TEMPLE OF JUSTICE, Monrovia – The Monrovia City Court, presided over by Stipendiary Magistrate Ben L. Barco, has ruled against defendants Thomas Etheridge and Eric Susay in a preliminary hearing, transferring the case to Criminal Court ‘A’ for trial. This follows Justice-in-Chambers Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay’s decision to deny a writ of certiorari filed by the defense.
In his ruling, Magistrate Barco addressed the key legal issue of whether the prosecution established a prima facie case sufficient to warrant further legal proceedings. Citing Section 12.2 of the Criminal Procedure Law, he emphasized that a magistrate must determine if evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to justify holding the accused accountable in a higher court.
Referencing the Supreme Court case RL v. Chakpadeh, 35 LLR 715 (1988), he noted that a prima facie case only requires probable cause and does not demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt. He further cited Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition, which defines prima facie evidence as that which, unless rebutted, stands as factual.
According to the prosecution, Etheridge and Susay allegedly conspired to purchase gasoline, which was used to set fire to the Capitol Building, causing property damage exceeding eight million U.S. dollars. Additionally, they are accused of assaulting a police officer, leaving him unconscious and stealing his firearm. Prosecution witnesses provided corroborative testimony regarding how the defendants and their alleged co-conspirators gained access to the Capitol Building with the intent to disrupt legislative sessions.
The prosecution also presented forensic evidence collected from the crime scene and electronic devices, arguing that unless these pieces of evidence are effectively challenged, they remain valid. As a result, the court found sufficient grounds to send the case to a higher jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court has been ordered to transmit the case records and the defendants to the First Judicial Circuit, Criminal Court ‘A’ for trial.
Etheridge and Susay are currently detained at Monrovia Central Prison on charges including arson, attempted murder, criminal mischief, criminal facilitation, conspiracy, and solicitation.
Defense Challenges Prosecution’s Case
During final arguments on February 6, 2025, defense attorney Cllr. Massaquoi argued that the prosecution failed to provide a foreign expert fire report to establish the cause of the blaze before implicating his clients. He compared this case to the 2006 fire at the Executive Mansion, where an expert from South Africa was brought in to determine the cause, noting that no such forensic analysis was conducted in the current matter.
Massaquoi further contended that the prosecution failed to specify whether the fire was of first, second, or third-degree severity. He criticized the reliance on recorded conversations in which an individual allegedly stated, “We dirty the police officer,” pointing out that neither the police officer nor his relatives were presented in court, nor was the stolen firearm recovered.
Citing Article 21(h) of the Liberian Constitution, Massaquoi stressed that defendants in capital or infamous crimes have the right to a fair and impartial trial, the presumption of innocence, and protection from self-incrimination. He argued that the prosecution had not met the legal threshold to establish probable cause.
He also referenced Section 25.1-2 of the Civil Procedure Law, asserting that jurisdictional matters should be properly examined. Additionally, he noted that the Liberia Petroleum and Refining Company, which participated in the fire investigation, was never called to testify, and no forensic analysis was conducted to determine fingerprints on the alleged incendiary device.
Supporting this argument, defense lawyer Cllr. Wright questioned the specific roles played by the defendants in the alleged crime. He highlighted the prosecution’s failure to present a fire report, the missing firearm, and the chloride bottle allegedly used in the crime.
Prosecution’s Argument for Probable Cause
Countering the defense’s claims, Montserrado County Attorney Cllr. Richard Scott Jr. invoked Chapter 12.2 of the Criminal Procedure Law, which mandates that a preliminary examination be held only upon a defendant’s request. He reiterated that a prima facie case does not require proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt but rather establishing reasonable grounds to suspect the accused’s involvement.
Scott maintained that evidence presented in court, including audio recordings, showed defendant Eric Susay stating, “We dirty the police officer and left him lying on the ground in Jallah Town.” He asserted that such evidence sufficiently demonstrated probable cause for the case to proceed to trial.
The prosecution insists that the defendants be held accountable and answer to the charges before Criminal Court ‘A’.
Discussion about this post