Capitol Hill, Monrovia – In response to a formal request by state prosecutors who expressed doubts about the impartiality and integrity of the empaneled jurors, the Criminal Court “A” dismissed the entire jury panel in the continuing Capitol Building arson case.
On Friday, January 2, 2026, Presiding Judge Roosevelt Z. Willie granted the motion in open court, directing the jurors to be immediately removed and a new jury selection procedure to begin. Only a few days had passed since the court’s ruling regarding potential prejudice and outside meddling by panel members.
It is recalled that the prosecution filed a motion on Monday, December 29, 2025, asking the court to disband the current jury. The prosecution claims that the current venire of trial/petit jury has shown itself to be incapable of rendering impartial, independent, and unbiased verdicts in the current Capitol Building Arson trial.
They argue that during the jury’s questioning on Monday, December 22, 2025, the 36th day of the jury’s sitting, it was clearly observed that a significant portion of the fourteen trial jurors displayed actions and behaviors that suggested they lacked the resolve and capacity to make their own decisions;
The jurors were clearly seen exchanging questions and consulting with one another prior to questioning Chief Superintendent Rafael A. Wilson of the Liberia National Police, the prosecution’s first witness, during the previously mentioned period.
The state attorneys added, “Those exchanges raise serious questions about whether the current venire of petit/trial jurors can render an independent and impartial verdict, consistent with law and the weight of the evidence to be produced during the pendency of this very important trial.”
The state cited Section 19 of the Liberian government’s Judicial Branch’s Jury Procedures Manual, which states: “Sequestration is the isolation of a jury to avoid accidental or deliberate tainting.” A court may order a jury to be sequestered in order to prevent others from influencing members of the jury through undue persuasion, threats, or bribes, even though sequestration is uncommon. Publicity surrounding a trial and interested parties may interfere with juror neutrality.
In their motion, the prosecution claimed that although the latter argument is valid and lawful, it becomes far riskier for a transparent and unadulterated trial where the jurors’ obvious lack of resolve to render an independent verdict.
Additionally, on Monday, December 22, 2025, during the 36th Jury Sitting, jury man J30-9863 asked the prosecution’s first witness to replay the November 10, 2024, audio/video recording that showed the desecration of the Joint Chambers of the National Legislature, to which the witness had previously testified. The prosecution maintains adamantly and sternly that some trial jurors’ prior behavior was insufficient to render their service in these proceedings as worthless and detrimental to the prosecution’s case.
The prosecution further stated in her motion that, in response to the witness’s response, jury member J30-9863 came to the conclusion that the person in the video is a Chinese man rather than Etheridge. Defense attorneys responded to the prosecution’s motion by stating that jurors are allowed to ask clarifying questions and that doing so shows attention to detail rather than improper behavior.
They went on to characterize the prosecution’s accusations as “false, misleading, and unsupported by evidence,” contending that juror dissatisfaction did not satisfy the legal requirements for the unusual remedy of disbanding a jury. The defense went on to describe the motion as an unjustified assault on the jury panel’s integrity and, inadvertently, on the authority of the court that selected and instructed the jury. They underlined that there is no proof that any juror was coerced, intimidated, or tampered with throughout the trial.
In response to the prosecution’s referral to a particular juror, the defense contended that the questions posed were neither unlawful nor biased and that the juror’s obligation to evaluate the evidence and seek clarification in the pursuit of justice was perfectly within their purview.
Additionally, the defense cautioned that the prosecution’s attempt to politicize juror questioning is unprecedented and goes against the fundamentals of a fair trial, and that such actions could erode public trust in the legal system. “When juror impartiality is questioned, a fair trial cannot proceed,” said Judge Willie. This court is dedicated to guaranteeing the transparent administration of justice.
The 2023 fire that destroyed portions of the Capitol Building and raised suspicions of politically motivated sabotage is the source of the arson case. Numerous people have been charged with arson, criminal mischief, and conspiracy after being indicted. The trial has been temporarily suspended due to the jury’s disbandment. In an effort to rebuild trust in the trial process, the court is anticipated to start screening potential jurors in the upcoming days.
The defense and prosecution have both stated that they are prepared to move on after a fresh jury is seated. The case is still being widely watched by the public, who see it as a significant test of Liberia’s judicial independence in the face of growing political unrest. Due to the disbandment, the trial, which had only begun the witness presenting phase, will now be put on hold until the court conducts a new jury selection and vetting procedure.
The lawsuit concerns the inexplicable Capitol Building fire that occurred in 2023, causing damage to important parliamentary chambers and raising concerns about security lapses and political interference. Arson, criminal conspiracy, and destruction of public property are among the allegations brought against a number of people.
The high-stakes case, which has garnered national attention because of its connections to political instability and claims of state participation, is anticipated to become much more tense as a result of the jury reset.
According to court officials, a new jury is anticipated to be assembled in the next few days, and the trial will start up right away. The defense has demanded openness and justice but has not challenged the court’s decision. In the meantime, defense attorneys have filed an appeal with Liberia’s Supreme Court while simultaneously urging the lower court to approve a bill that would free the incarcerated defendants.
Reported by: Bennie Bravo Johnson
