Executive Summary
- Defense attorneys allege the prosecution withheld a report by Minnesota-based fire experts that contradicts the state’s case.
- The international report reportedly criticizes the Liberia National Fire Service investigation as incomplete and scientifically flawed.
- Police investigators admitted under cross-examination that no formal voice analysis was conducted on key audio evidence.
- The court has not yet ruled on whether the disputed international report will be admitted into evidence.
Defense lawyers representing the accused in the high-profile Capitol Building arson trial have formally accused the Government of Liberia of withholding a critical investigative report authored by international fire experts. During court proceedings on Tuesday, the defense argued that the prosecution failed to turn over findings from a Minnesota-based team that reportedly identify significant flaws in the state’s official investigation.
According to defense counsel, the suppressed report was commissioned by the Liberian government and submitted to Police Inspector General Gregory Coleman in March 2025. The document, authored by retired Fire Chiefs Jerry Streich, Ken Prillaman, and Mark Lynde, allegedly characterizes the Liberia National Fire Service (LNFS) report as “incomplete, inaccurate, and inconsistent with modern fire science.” The defense contends that the prosecution has repeatedly objected to the introduction of this material, effectively excluding it from the evidentiary record.
Excerpts cited by the defense in court claim the international experts found the LNFS investigation lacked essential data regarding firefighting operations and forensic evidence collection. The international team reportedly stated that the local agency’s findings contained conclusions unsupported by best-practice investigative tactics. The defense argues that the exclusion of this document raises serious concerns regarding prosecutorial transparency and the defendants’ right to a fair trial.
Scrutiny of the state’s case intensified during the cross-examination of Assistant Commissioner of Police Rafael Wilson, the Chief Investigator of the Liberia National Police Crime Services Department. When pressed by defense attorneys, Wilson acknowledged he could not recall the name of the international expert who assisted local authorities. Furthermore, regarding audio evidence allegedly implicating defendant Dixon Seboe, Wilson admitted that no formal voice analysis had been conducted by a qualified expert, despite the prosecution’s reliance on the recording.
Wilson confirmed under oath that Seboe has consistently denied involvement in the incident. The investigator testified that Seboe voluntarily provided a statement indicating he learned of the fire only after it had occurred. The court, presided over by Judge Roosevelt Willie, has yet to rule on the admissibility of the international report, a decision that could significantly alter the trajectory of the proceedings.
Procedural Integrity and Due Process
The allegation that the state suppressed potentially exculpatory evidence touches upon fundamental principles of justice and due process standards observed internationally. If proven, the withholding of evidence favorable to the defense could challenge the validity of the proceedings and raise questions regarding the comprehensive nature of the state’s investigation. The court’s subsequent ruling on the admissibility of the independent expert review will likely serve as a pivotal moment in establishing the evidentiary threshold for the trial. It is important to note that all individuals charged in this case are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
