Liberia: Jurors Question Video Evidence in Koffa Capitol Arson Trial

Monrovia – Jurors at Criminal Court “A” on Tuesday raised serious doubts about the credibility of video evidence presented by the prosecution in the ongoing Capitol Building arson trial involving former House Speaker Cllr. Jonathan Fonati Koffa and several co-defendants.

The concerns emerged during the testimony of the prosecution’s first witness, who presented a PowerPoint video purportedly showing defendant Thomas Etheridge participating in the alleged desecration of the Capitol Building, including the removal of chairs from the Joint Chamber.

During the presentation, a juror requested that the video be re-screened to allow for an independent assessment of its authenticity and clarity. Although still photographs extracted from the Liberia National Police (LNP) status report had already been marked and admitted into evidence, the court granted the request.

Presiding Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie ordered the video re-screened in open court. Defense counsel raised no objection.

However, immediately after the replay, jurors repeatedly questioned the witness, Wilson, asking whether the individual shown in the footage was indeed the same Thomas Etheridge standing trial. In response, the witness pointed to Etheridge in the courtroom. A juror, however, remarked that the person in the video appeared to be “a Chinese man,” casting further doubt on the identification. Wilson quickly dismissed the observation, suggesting the juror was mistaken.

Judge Willie also questioned the witness about inconsistencies in his testimony, particularly regarding the number of defendants involved in the case. While only 11 defendants are currently on trial, the witness named additional individuals—including Patrick Saah Alie, Representative Priscilla Cooper, and Representative Jerry Yorgbor—whom he said had been charged and turned over to the state for prosecution.

Following the inconsistencies, the witness was discharged from the stand, and Judge Willie instructed the prosecution to produce its second witness. Instead, prosecutors filed a submission seeking a continuance, arguing that their next witness was unprepared and not present within the court’s jurisdiction.

Defense lawyers strongly objected, describing the request as a deliberate delay tactic aimed at punishing the defendants. They argued that the prosecution, which has indicated it intends to call about ten witnesses, should have been prepared to proceed and that the delay infringed on the defendants’ constitutional rights, including their right to freedom of movement.

After hearing arguments from both sides, Judge Willie granted the prosecution’s motion for a continuance. He ordered the trial to resume on Friday, December 26, 2025, with the testimony of the prosecution’s second witness.