Lawyers representing several foreign nationals and a Liberian in the ongoing US$100 million cocaine case at Criminal Court ‘C’ in Monrovia have alarmed over the display and introduction of two Samsung phones as additional evidence to prove the guilt of the defendants
Counsels for the defendants prayed Judge Blamo Dixon to deny the application that the phones be displayed in open court via a projector that has been brought forward by prosecution to clarify and enlighten their minds to the fact finder of the case (the jurors).
The defense team said the phones to be displayed in court constitute a violation of the rights of the defendants against self-incrimination and therefore is unconstitutional.
“The defendants said the phones subject of this application has never been display, or paraded or brought to the knowledge of the defendants throughout the processing of investigation, the preliminary at the City Court, the discovery proceeding in this court, and as such the said phone constitute a surprise to the defense which is contrary to the Criminal Procedure Law,” stated defense lawyers.
They argued that according to the testimony of state witness in person of Larry S. Brown, the said phones were seized from defendant Malen Conte on October 1, 2022.
They indicated that from that up to now, the phones have been in the custody of the witness on the stand in person of Brown who is said to have exercised uninterrupted control over the phones but that constitutes a bridge in the chain of custody.
The defense revealed that in this case, there is no determination as to the witness or any other person of the Prosecution who might have broken the passcode of the defendant’s phones and gain access to said phones and may have inserted whatever material they decided to insert in order to implicate the defendants.
Defendant lawyers also said if the phones had been presented to or shared with the defense prior to now, the defendants could and would have move to suppress evidence because the said evidence was gathered unconstitutionally against the interest of the defendants.
The defendants maintained that to display the contents of the phones to reflect photography showing association between the defendants and Mr. Augustavo Henrique, the Brazilian national who is now beyond the bailiwick of the court and have been separated from the defendants, and is to be tried separately from the defendants, the same would work prejudice and injury to the right and interest of the defendants and should therefore be disallowed.
