-In Capitol Arson Investigation
The defense on Tuesday mounted a forceful challenge to the prosecution’s case in the Capitol Building arson trial, as cross-examination of Liberia National Police Chief Investigator Reafeal Wilson revealed gaps in the fire investigation and uncertainty surrounding key audio evidence relied upon by the state.
Under questioning, Wilson acknowledged that he could not recall the name of an international fire expert said to have assisted the Liberia National Fire Service during the investigation, raising concerns about the reliability of the process and the handling of expert input central to the prosecution’s narrative.
The defense further underscored these concerns when Wilson was unable to testify to the expert’s conclusions, prompting an objection from the prosecution. Judge Roosevelt Willie sustained the objection after the state argued that Wilson was not qualified to speak to expert findings and that the expert would be called to testify.
Tensions heightened when the prosecution sought to block reference to an international fire expert’s report introduced by the defense. Defense lawyers maintained that the report exposed serious flaws in the LNFS investigation, including misstatements, inaccuracies, and conclusions unsupported by modern fire science and accepted investigative standards.
According to portions of the report read in court, the LNFS documentation omitted critical details such as the names of responding personnel and specific actions taken at the fire scene. The report stated that, given the scale of the fire, the investigation should have been thorough, but “unfortunately, this is not the case.”
Defense counsel Cllr. Arthur T. Johnson cited the report as concluding that the Liberia National Fire Service lacked the training, experience, and equipment necessary to properly collect, preserve, or store evidence. The report also faulted the Liberia National Police for inadequate documentation of personnel and investigative actions at the scene.
The prosecution objected, describing the defense’s approach as introducing “strange practices.” The defense rejected the claim, stressing that cross-examination is designed to test evidence and uncover the truth.
Attention later turned to an audio recording allegedly linked to defendant Dixon Seboe. Under questioning, Wilson conceded that he is not a voice expert and could not confirm that the voice on the recording belonged to Seboe, noting that the speaker only referred to himself as “Seboe.”
Wilson testified that the National Security Agency provided technical assistance in analyzing the recording and that investigators concluded it implicated Seboe. However, the defense highlighted the absence of a formal voice analysis report and the lack of testimony from a qualified voice expert.
Pressed on how he identified the voice, Wilson responded that a voice expert would be produced to testify and explain the findings.
The defense also questioned Wilson about his interrogation of Seboe, during which Seboe denied any involvement in the alleged Capitol attack and stated that he learned of the fire after waking up. Seboe said he later went to the Capitol Building after other government officials had already arrived.
Wilson confirmed that Seboe denied involvement, that no force was used to obtain his statement, and that these details were reflected in his investigative report.
The trial continues as the court considers the defense’s challenges to the credibility of the fire investigation, the handling of expert evidence, and the reliability of the audio recording presented by the prosecution.
