PHOTO: The late Juergen Schedema
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
KAKATA, Liberia- Defense lawyers of the three defendants in the ongoing German national Juergen Schenman murder trial at the 13th Judicial Circuit Court here in Margibi County have filed an eleven-count motion for the assigned Circuit Court Judge Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay to recuse himself from the ongoing case, citing legal grounds.
German national, Juergen Schedema, Manager of the International Consultant Company (ICC), was discovered dead early Wednesday morning, January 22, 2020 at the back of the log yard, which is located in Big Joe Town – more than a mile away from the port city of Buchanan, some 88 miles from Liberia’s capital.
The trial commenced during the 2020 November term of court after the defendants pleaded not guilty in to their crimes charged thereby joining issue with the state.
The defendants are trial for allegedly killing the German national in big Joe town Buchanan City, Grand Bassa County are Emmanuel Kollie, alias Porleh, Joseph Cole, alias Joe Cole and James Kollie, alias Depree.
They were indicted for the crimes of murder, armed robbery and criminal conspiracy.
The suspected killers of the German national
Defense Lawyers Attys. Peter G. King and Afred Holmes claimed in their submission, that “on the 17th day of December 2021, your Honor Judge Gbeisay had a private meeting with jurors in your chambers without any representative from the defense team present and said act on your part is deemed as interfering with the trier of the facts that is to say the jury for which your honor should rescue yourself from this case.”
But the motion has been resisted by state prosecution headed the Margibi County Attorney Dedeh Johnson Wilson, who requested court to deny and dismiss said motion filed the defense lawyers.
Cllr. Wilson said the motion filed by the defense lawyers is meant to delay and buffle the proceedings or justice adding that this case the defense lawyers have been playing tactics when the case is assistant for hearing.
Ruling on the motion filed by the defense Lawyers, Judge Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay said there were three issues raised by the defense lawyers.
The defense accused him of holding secret meeting with the jurors on December 17 ,2021 in chamber during the morning hours.
They claimed that the judge requested for the telephone numbers and names of jurors.
That the defense lawyers accused he Judge Gbeisay of making remark at the commencement of the trial that the entire world is watching us and the outcome of the case will either encourage or discourage investors.
But Judge Gbeisay defending himself said, at no point in time he ever held secret meeting with jurors especially when court and correction officers including party litigants and lawyers were all at the court.
More to that Judge Gbeisay questioned the defense lawyer Peter G. King as to who was there as his witness when the secret meeting was going on? The defense lawyer Atty.King said the defendants and some correction officers but he couldn’t be specific to point the main correction officer.
The judge therefore dismissed his claimed on lack of proof.
On the accusation that he requested jurors numbers and names, Judge Gbeisay added that usually, when the jury management done with collecting the names and numbers of jurors, it can be turned over to the judge who is the head of the court and he sees nothing wrong with it.
As for the other issue that the whole world is watching this trial, he yes he said it because it there are lot of murderers and so many bodies have discovered in the streets and bedrooms and a foreign national being killed on the Liberia soil means a lot and people are watching to see how our justice system work and therefore see nothing wrong with said statement.
Meanwhile, the defense lawyer Atty. King took exception to the Judge ruling and promised to take advantage of the statute controlling.
Details of the Defense Lawyers’ Motion calling for Judge Gbeisay’s recusal
“Further to count one above, movants avers and say that the practice and procedure in this jurisdiction hoary with age governing jury trial is clear that when the jurors are sworn in by the court, no party in said proceedings, that is to say the judge, counsels for prosecution and defendants are allowed to have private discussion/ meeting with juror except in open court where all of the parties are present for transparency and fair trial.
Count three says further to two above, movants aver and say that his Honor Gbeisay ignored the procedure and had meeting with the jurors in his chambers and in the mind of the movants they will not have free and fair trial under his Honor Judge Gbeisay gavel ship and transparent administration of Justice.
Movants also aver that on 17th day of December 2021, his honor Judge Gbeisay requested the jury management to submit the names and telephone numbers of the trier of the facts that is to say the trial jury and same was done in open court and his honor Judge Gbeisay further informed court that the jury’s mobile phone numbers will be monitored by you(Judge Gbeisay) to determine calls made and received and for what purpose. That in the mind of the movants this amount to interfering and micro-managing the trier of facts in these proceedings for which his honor Gbeisay should rescue himself from further presiding over this case.
Movants motion count five added that on the 17th day of December 2021, his honor Judge Gbeisay in a clear tone told court that the whole world is watching these proceedings and any decisions from these proceedings will either discourage or encourage investors to come to Liberia to invest and in the minds of the movants is clearly show that his honor Judge Gbeisay had already taken a side in this case in favor of the prosecution and also prejudicial and comprises his neutrality as the presiding judge in these proceedings for which movants want he (Gbeisay) to rescue himself from presiding on their case.
In count five above, movants aver and say your Honor’s statement have the propensity to impress upon the minds of the trial jurors to bring a guilty verdict against the movants for which his honor Judge Gbeisay should rescue himself from these proceedings.
The movant further submit that his honor Judge Gbeisay who should exercise cool neutrality and impartiality in presiding over the trial has taken a side as evidence of the private meeting held with jurors on the 17th of December 2021 and his honor Judge Gbeisay statement in open court on said date that the outcome of these proceedings will either discourage or encourage investors from coming to Liberia are clear manifestation that his honor Judge Gbeisay had taken a side for which he should rescue himself from further presiding over these proceedings.
Count nine says that behavior of his honor Judge Gbeisay as explained in count one through five hereinabove of movants motion clearly demonstrate that those three cardinal principles which supposed to exist to give credit and tolerance to the decrees of judicial tribunals which are named as impartiality, disinterestedness and fairness as reflected in the case Bestman vs Dunbar which quoted in count eight hereinabove does not exist in this trial which you are currently presiding for all the reasons as mentioned in count one through hereinabove. You have demonstrated partiality as well as unfairness for the same reasons as stated hereinabove and for these and many other reasons you are not to further preside over this trial and movants want you to rescue yourself from further presiding over this trial in the interest of transparent justice and fairness.
Laws citation Richard V. McGill et al(1937)LRSC 24;6LLR 81(1937) and Bestman v Dunbar (1972)LRSC 27;21LLR 227(1972).
Movants submit that from the laws cited hereinabove, it is quite clear that a trial judge should exercise impartiality and fairness in his handling of a trial but in the instant case, your honor’s decision to make a conclusive statement to impress upon the minds of the trial jury to the effect that such statement prejudices the right of the movants/Defendants show your honor partiality and unfairness in handling this trial for which movants request your honor from further presiding over this trial as judge.
Movants say that they will not get free, fair and transparent trial under your honor gavel ship taken into consideration all that herein stated of counts one through eleven of movants’ motion, and your honor it seriously compromises neutrality in these proceedings and shows your total partiality against the movants/defendants in these proceedings in favor of the prosecution for which this motion for recusal will lie in this instant case.
Wherefore and in view of the foregoing, movants most respectfully prayed your honor and this honorable court to grant movants’ motion for recusal of your honor for all of the reasons stated hereinabove and further grant unto movants such relief justice and rights that may demand in the premises.”