As Miss Liberia Runner-Up, Kindness Wilson’s Simple Assault Drags On
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
Criminal Court “A’ at the Temple of Justice presided by its resident judge Roosevelt Z. Willie has given a two-day ultimatum to Monrovia City Court magistrate Ben L. Barco to allow the private prosecuteix Jumel Cox to prove the authenticity of her video recording produced in court during the alleged physical assault on campus,
The video was earlier denied by Magistrate Ben L. Barco because it was done illegally.
This Summary Proceeding was filed against the Stipendiary Magistrate Ben L. Barco of the Monrovia City Court.
Recently, the Monrovia City Court issued a writ of Arrest on Miss Liberia Kindness Wilson for the crimes of simple assault, disorderly conduct and menacing. The arrest order was issued on Monday, March 31,2025 by the court presided over by its Stipendiary Magistrate Ben L. Barco and other Associates Magistrates, Why Is Miss Liberia Being Ordered Arrested? – News Public Trust
According to the Petitioner in the latest twist of this case, she is the complainant in the above charges and informed the Court that while testifying on the direct in the Court below, she testified to a video and when it was time to play the said video, she was prevented from admitting and playing the video recordings based on objection made by the Defense, which objection was sustained by the presiding Magistrate.
It is this ruling of the Magistrate, the Petitioner wants overturn and the video admitted into evidence for which she filed this Summary Proceedings against the Stipendiary Magistrate.
In response to the Petition, the Respondent Magistrate through his Counsels informed the Court that the video recording which the Petitioner seeks to be played in Court and subsequently admitted into evidence was generated through the social media and has been in the public domain for weeks and the alleged video recorder cannot be identified and was never brought to Court by the Petitioner to authenticate the video as the Court lacks the capacity to verify the authenticity of the video recording.
The Court having listened to the parties and the arguments put forth, ask one question and, that is:
Should the video recording be played and admitted into evidence?
Under the Civil Procedure Law, Chapter 25, subsection 25.5, titled “Burden of Proof”, quote “the burden of proof rests on the party who alleges a fact except that when the subject matter of negative averment lies peculiarly within the knowledge of the other party”.
As per this law, it is the Petitioner/Private Prosectrix that has the burden of proof to her, besides the verbal evidence, she wants to produce video evidence that was prove the allegation levied against the Respondent/Defendant, which according to taken during the commission of the crime.
While it is true that the person or photographer who took the photo needs to be brought to Court to verify the authenticity of said video, the Court cannot out rightly deny the playing and admission of the video.
in the interest of justice and fair play, but rather allow Petitioner/Private Prosecutrix an opportunity to produce the photographer/video recorder.
In order words, the Magistrate should have allowed the Petitioner/ Private Prosecutrix one or two days to bring the video recorder/photographer to Court to testify as to whether this is the video, he/she recorded during the commission of the crime.
In view therefore, the Magistrate is hereby ordered to allow the Petitioner/ Private Prosecutrix at most two (2) days to bring the video recorder/photographer to Court to authenticate as to whether the video recording being
produced into evidence is the video that he/she recorded.
He/she should be allowed to so do since the Petitioner/ Private Prosectrix has the burden of prove and according to the Petitioner/ Private Prosecutrix, the video is part of the proof to show that the Respondent/Defendant committed the crime of Simple Assault, Menacing and Disorderly Conduct.