Africa-Press – Liberia. The arson case involving former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Cllr Fonati Koffa and six other defendants, including three sitting lawmakers, was temporarily adjourned on Monday, due to a strange complaint for juror’s misconduct.
The juror misconduct allegations are raised by prosecution, specifically regarding a juror’s request to replay a video recording and identify the defendant.
Following the identification, the juror remarked that the individual shown in the video appeared to be a Chinese man and questioned whether the person in the footage and the defendant was the same.
The prosecution claims the juror’s actions constitute misconduct, potentially compromising the trial’s fairness.
The defense, however, sharply criticizes this move, calling it an attack on the jury’s integrity and arguing it’s an attempt to disband the entire jury. They are also pointing out that jurors asking questions is actually a good thing – it shows they’re engaged and want to understand the evidence better.
The defense argued that there is no evidence of any juror misconduct, intimidation, or outside influence, which is key to the prosecution’s motion to disband the jury.
However, Judge Roosevelt Willie expected to make a decision on Friday, January 2, 2026, that would be crucial in determining the trial’s next steps.
The judge would consider whether there is a reasonable apprehension that the jury might not have discharged its function according to law and evidence.
If the motion is granted, the current jury panel might be disbanded, and a new panel could be selected. On the other hand, if the motion is denied, the trial will likely proceed with the current jury.
Judge Willie has already removed one juror, Mulbah, citing her leadership role in the CDC creates a “propensity for bias”.
The defense argues this removal is unconstitutional, violating Article 17 of Liberia’s 1986 Constitution, which guarantees citizens the right to participate in civic duties without discrimination based on political affiliation.
According to a senior Supreme Court lawyer, in cases like this, judges typically investigate to determine if misconduct occurred and assess its impact.
“Possible outcomes include cautioning the jury, replacing the juror, or declaring a mistrial. The goal is to ensure the trial remains fair and impartial,” the lawyer emphasized.
The lawyer maintained that, as jurors are typically not allowed to request specific evidence to be replayed without the judge’s approval. But, in this case, the judge, the prosecution and the defense agreed to have the replayed of the recordings, after a request from the juror.
“Jurors are instructed not to discuss the case with each other until deliberations begin, and violating these instructions can be considered misconduct,” the lawyer noted.
Another lawyer injected that pointing out that jurors asking questions is actually a good thing – it shows they’re engaged and want to understand the evidence better.
The defense is also highlighting that there’s no evidence of any juror misconduct, intimidation, or outside influence, which is key to the prosecution’s motion to disband the jury.
But the lawyer said courts generally allow jurors to ask questions as a way to clarify points and ensure they have all the information needed to make an informed decision.
“This practice is a way to increase juror participation and understanding,” the lawyer noted.
The lawyer, however, suggested that the defense’s argument is solid – jurors have a duty to assess evidence and seek clarity, and their questions shouldn’t be politicized.
” In fact, courts have ruled that juror questioning can be a valuable tool in ensuring a fair trial, as long as it’s done properly,” the lawyer emphasized.
The key is whether the questions were legitimate attempts to understand the evidence or if they were prejudicial.
The prosecution’s attempt to politicize juror inquiry could undermine public confidence in the judicial process, as it may intimidate jurors from fulfilling their duties, the lawyer said.
The lawyer went on that the court’s primary concern would be to determine whether the juror’s actions compromised the trial’s integrity.
“If the prosecution’s motion is granted, the court might investigate the incident, potentially leading to the juror’s dismissal or, in extreme cases, a mistrial,” the lawyer noted.
It’s worth noting that jurors are expected to remain impartial and follow the court’s instructions, according to the lawyer.
The prosecution is raising concerns about potential juror misconduct, alleging that jurors may have been discussing the case among themselves during Wilson’s testimony.
However, the defense is pushing back, stating that there’s no concrete evidence to support these claims and urging the court to dismiss the motion.
As for disbanding the jury panel, it’s unclear what Judge Willie will decide, but he has emphasized ensuring a fair and impartial trial.
Judge Willie had previously denied the prosecution’s request to remove a juror, citing lack of evidence of bias or conflict of interest. In fact, the judge had ruled that the prosecution’s evidence, which included unauthenticated photographs from social media, was unreliable.
However, the prosecution had successfully had one juror, Antoinette Mulbah (J30-9550), removed after alleging she was a CDC affiliate, which could compromise her impartiality. The defense argued this was an attempt to stall proceedings and undermine the jury’s integrity.
For More News And Analysis About Liberia Follow Africa-Press
