TEMPLE OF JUSTICE, Monrovia – The Monrovia City Court has denied a movement filed by the protection within the alleged Capitol Building arson case, rejecting their request to suppress proof and return property seized in the course of the investigation.
By: Jackie Dennis, contributing author
The case includes defendants Thomas Isaac Etheridge and Eric Susay, who’re accused of arson. During authorized proceedings, their legal professionals argued that proof obtained on December 18, 2024, must be suppressed and that the seized property must be returned.
During courtroom continuing a “motion to suppress” could be filed, requesting a choose to rule that sure proof can’t be offered at trial, sometimes as a result of it was obtained illegally or violates the defendant’s constitutional rights, successfully stopping the prosecution from utilizing that proof towards the accused.
However, state prosecutors opposed the movement, asserting that the proof had already been admitted in courtroom and that the protection had ample time to problem it previous to its admission.
Following arguments from either side, the courtroom dominated in favor of the prosecution and denied the protection’s movement, permitting the case to proceed.
During the listening to, state prosecutors argued {that a} crime had been dedicated and that the proof strongly implicated the defendants. They offered a number of types of proof, together with direct testimony, WhatsApp messages, and voice recordings, asserting that these supplies demonstrated the defendants’ involvement.
The protection, nonetheless, referred to as for the fees to be dismissed, difficult the legality and reliability of the state’s proof. They argued that the prosecution did not current a hearth report back to substantiate the arson cost. Additionally, they claimed that the voice recordings performed in courtroom had been generated utilizing synthetic intelligence by Lewis Jayjay, an worker of the National Security Agency (NSA), and had been obtained unlawfully.
Further contesting the prosecution’s case, the protection identified that the weapon allegedly taken from a Liberia National Police officer was not offered as proof. They additionally argued that the state didn’t specify the diploma of the hearth—whether or not first, second, or third diploma—thus failing to satisfy authorized requirements. Additionally, they famous that whereas a voice recording talked about hurt to 2 cops, the prosecution didn’t current any kinfolk of the alleged victims to testify.
Despite these arguments, the courtroom upheld the prosecution’s proof and dominated that the case ought to transfer ahead.