The Monrovia City Court, presided over by Stipendiary Magistrate Judge L. Ben Barco, convened on Thursday for the final arguments in the preliminary hearing of the high-profile Capitol Building Arson case.
The proceedings marked a critical stage in the case, which centers on allegations that two defendants orchestrated an attempt to set the legislative headquarters ablaze in December 2024.
Leading the prosecution, Montserrado County Attorney Cllr. Richard J. Scott contended that the defense had initiated the preliminary hearing to challenge the prosecution’s ability to establish a prima facie case.
He asserted that the government’s investigation had uncovered compelling evidence linking the defendants to the arson plot. According to Cllr. Scott, the prosecution’s burden was to prove both the Commission of a crime and the involvement of the accused, a threshold he claimed was met through documentary evidence and witness testimonies.
The prosecution introduced recorded audio exchanges and WhatsApp messages, allegedly featuring discussions between the defendants about setting fire to the Capitol Building.
These materials, alongside testimonies from law enforcement officers and the accused themselves, were presented as key elements of the case.
Cllr. Scott urged Judge Barco to consider the investigative findings, which purportedly tied the defendants to charges including arson, criminal attempt to commit murder, and conspiracy.
The defense, however, mounted a vigorous challenge to the prosecution’s claims. Lead defense counsel Cllr. Jonathan Massaquoi dismissed the WhatsApp messages and audio recordings as unreliable, asserting that they were manipulated using artificial intelligence.
He further argued that his client’s alleged confessions were extracted under duress, violating their constitutional rights. Cllr. Massaquoi cited Article 21(h) of the 1986 Constitution, which prohibits torture, as grounds for dismissing statements made by the accused during police interrogations.
Raising additional concerns over due process, the defense filed a motion to suppress evidence, contending that investigators seized materials from the defendants nearly a month before securing a search warrant.
They insisted that the charges be dropped due to insufficient legally admissible evidence. The legal battle now hinges on Judge Barco’s ruling, scheduled for Wednesday, February 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m.
The case has captured national attention, given the allegations’ gravity and the targeted building’s symbolic significance. The December 18, 2024, fire at the Capitol Building in Monrovia resulted in extensive damage, prompting swift legal action. In response, the Monrovia City Court issued arrest warrants for Thomas Etheridge, Amos Kofa, Erie Susay, and other suspects accused of orchestrating the attack.
The defendants are facing a litany of charges, including arson, criminal conspiracy, solicitation, aggravated assault, illegal possession of firearms, and attempted murder. The arrests came after a legal conference held on January 20, 2025, before Chamber Justice Yamie Quaqua Gbeisay. During the session, Justice Gbeisay ordered government officials to produce defendant Etheridge within an hour, after which he was released. Shortly thereafter, the court issued new arrest warrants for Etheridge, Kofa, Susay, and additional co-defendants.
According to the Ministry of Justice, investigators determined that the accused conspired to set fire to the Capitol Building following a protest. Authorities allege that the group procured gasoline late on December 17, 2024, and carried out the attack the following day. The fire reportedly caused an estimated $1.8 million in damages, adding to the severity of the charges.
Court documents further reveal that during the incident, a police officer was assaulted, rendered unconscious, and had his firearm confiscated.
Prosecutors claim that the stolen weapon was later used by the defendants, compounding the criminal accusations against them. The prosecution insists that the defendant’s actions violated multiple sections of Liberia’s Penal Law, underscoring the high stakes of the court’s impending ruling.
