-As Politically Charged and Unlinked to the Capitol Fire
The defense in the Capitol Building arson trial scored a major point Friday at Criminal Court “A” after a key prosecution witness acknowledged under oath that the audio recordings central to the state’s case bear little relevance to the alleged arson, reinforcing the defendants’ position that the evidence fails to link them to the crime.
During cross-examination, Rafael Wilson of the Liberia National Police admitted that most of the recordings presented by the prosecution did not concern the burning of the Capitol Building but instead revolved largely around political discussions. The admission came as defense counsel intensified scrutiny of the state’s reliance on audio evidence as the backbone of its case.
Defense lead counsel Cllr. Arthur T. Johnson pressed Wilson on the prosecution’s claim that the recordings captured discussions about setting the Capitol on fire. Johnson highlighted that the audio cited by the state contains only a vague statement—“Did you see the fire already?”—with no reference to the Capitol Building or any specific location. Wilson confirmed this during his testimony.
The witness further testified that the recordings were extracted from the phone of Thomas, one of the defendants, and conceded that investigators themselves found much of the content unrelated to the alleged arson. Despite this, the recordings were still submitted as evidence by the prosecution.
Johnson questioned the justification for presenting recordings with no direct connection to the Capitol fire, suggesting that their inclusion only underscores the weakness of the state’s case. The defense also raised concerns that the audio was doctored and dated December 17, a day when President Joseph Y. Boakai was reportedly present at the Capitol, which was under heavy security by the Liberia National Police and the Executive Protection Service.
Wilson also acknowledged that the investigation leaned heavily on witness statements and admitted he could not confirm whether some of those statements were written by the defendants themselves, further fueling defense arguments about the unreliability of the prosecution’s evidence.
The proceedings took a dramatic turn when the defense accused the Liberia National Police and the National Security Agency of torturing defendant Eric Susay to extract a confession implicating former Speaker J. Fonati Koffa. Cllr. Johnson alleged that Susay was beaten for nearly a week, tied to a mattress, and assaulted by individuals allegedly linked to the former warlord known as “General Butt Naked.” According to the defense, Susay was pressured to claim that he had been paid and sent by former Speaker Koffa to burn the Capitol to facilitate the former speaker’s arrest.
The defense further alleged that Susay was transferred to the NSA for several weeks, during which agents reportedly stepped on his back, leaving him with lasting injuries. Johnson questioned whether Wilson’s investigation ever documented or addressed these alleged abuses.
The prosecution objected, arguing that the line of questioning was unconstitutional and could incriminate the witness. Judge Roosevelt Willie sustained the objection, prompting Johnson to respond that the constitutional right against self-incrimination belongs to the witness, not the court.
Defense counsel also objected to any plan to allow audio playback devices or a technician into the jury’s deliberation room. The defense argued that only jurors are permitted during deliberations and that electronic devices containing multiple recordings should not be introduced into that space.
According to the defense, jurors should rely solely on properly admitted transcripts read into evidence, not on electronic equipment that could improperly influence their deliberations. The defense maintained that the court lacks authority to enter the jury room and warned that permitting playback devices and technicians could contaminate the deliberative process.
The prosecution countered that all admitted evidence, including the audio recordings, would be available to the jury. The defense rejected this position, reiterating that only admitted facts and written transcripts should guide the jury’s decision.
Cross-examination of Investigator Wilson continued, with defense lawyers insisting that the state’s own evidence raises reasonable doubt rather than proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The Capitol Building arson trial continues at Criminal Court “A” in Monrovia.
