"Wherefore...they are not guilty":

JUDGE GBENEWELLEH DECLARES TREASON SUSPECTS FREE MEN

Political Editor Sherman C. Seequeh and Reporter Ora Garway who watched the suspenseful delivery of the 4-hour-14-minute verdict describe how and why Charles Julu and Andrew Dorbor were purged of the felonious charge of treason.

Almost 40 minutes in the largely extemporaneous presentation of the Julu-Dorbor freedom verdict, a bystander chuckled and said “this man [the judge] would be a fine novelist--a classic one.”

The bystander's observation was not an overstatement. Indeed, Peter W. Gbenewelleh in delivering the verdict demonstrated clear obsession for words, if not verbosity.

Some wearied observers murmured as the judge navigated the minute details of the issues, with some whispering to one another, wondering whether he would ever leave any fact and circumstance germane to the matter unsaid or undisclosed.

Another observer answered in whispers, “don't be surprise because this case is unique; he has got to do what he's doing because he's both the judge and jury; and it requires that he moved back and forward on the heap of facts and fantasies and accumulated for near two years.”

And Judge Gbenewelleh did it amazingly without reading from a written verdict, first sequentially and later selectively.

As minutes turned into hours, and Judge Gbenewelleh had not said, “Whereof,” a portion of the swarms of unusual audience in attendance at the Criminal Court “A” who hadn't been following the matter appeared delighted knowing the details, while others who thought the verdict would have come in a few minutes were seemed consternated.

By the time the judge had hooted “Whereof” on the top of his voice after four full hours and a few minutes on his feet, the courtroom had already lost nearly 40 per cent of attendees, some of whom were on the ground floor idly chatting, probably waiting for loud shout of joy or loud shout of grunt from inside the court.

Nearly all observers of the Judgment Day oration, save journalists and legal practitioners, appeared to be sympathizers of the then indictees.

In the first 15 minutes of Gbenewelleh's verdict, the decorum which greeted his opening remarks gave way to shuffling sounds of locomotive observers, particularly those jamming the balcony of the courtroom.

As if the Judge's pronouncement of “Whereof” was a petition for calm, the court went dead silent, except for the shuffling of some attendees who rushed out, probably to announce to the huge crowds outside that the D-Minute of the D-Day was here.

In seconds, the courtroom was jostling again, though still resoundingly calm. But the rushing spectators arriving from outside were disappointed. Judge Gbenewelleh was not on his throne.

When he had said “Whereof” in loud tune, the judge took a sip from his large mineral water bottle which had already almost gone empty from intermittent gulping. Then he dropped on the stage before him the manual hand-fan he was endlessly brandishing either to keep himself intellectually refreshed or physically cool, and with seconds of whispers with his attendants or staff, he walked out of the podium.

There was murmuring; nearly an uproar. Most observers stood on their feet, gazing in the direction whence the judge had gone.

The Defense counsel appeared edgy. One of them, Cerenius Cephus, made a chase after what gossipers thought was a shadow of a prominent state prosecutor in the direction of the judge.

It was all exhilarated laughter when the Judge and attendants reappeared. Then he repeated, “Whereof…”

Judge Gbenewelleh's verdict, from start to finish, was hugely devastation to state prosecutors. So, despite the elongation of the presentation and deliberate display of suspense by the judge, the premise and trail of his expose were clear to even non-paralegals to predict a non-guilty ruling.

The judge minced no words in his disparagement and nullification of the evidences that formed state prosecution's cramp card for imposing treason charge on Charles Julu and Andrew Dorbor.

After an exhaustive analysis of the contentious issues and “facts” of the case, Judge Gbenewelleh said quite unequivocally that the state miserably failed to prove the charge of treason as laid in the September 25, 2007 indictment

“The party who alleges has the burden to prove; the burden of proof rest on prosecution to establish.”

“There is only one key issue that we need to look at critically in order to determine this entire trial,” Judge Gbenewelleh said. “And that key issue is whether or not prosecution has established sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt that would warrant the conviction of the defendants.”

The state's indictment, he reechoed, states that on diverse occasions, the defendants conspired, connived and planned to overthrow the elected government of President Sirleaf.

When he had quoted the state's indictment, the judge proceeded to access, one-by-one, the various dimensions of evidence provided during the marathon litigation.

The first had to do with an AFL leadership meeting.

He said the state adduced as evidence during the trial that the leadership of the disbanded AFL held series of meetings and set up a committee to seek their affairs and address their grievances.

According to him, the prosecution evidence also states that one of the meetings at Gen. Julu's Congo Town residence was never held due to lack of quorum.

He noted that the series of meetings held by the disbanded soldiers following the dissolution of the army did not in any way constitute any evidence of treason.

“The failure of the meeting at Gen. Julu's residence did not disclose to this court its nature since the meting was never held.”

“We shall now relate to the facts produced during the trial with relevant provision of law to determine whether the defendants did commit any act of treason,” Judge Gbenewelleh said.

Another contentious issue was the alleged visit of a Lebanese national, Jacob Karan, to the Congo Town residence of Charles Julu, at which time Julu allegedly introduced Karan to Dorbor and Ephraim Gaye and he Karan was asked to transport the both men to Ganta.

But the judge noted that Karan's testimony did not establish that he ever met Ephraim and Dorbor at the residence of Julu.

“There is no corroboration of prosecution's testimony regarding the present of Ephraim and Dorbor during the visitation of Karan,” the judged asserted.

“The only corroboration is that Karan hosted the two men at his own expense and gave them US$50 or L$3,000. Prosecution did not establish before this court that the US$50 given by Karan was in support of subversive activity; Karan did not testify about what transpired beyond Ganta, Nimba County .”

Another state prosecution allegation centered on an official of the National Security Agency (NSA), state witness James Kanneh, who the judge said told the Court that the NSA received information in January 2007 from its Ivorian counterpart of the arrest of Dorbor for subversive activity after which a team was dispatched to the Ivory Coast.

This witness' testimony, the judge pointed out, contradicts the testimony of another state witness Marc Amblah also of the NSA who testified that Dorbor was arrested in February 2007.

“This court wonders how Marc would arrive in the Ivory Coast in January 2007 when NSA received information in February 2007,” said Judge Gbenewelleh.

“This testimony of Marc creates a reasonable doubt as to the receipt of communication on February 2007 and his arrival in the Ivory Coast in January 2007.”

On another count of state “evidence,” Judge Gbenewelleh said in his verdict that prosecution established that Dorbor visited the Congo Town residence of Julu in early February 2007 and that Marc testified that Dorbor held a meeting with Ivorian regional commander Wright Delafosse in Guiglo, the Ivory Coast on February 1, 2007.

“This court says it is unthinkable, unbelievable and humanly impossible for Dorbor to visit Julu and at the same time be in a meeting in Ivory Coast with Delafosse,” the judge rubbishes another state evidence. “The testimony of Marc is contradicting and creates a serious doubt in the mind of this Court.”

There also was the “evidence” of the state regarding a “government insider witness,” Junior Gaye, who according to Judge Gbenewelleh testified that he received a phone call from Julu in December 2005 to overthrow the government during the inauguration day of the new government.

Junior Gaye, the judge noted, testified further that he later informed his father of such a plan.

According to him, his father advised him to report the incident to the police but he (Junior) decided to return to the Ivory Coast for fear of his life.

“Prosecution miserably failed to produce Junior's father or any other witnesses to corroborate the testimony of Junior,” the Judge dissected, observing that defense witness, Ephraim Gaye, who is a brother to Junior testified that Junior came to Monrovia after he administered sassywood to residents in Zleh Town , Grand Gedeh, causing deaths and was hunted by relatives of the victims.

“Ephraim's testimony negates allegations of Junior that he came to Monrovia to overthrow,” the Judge asserts. “The prosecution failed to bring a rebuttal witness to rebut the testimony of Ephraim.”

Regarding the testimony of Marc Amblah, the judge noted that Marc claimed an equipment was set up prior to the holding of the meeting with Dorbor and Delafosse and that the meeting was recorded and statements taken and given to Ivorian Chief Of Staff Tapei Kasarati.

On the state “evidence,” Judge Gbenewelleh, “Prosecution failed to produce before this court the video recording along with statement allegedly made. Thus, this court says prosecution failed to prove the charge as laid in the indictment of September 25, 2007” Judge Gbenewelleh averred.

Another issue of contention was the testimony of NSA personnel James Kanneh, who also testified that Junior was interviewed by the NSA and during the interview Junior said he was approached by his kinsmen [Krahns] for arms after the disarmament process and he told them he had no access to arms anymore.

The judge noted that Kanneh testified that Junior left Liberia for the Ivory Coast due to constant requests from his kinsmen for arms and that he (Junior) did not want to engage in military activity anymore.

On this issue, Judge Gbenewelleh said the interview was made after the arrest and detention of Dorbor and that the interview is devoid of any evidence alleging that Julu ever sent Dorbor to Ivory Coast to him so as to introduce him to Delafosse for arms.”

According to the judge, the interview of Junior that he had no access to arms anymore and is not interested in military activity creates a reasonable doubt in the minds of the court that he had access to arms in the Ivory Coast .

The Judge also debunked prosecution's evidence regarding Junior Gaye's testimony in which he alleged that he received a phone call from Armah Yulu and they were ready and they needed 200 AK-47 riffles and 3,000 military uniforms.

“This testimony by Junior creates serious doubt in the mind of the Court since Armah Yulu is not on trial and since the prosecution failed to avail another witness to confirm this allegation,” the judge said.

Then Judge Gbenewelleh touched on the testimony of prosecution that quoted Dorbor as confessing during an alleged investigation at the NSA. He also rubbished the “evidence” on account of the fact that it was inadmissible as it was not consistent with Article 21c of the Liberian Constitution of 1986, which states that the confession or statement made by an accused in the absence of his/her legal counsel cannot be held against him/her.

There was the contentious issue of Dorbor's arrest and investigation by Ivorian security forces.

Judge Gbenewelleh said the Court granted a motion to the prosecution for deposition which extended fact gathering to the Ivory Coast in an effort to take the testimony of the alleged arm dealer Delafosse and Kasarati who allegedly arrested Dorbor in that neighboring country.

“There was no deposition taken. This court says, therefore, that the failure of the state to take deposition of the alleged arm dealer and arresting officer creates another serious doubt in the mind of the court,” he said. “The absent of testimonies of these two top military officials which are material in this trial makes the entire evidence of prosecution insufficient.”

He pointed out that the testimonies of the two witnesses for which deposition was granted was to corroborate and establish sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt for the conviction of the defendants.

He added: “This court instead received an alleged investigative report instead of deposition; the delegation only proceeded to the Ivory Coast for deposition, in the absence of deposition there can be no evidence. This court says this purported report was never cross examined and is therefore incredible and has no legal bearing.”

At this point, the judge who had got on his feet probably to allow for gesticulation or to be fully heard in the absence of a public address system, said: “Where there is reasonable doubt in a criminal trial, it must operate in favor of the accused. Wherefore, and in view of the foregoing, it is the final judgment of this Court that retired Gen. Charles Julu and Col. Andrew Dorbor are not guilty.”

Those words of Judge Gbenewelleh triggered tumultuous uproar of jubilance amongst the crowds of people who stormed the Temple of Justice last Friday.

It took the combined efforts of local and expatriate security personnel to allow the Judge's final words, “…It is hereby ordered that these men be released from further detention and their freedoms restored without the pass of a day.”

The crowds went wild, and celebrations commenced in the halls of the Court.