Monrovia – Former Chief Justice Gloria Musu Scott, shortly after her release from prison, has called for a concerted effort to combat injustice in Liberia. Justice Scott and three female relatives had spent over a year at Monrovia Central Prison following accusations of murdering Charloe Musu, Scott’s 29-year-old adopted niece.
By Gerald C. Koinyeneh, [email protected]
Addressing the media at her Sinkor home, Justice Scott expressed gratitude to the lawyers who provided pro-bono services and urged civil society organizations (CSOs) to intensify their advocacy and offer legal aid to the many innocent individuals still imprisoned.
She stated, “I want to thank the lawyers and the civil society organizations for their support. However, there is still a great deal of injustice in this country. If they could do this to me, what about the young man from Bokonjehlay? What about someone in Sinoe, Karloken, or Lofa? I celebrate today, and my family celebrates, but the work is far from over. Many innocent people remain in jail…”
‘No Sufficient Evidence’
Justice Scott and her relatives were released following a reversal of Criminal Court A’s ruling by the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Yuoh. The trial court had previously convicted Justice Scott and her relatives of murdering Charloe Musu at Scott’s Brewerville residence.
In the verdict delivered by Chief Justice Yuoh, the Supreme Court found the jury’s decision was based on circumstantial evidence, which lacked direct support and failed to identify the specific individual responsible for the murder. During the Supreme Court hearing on July 16, 2024, state prosecutors acknowledged that the conviction was based on circumstantial evidence.
Legal analysts had speculated that the Supreme Court might overturn the lower court’s decision. During the arguments, Cllr. Bobby Livingstone, the lead government lawyer, argued that the case relied on circumstantial evidence since the defendants did not identify the perpetrator. Circumstantial evidence, while suggestive, does not directly prove a fact but allows for logical inference.
Former Associate Justice Kabineh M. Ja’neh, the lead defense lawyer, countered by challenging whether the state had met the standard of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” and whether a prima facie case had been established against the defendants.
The Supreme Court agreed with the defense’s arguments, stating that the circumstantial evidence provided by the state failed to connect the crime to a specific individual among the four accused.
In addition, the Supreme Court criticized the state’s failure to produce the weapon used in the murder and highlighted inconsistencies in the evidence, including conflicting testimony about DNA found on the deceased. The court also considered the possibility that a professional criminal could have entered the home, given previous reports of attempted intrusions.
In a separate matter, state lawyers failed to appear before the Supreme Court, resulting in fines for Solicitor General Cllr. Augustine Fayiah ($100) and Minister of Justice ($200). Cllr. Fayiah later disclosed a conflict of interest, as he had previously served as defense lawyer for Cllr. Scott before his appointment as Solicitor General.
