MONROVIA — Liberian lawyer and criminal justice lecturer, Cllr. Jeremiah Samuel Dugbo, has clarified public misconceptions surrounding the release and subsequent rearrest of a suspect in a high-profile criminal matter, urging citizens to rely on constitutional principles rather than speculation circulating on social media.
In a public commentary, Cllr. Dugbo explained that, contrary to widespread claims, the suspect was not taken from the Liberia National Police headquarters, as suggested by a widely shared photograph. Instead, he said the individual was lawfully released by Criminal Court “C” following the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus after the court determined that the suspect’s constitutional rights had been violated.
According to Dugbo, the suspect was arrested on January 7, 2026, and held in police custody beyond the constitutionally permitted 48-hour period without being formally charged. His legal counsel subsequently petitioned the court for habeas corpus, leading to the suspect’s release in line with constitutional and statutory safeguards.
However, Dugbo noted that the release did not terminate the criminal process. He disclosed that immediately after the suspect exited the court premises, a writ was served on him by a Sheriff of the Monrovia City Court, formally charging him with gang rape and kidnapping.
The lawyer emphasized that public attention should not be fixated on the circumstances captured in photographs or on social media narratives, but rather on an accurate understanding of legal procedures. He explained that the use of handcuffs during an arrest is left to the discretion of arresting officers and is guided by factors such as the suspect’s conduct, level of cooperation, and prevailing security considerations.
“The presence or absence of handcuffs does not establish guilt or innocence, nor does it determine the legality of an arrest,” Dugbo stressed, adding that a compliant suspect who poses no apparent risk may lawfully be arrested without restraints.
Cllr. Dugbo also addressed public reactions to the suspect’s demeanor, particularly claims arising from observations that the accused appeared to be laughing while entering court. He cautioned that facial expressions or behavior during arrest are unreliable indicators of guilt or innocence.
While some observers may interpret such conduct as arrogance or a lack of remorse given the seriousness of the charges, Dugbo explained that others may view it as a psychological response to stress, fear, shame, or guilt. In criminal justice, he said, demeanor evidence is inherently subjective and cannot be determinative.
He concluded by reminding the public that guilt or innocence can only be established through evidence presented and tested in a court of law, not through social media commentary or personal interpretations of a suspect’s behavior.
