Published: September 2, 2025
Temple of Justice, Monrovia — Associate Justice Jamesetta Howard Wolokolie, presiding in chambers at the Supreme Court of Liberia, has ordered Criminal Court ‘A’ Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie to resume jurisdiction and proceed with an ongoing arson case after declining to issue a writ requested by the defendants.
The defendants — Christian Kofa, John Nyanti, Eric Suray, Thomas Isaac Etheridge and Stephen Broh — remain in pretrial detention on multiple charges, including arson, criminal mischief, conspiracy, solicitation, attempted murder, aggravated assault, illegal possession of firearms, release of destructive forces, reckless endangerment and theft of property. In her directive, Justice Wolokolie said, “By directive of Her Honor Jamesetta H. Wolokolie, Associate Justice presiding in chambers, you are hereby mandated to resume jurisdiction and proceed in keeping with law, as the Justice has declined to issue the writ prayed for.”
Through their lawyers, the defendants petitioned the Supreme Court after Criminal Court ‘A’ refused to release them on bond. They argued that Judge Willie had erred by conditioning their release on the prosecution’s right to file exceptions, even after their bond had been approved. The petitioners noted that they had procured and filed a criminal appearance bond, which Judge Willie formally approved. They further maintained that he went beyond the normal process by requiring them to produce “living human sureties,” meaning relatives and prominent persons who signed undertakings to guarantee the defendants’ appearance at trial. The defense argued that the combination of a valid bond and human sureties met all legal safeguards, and that continued detention was unlawful.
In support of their claim, the petitioners cited Zuo v. Morris (1994) and Section 63.3 of the Civil Procedure Law, which holds that a bond becomes effective once approved by the court. They argued that once the bond was justified and approved, the trial court had no basis to continue entertaining exceptions that kept the defendants in jail. They contended that Judge Willie’s insistence on holding them until the prosecution’s objections were resolved violated due process and improperly prolonged their detention.
The prosecution, however, filed formal exceptions to the bond, initiating what is known as a sureties justification process. In practice, when prosecutors challenge a bond, the trial court schedules hearings to assess the adequacy of the bond and the trustworthiness of those acting as sureties. Judge Willie indicated that he would keep the defendants in custody until these exceptions are heard and decided.
The petitioners had asked the Supreme Court to grant an alternative writ, reverse Judge Willie’s rulings, and order their immediate release.
Discussion about this post