Liberia: Justice Ministry to Present Evidence in Murder Case Against Cllr. Scott

…. One of the key elements in the prosecution’s case, therefore, is the testimony of “unclassified materials, such as an audio of Scott claiming that the death of Musu was caused by an alleged armed robbery” to prove that the deceased’s death was a result of a “calculated murder plot.”

The Ministry of Justice is expected today to present evidence in the high-profile murder case involving former Chief Justice Gloria Musu-Scott and three other family members. 

Scott, who is also a former Minister of Justice, stands accused along with three other persons of “brutally murdering” Charloe Musu, who happens to be a nice of the legal luminary.

Charloe had been living with the former Chief Justice since a tender age and was a graduating senior of the Starz University College before her untimely death on the night of February 22. 

The police and Scott had, in an initial statement, claimed that Musu’s death came as a result of an alleged armed attack by a hired domestic worker.  

Although defendants have constantly claimed innocence, an indictment by the Ministry of Justice, which is based on a four-month investigation by the Liberia National Police, revealed a series of shocking revelations.

The indictment accuses the defendants of murder, criminal conspiracy, making false statements to law enforcement, deliberately altering evidence, fabricating a false narrative, and showing a callous disregard for human life. 

It alleges that Scott, being a former Chief Justice, used her legal expertise and criminal justice background to create a story that would shield herself and her co-defendants from the murder accusations.

One of the key elements in the prosecution's case, therefore, is the testimony of “unclassified materials, such as an audio of Scott claiming that the death of Charloe was caused by an alleged armed robbery” to prove that the her death was a result of a “calculated murder plot”.

Others are expected testimonies of the security personnel who, according to the indictment, alleged that the defendants’ claim of armed attack is false and that the body of the deceased was seen in the bathroom of the legal luminary. 

However, it is unclear if the Ministry ever performed any DNA test to match the alleged blood found in Scott’s room to match that of the deceased, which is key in strengthening the prosecution’s claim that the accused had direct contact with the victim at the time of her death.

The Ministry has however not said whether they have found the alleged knife used to “stab” the deceased, leaving her with “nine wounds inflicted on her chest, right hand, armpit, and left thigh using a knife that co-defendant Gertrude Newton claimed to possess.”

Meanwhile, the defendants are yet to be arraigned before Criminal Court 'A' and have not had the chance to enter a plea, even though they have been indicted for about two weeks now on charges of murder, criminal conspiracy and making false statements to the law enforcement.

However, the defense team, led by nearly 30 renowned lawyers, are expected to criticize the prosecution for relying heavily on witness statements that do not directly connect the defendants to the crimes.

Sources with knowledge of the defense team’s argument noted that the defendants’ lawyers would argue that the lack of forensic evidence to match the alleged blood found in Scott’s room, as well as the government’s inability to locate the weapon that killed Musu, are enough grounds for acquittal.

The case, which is expected to last for several weeks, would tomorrow enter a critical juncture as it would begin the process of looking at the merit and demerit of the case. With such high stakes and widespread public interest, both the prosecution and defense must bring forward their most compelling arguments. 

The outcome of this case will undoubtedly have a profound impact on not only the accused individuals and as the trial continues, the country remains divided. Some still hold the former Chief Justice in high regard, finding it hard to reconcile her esteemed legal career with the accusations against her. Others demand swift justice for Musu and fully support the prosecution’s case.

Meanwhile, the indictments also alleged that one of the co-defendants, Gertrude Newton, provided a narrative that the police found to be unbelievable, the indictment noted. 

According to the indictment, Newton claimed that she briefly took the knife from the alleged assailant but was unable to prevent him from continuing the attack. 

The indictment states that Musu was subjected to a brutal stabbing, with nine wounds inflicted on various parts of her body. There were also signs on her face that investigators believe could have resulted from exposure to pepper spray.

The indictment alleges that Scott acknowledged in her statement to law enforcement that she discharged pepper spray on the supposed assailant's face. 

However, it claims that Scott did not escape through a window as alleged, but through a backdoor that she had the key to. Investigators also discovered that Newton and another co-defendant, Alice Johnson, returned to the house later that night and took several items, including the murder weapon or conspiracy evidence, in a concealed plastic bag.

The indictment further alleges that the defendants deliberately altered and concealed the blouse worn by Musu during the assault. 

They also prevented investigators from accessing a locked room in the house, which eventually had to be opened in the presence of Gertrude Newton's legal representatives. Bloodstains linked to the deceased were found in various parts of the room, along with a torn bra believed to belong to Charloe Musu.

The defendants are accused of showing a callous disregard for Charloe's life by not promptly taking her to the hospital after the alleged stabbing. Instead, they allegedly used the time to create a false narrative, claiming that they had witnessed a man inside the house. 

The indictment further claims that Gertrude Newton intentionally created a delay to allow people to enter the house, instructing a security guard to break a window and facilitate their escape.

Meanwhile, lawyers representing the defendants last week 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 defendants’ legal team 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 demonstrates 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.”