defense challenged the ruling and appealed to the Supreme Court, leading to arguments presented on July 16, 2024.
During the arguments, lead government prosecutor Cllr. Bobby Livingstone acknowledged that the state's case was built primarily on circumstantial evidence. He reiterated this point while arguing before the justices for nearly three hours, stressing that "our case theory was based on circumstantial evidence since the defendants failed to identify who committed the murder."
Circumstantial evidence is indirect and does not directly prove a fact, but instead allows for a logical inference to be drawn. Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Yuoh questioned Livingstone, asking if all the defendants could have taken the knife at the same time to stab Charloe Musu. Associate Justice Jamesetta Howard Wolokolie further pressed the prosecutor on whether the defendants used separate knives in the alleged crime.
In response, Cllr. Livingstone maintained that the indictment of all defendants was based on circumstantial evidence. However, these exchanges led the justices to express concern that the prosecution's case rested heavily on presumptions and assumptions, rather than concrete prima facie evidence.
Livingstone also argued that no intruder was found at the crime scene, as alleged by the defendants. However, when asked if DNA analysis conducted by Liberian pathologist Dr. Benedict Kolee linked any of the defendants to the charges of murder, criminal conspiracy, and making false statements to law enforcement, Livingstone's response did not satisfy the justices' concerns.
Justice Yamie Gbeisay questioned what made Livingstone believe that all the defendants, including Rebecca Yonder Winser, were involved in the crime. Justice Yussif Kaba pointed out that the indictment failed to specify the roles each defendant played, suggesting that the government rushed to prosecute the case without conducting a thorough investigation. "I don't know why you proceeded with the prosecution. I'm still waiting to hear on what evidence you based your case," Justice Kaba stated.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Justice Kaba further recommended that the prosecution should have investigated whether there was any prior conflict within the family before the incident. Livingstone's inability to directly address these concerns led to speculation that the life sentences imposed on Justice Scott and her co-defendants may be overturned.
Representing the defense, impeached Associate Justice Kabineh Ja'neh argued that the state did not establish a prima facie case strong enough to warrant a conviction. He emphasized that the prosecution failed to present a single eyewitness to the alleged murder. Justice Ja'neh contended that the conflicting forensic and circumstantial evidence presented at trial fell short of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ja'neh also raised doubts about the expertise of the government pathologist, Dr. Benedict Kolee, noting that he is a clinical psychologist and not a forensic pathologist. He argued that the DNA analysis should have definitively identified the perpetrator. "Dr. Kolee admitted discovering a male DNA chromosome but stated it was too minimal to have contributed to the crime," Ja'neh noted.
