Lawyers representing former Chief Justice Gloria Musu Scott, along with three others accused of murder and various other crimes, have petitioned Criminal Court ‘A‘ for bail, citing insufficient evidence provided by the prosecution.

Although murder is considered a non-bailable offense under Liberian law, the defendant's legal team, which consists of over 30 lawyers, argues that based on “the content and narrative of the government indictment,” the evidence put forward fails to substantiate the accusations leveled against them, as such, the court should reconsider their detention.

They asserted that the prosecution's case rests on weak foundations, highlighting the inconsistencies and gaps in the evidence presented. 

According to the defense lawyers, the indictment itself demonstrates that the proof is not evident and the presumption is not great as it collectively charged the defendants for the alleged commission of murder, but failed to indicate who the actual person was among the four defendants that committed the murder.

“In the case of the defendants, the indictment on every face and contents demonstrate that proof is not evident and presumption is not great,” the lawyers argued.  

“The indictment charged the defendants for the alleged commission of murder collectively, and  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 that committed the murder.”

“Based on the content and narrative of the indictment, the defendants are entitled to bail, pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Law Chapter. Under that law, it is provided that all crimes are bailable especially when the proof is not evident and the presumption is not great,” they said.

However, the prosecution has not yet responded to the defendants' lawyers appeal, as such, a date to examine the appeal's merit and demerit has not been determined. 

The defense in the appeal contended that since the prosecution has failed to precisely indicate who specifically committed the murder, the defendants should be released under the provision of the Criminal Code, which would allow for the release of the defendants on bail pending the final disposition of the trial.

The defense further that Scott, as a co-defendant, former Chief Justice, former Attorney General, and former Senator of Maryland County, is qualified for personal recognizance under the provisions of the Criminal Code, emphasizing Scott poses no flight risk or threat to society alone with co-defendants, and that they will comply with any conditions imposed by the court if released on bail.

“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 presumption are decidedly in favor of the innocence of the accused.

“[Scott] is qualified considering the facts and circumstances of the case to personal recognizance as she is not at night risk; 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.” 

The defense also highlighted that the primary purposes of bail in a criminal case, include relieving the accused of imprisonment and relieving the state of the burden of keeping the accused pending trial while ensuring that the accused will submit to the court's jurisdiction. 

They argued that the defendants have been cooperative throughout the proceedings, attending multiple police station interviews without fail, and should therefore be admitted to bail under these circumstances.

The defense in support of their argument, referenced the principle of “personal recognizance”, which allows for the release of a defendant in a criminal case based on their word that they will appear when scheduled. 

They also pointed to Article 21 (d) (i) of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia, which states that all accused persons shall be bailable upon their personal recognizance. They argued that even though the provision states that this does not apply to capital or grave offenses, it does not prevent a court from exercising its inherent authority to grant bail for grave crimes.

The defense team emphasized that Liberia's criminal justice system is founded on the principle of “presumption of Innocence,” citing Article 21 (h) of the Constitution, which states that all accused shall “presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

“Obviously, the defendants have been very cooperative in these proceedings beginning with the Police investigation with over 10 appearances. 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. 

“The organic law of the Land, 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 for capital offenses or grave offenses as defined by law, does not preclude a court of law from exercising its inherent authority to grant bail to one charged with grave offenses.”

Meanwhile, the defense lawyer has also argued that co-defendant Rebecca Youdeh Wisner is elderly, frail, and in need of medical assistance and that Scott has a sensitive medical condition involving hypertension that requires regular monitoring. 

The defense team believes these circumstances warrant the granting of bail. They request the court to declare the defendants' motion for bail as proper, citing the absence of sufficient evidence and a strong presumption of guilt. 

They urge the court to release the defendants based on the relevant statutes and laws and grant any other relief deemed fair, just, and legal.

“Wherefore and in view of the foregoing attending peculiar factual circumstances and legal reasons, the defendants pray the Court for a judgment declaring as follows: Grant Movants/Defendants Motion to Bail, Rule that under the attending facts and circumstances and by parity of legal reasoning, coupled with the spirit and intent of the statute, and that proof is not evident and presumption is not great.

“[And that] the defendants’ Motion for Bail is proper and most respectfully request same.. defendants be granted and order the defendants released on grounds of the aforesaid statute and law controlling. Grant unto defendants any other relief that will be fair, just, and legal,” the defendants’ lawyers argued.