Liberia: Pathologists’ Reports Conflict Over Identity of Charloe Musu’s Murderer

Reports of diverging accounts have emerged from pathologists involved in the autopsy inquest into the alleged murder of Charloe Musu, who was found dead in the home of her foster mother, Cllr. Gloria Musu Scott.

The testimony provided by Liberian forensic pathologist, Dr. Benedict Kolee, who served as a prosecution rebuttal witness, contradicted the findings of another pathologist, Dr. Matthias Okoye. During the trial on Monday, December 18, Dr. Kolee asserted that the gender of Charloe’s killer could not be definitively established, while Dr. Okoye maintained that evidence he uncovered during the forensic examination indicated the perpetrator was male. This discrepancy arose because Dr. Kolee initially suggested that the murderer was female.

However, when he attempted to disprove Okoye’s testimony about a female perpetrator, Kolee acknowledged that multiple individuals had come into contact with Charloe’s body, potentially leading to a transfer of DNA from those individuals onto her body.

“The late Charloe Musu came in contact with many people, some of whom touched her and others may have backed her. In the process, many parts of her body, including her extremities (both hands and feet) came into contact, potentially leading to the exchange of her DNA on parts of her body,” Kolee said.

Kolee emphasized that his testimony was based on the police forensic reports, as it was the police pathologist who performed the autopsy, not himself, he said in response to defense lawyers’ questioning.

“It was the police pathologist who conducted the autopsy on Charloe and not me,” he said. 

Kolee attributed the contamination of Charloe’s body prior to his examination to individuals who had touched her without proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). 

“Under normal medical practice, during the conduct of laboratory examination or autopsy, it is medically adequate or professional for those within the premise of the examination to have on their PPEs, to include hand gloves,” he said. 

He stressed the importance of wearing PPE, including gloves, during autopsy and laboratory examinations. Regarding the fingernail analysis, Dr. Kolee stated that the contamination made it impossible to identify whether the DNA profile belonged to a male or female. 

But Okoye, an experienced forensic pathologist, last week provided new information in the trial of Charloe Musu’s murder, which has the potential to sway the trajectory of this landmark murder case. He said evidence found during his forensic examination indicates that the perpetrator is male, contradicting the government’s earlier claims that the murderers were all female.

Dr. Okoye, who specializes in DNA testing and bodily fluids, testified that his examination of the deceased’s body, including multiple swabs and samples, revealed the presence of male DNA. This DNA profile did not match any of the defendants, including the accused Cllr. Scott.

He was the second pathologist who examined the deceased’s body. During the testimony, Okoye demonstrated on a flip chart about how DNA testing is used to determine the source of bodily fluids. DNA testing can determine the biological sex of the person it came from, and whether an individual can be excluded as a match to the DNA. 

“The purpose of testing was to find male or female DNA,” Okoye said. “All the swabs showed male DNA.”

In addition to analyzing the body, Okoye conducted DNA testing on various items from Cllr. Scott’s home, finding bloodstains that matched the DNA profile of a male.

“The blood that was found through chemical testing matched the DNA profile of a male,” Okoye said.

The defendants, which include Cllr. Scott, Rebecca Youdeh, Alice Johnson, and Gertrude Newton, are being tried in connection with Charloe’s murder. Dr. Okoye’s testimony followed that of Dr. Kolee, who had conducted a bloodstain analysis previously. Dr. Kolee’s analysis indicated a DNA profile consistent with a female. The trial is set to continue on Thursday with further testimony from subpoenaed witnesses.