“I Have Done” Nothing Wrong with Cllr. Sherman’s Bribery Case”

1
217
Judge Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay on his way to the Supreme Court

Ex-Criminal Court’C’ Judge Gbeisay defends against US Treasury’s Report

One of several judges that handled Senator Varney Sherman’s bribery case before the US Treasury Department accused them (judges) of receiving a bribe from Sherman to rule in his favor, on Tuesday, March 16, surfaced at the Civil Law Court where he provided clarity on his judgment.

Even though the Treasury’s report did not mention his name or the role he may have played, Judge Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay, during the formal opening of the sixth Judicial Circuit Court, Civil Law Court for Montserrado County, disclosed that he was one of the judges that found Sherman not guilty.

It can be recalled that on December 9, 2020, the United States Treasury Department in a statement captioned “Treasury Sanctions Corrupt Actors in Africa and Asia” placed the Global Magnitsky Designation on several individuals in some countries including Liberia.

In the statement, the Treasury Department declared that Counselor Varney Sherman, a prominent lawyer and Senator of Grand Capemount County and chairman of Senate Judiciary Committee, was named as one person who bribed judges to rule in his favor.

The report further claimed that Sherman offered bribes to multiple judges associated with his trial in the 2010 bribery scheme and had an undisclosed conflict of interest with the judge who ultimately returned a not guilty verdict in his favor in 2019.

The statement said Cllr Sherman had routinely paid judges to decide cases in his favor and that his acts of bribery demonstrated a larger pattern of behavior to exercise influence over the Liberian Judiciary and the Ministry of Justice.

However, addressing his audience that by large comprised judges and lawyers, Gbeisay said he has been wishing to seize any occasions to clear his innocence.

“Having cleared my chest, let me remind all lawyers that, a wise man changes only when he realizes that he is doing the wrong.”

 Gbeisay referenced a report in the New Democrat Newspaper where it said, “Label some Judges as corrupt,” mentioning his name as the judge the report was talking about.
“This paper has not been able to conduct proper investigation as to which Judge is corrupt, but links to me the Sable Mining Case, which I partly handled barely (9) months following my appointment as a judge to be one of the corrupt judges because I simply insisted on two principles of Law,” Gbeisay noted.

Gbeisay named: Can Nieklerk as one the principles.

He explained that Hans Van Niekierk swore affidavit from South Africa alleging that he bribed the principal defendant in the case and he should be made to appear in person or through a live podcast so that the defense lawyers will have an opportunity to cross-examine him.

Gbeisay said, his reliance was (Article 21 H) of the current Constitution of the Republic of Liberia, which requires an accused to confront his accuser in a court of law.

“I also insisted then that under the Hague Convention, which both South Africa and Liberia are signatories to, for a document from either nation to be admitted into evidence in a court of competent jurisdiction, such document must be signed by the Secretary of State of the country the document originated from,” Gbeisay emphasized.

So, Gbeisay explained that the court under his gavel rejected the admission of the affidavit from South Africa, which did not meet the above requirement. 

However, Gbeisay said the prosecution filed a petition for Certiorari and by the time the Supreme Court returned the case to the lower court, “My assigned term was over. Though the Supreme Court overruled my decision, I still stand by my position today.”

Gbeisay believes that it was a matter of how he understood the law and has nothing to do with bribery, “Yet the New Democrat Newspaper insinuated that Judge Gbeisay is one of the Corrupt Judges reference by the US treasury Department Report.”

Interestingly, Gbeisay further defended his judgment by saying that the United States of America is a signatory to the Hague convention and has for the purpose of complying with the convention open offices in most of the states and constituted authority to sign legal document emanating from the US to other jurisdiction around the world.

1 COMMENT

  1. It is said in Latin….“Acquior est dispositio legis quam hominis“…which in English is translated …“The law’s disposition is more impartial than man’s“!

    In other words, the prime purpose of THE RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION AND CROSS EXAMINATION is to protect and assure a fair trial. The right of an accused to reasonable notice to a charge against him or her and the opportunity to be heard in his or her defense is a right to his day in court are basic to our system of jurisprudence, and these rights include as a minimum a right to examine the witness against him or her, to offer testimony, and to be represented by counsel.

    Thus in a constitutional sense, it is essential to a criminal case that evidence developed against a defendant come from the witness stand in a courtroom where full judicial protection is afforded, and that the defendant be permitted to confront his or her accusers and to cross examine those who testify against him or her. For the purpose of crosss examination is to reveal the truth and expose the falsity of testimony and other evidence offered at a criminal trial.

    But the prosecution failed to stand up to these jurisprudential obligations, because THE THEN STOOGE PHILIP BANKS at the Supreme Court and his accomplices …the prosecution were mere zombies for the then President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf who was carrying out her personal vendetta against those who according to her detested or sons senatorial bid from being campaigned by the Unity Party.

    Banks and his accomplices as a matter of proof of their reckless and lawless mockery of justice could not even provide the documentation from the Secretary of State of South Africa…a documentation which would have served in lieu of the presence of the accuser to be cross examined!

    Accordingly, in the first place, this YELLOW JOURNALISM HEADLINE is simply intended to mislead as a matter of personal vendetta by the editor of this news outlet against Senator Varney Sherman, for the accusation against the defendants was proven to be false with overwhelming evidence and proof beyond all reasonable doubts. TRUTH AND ACCURACY ARE THE SPIRIT AND LIFEBLOOD OF JOURNALISM!!!

    The fact that a newspaper may be accused of committing slander, libel, or any other defamatory violation, crime, or offense, but the newspaper found not liable or not guilty, does not and should not in any way label the nomenclature of said case “Daily Observer Defamation case“. TRUTH AND ACCURACY ARE THE SPIRIT AND LIFEBLOOD OF JOURNALISM!!!

    It is disreputable on the part of this paper or any other paper that they will conduct themselves in such an inferior and zombic manner to the glaring irregularity of an impeached government which prior to instructing insurrection on its own country would make accusations for which it has absolutely not a single evidence. What heights of reckless lawlessness, and disgraceful inferiority complex!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here