Cllr. Scott  Lawyers Question Government’s Indictment

11

Thirty four lawyers of the Supreme Court and subordinate courts have filed a motion before Criminal Court “A” questioning the indictment of the national government to charge the former Chief Justice, Cllr. Gloria Musu Scott and her family with murder and other crimes.

Some of the prominent lawyers who filed the motion include the  former Supreme Court Justice Kabineh M. Janeh, Cllr. T. Negbalee Warner, Cllr. Cooper Kruah, Cllr. Augustine Fayiah, Cllr. Boakai Kanneh, Cllr. Augustine Toe,  Cllr. Amara M. Sheriff and Cllr. Jonathan Massaquoi among others.

The lawyers in the motion to admit defendant Scott and her family to bail filed late Tuesday, June 27, 2023 said  the fact that the government failed and refused and or refused to precisely indicate as to who particularly committed the murder, it is sufficient to trigger the provision of chapter 13.1 of the Criminal Code, thus releasing the defendants on the strength of said provision pending the final disposition of the trial.

The movants submit and say that based on the content and narrative of the Indictment they are entitled

to bail pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Law, Chapter 1, Subsection 13.1, captioned ‘Right to

Bail”. 

Under the law referenced, it is provided that all crimes are bailable especially when the

proof is not evident and the presumption is not great. In this instant case before the court, the

indictment on its very face and contents demonstrate that proof is not evident and presumption

not great. For instance, the indictment charged the defendants for the alleged commission of

murder collectively, the said indictment further alleged ‘that an instrument believed to be a knife’

was used but did not succinctly indicate as to who was the actual person among the four (4) that

committed the murder. 

The defendants said also, the Civil Procedure Law, Title 1, LCLR, under Provisional

Remedies in Chapter 7. Subchapter C. Arrest § 7.45. Release because of privilege or lack of

grounds and § 7.46 Bail; release from custody.

Further to count two of the their motion, they said the State having failed and or refused to precisely

indicate as to who particularly committed the murder, it is sufficient to trigger the provision of

Chapter 13.1 of our Criminal Code here and above, thus releasing the defendants on the strength

of said provision pending the final disposition of this trial. “Where it is uncertain whether the

accused is innocent or guilty-in other words where, upon an examination of the testimony, the

presumption of guilt is not strong, the court will exercise its discretionary powers and admit

to bail; and it is particularly called upon to bail in all cases where the presumptions are

decidedly in favor of the innocence of the accused”. Coleman v RL [1942] LRSC 12; 8 LLR 59

(1942) (8 May 1942)

Movants further submit and say that the co- defendant Gloria Musu Scott, former Chief Justice

of the Republic of Liberia, Former Attorney General of the Republic of Liberia, and Former

Senator of Maryland County Republic of Liberia, is qualify under the provision of the Criminal

Code cited here and above, she is also qualify considering the facts and circumstances of the case

to personal recognizance as she is not at night risk from the Republic; and that she along with

the other Co-Defendants will be in court whenever needed from the commencement to the logical

conclusion of this matter.

Movants/defendants add and submit that the primary purpose of bail in a criminal case are to

relieve the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the state of the burden of keeping the accused

pending trial and at the same time to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the court,

whether before or after conviction, to ensure that he or she will submit to the jurisdiction of the

Court and be in attendance thereon whenever his/her/their attendance is required. “Zuo v Morris

et al [1994] LRSC 32; 37 LLR 604″, Obviously, the Movants /Defendants have been very

cooperative in these proceedings beginning with the Police investigation with over 10

appearances at the LNP National Headquarters up to current. They have been invited to the police

station multiple times and have never failed to attend. Hence, they should be admitted to bail

under these circumstances.

According to the defendants, the Black’s Law Dictionary (9

Edition) “personal recognizance” is a principle which “allows the release of a defendant in a

criminal case in which the court takes the Defendant’s word that he or she will appear for a

scheduled matter or when told to appear.” The organic law of the Land, (1986 Constitution of

Liberia) under Article 21 (d) (i) thereof states that “All accused persons shall be bailable upon

their personal recognizance…” Notwithstanding the other phrase of the cited provision

“…unless charged

Comments are closed.