Monrovia, Liberia – The First Judicial Circuit Criminal Court “D” has cleared a major procedural hurdle in the prosecution of Abraham Jalloh, also known as “HP,” and his co-defendants, ruling that statements he made during a police investigation can be used as evidence in the ongoing armed robbery trial.
Presiding Judge Mameita Jabateh-Sirleaf issued the ruling on Monday, August 17, 2026, after rejecting a motion filed by the defense seeking to suppress Jalloh’s statements on grounds that his constitutional rights had allegedly been violated.
The court determined that investigators informed Jalloh of his Miranda rights before questioning and that he knowingly and voluntarily waived those rights. Based on that finding, the judge concluded that the statements met the requirements for admissibility.
The prosecution, represented in part by Cllr. Jonah A. Kerkulah, relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Wright Jr. v. Republic of Liberia (2010), along with a police charge sheet dated February 17, 2026, to defend the legality of the statements.
Defense counsel Cllr. Juah D. Bestman of the Public Defender’s Office challenged the prosecution’s position, arguing that Jalloh’s rights had not been properly protected. The defense also raised questions concerning jurisdiction.
Judge Jabateh-Sirleaf, however, limited the proceedings to the armed robbery matter before the court, denied the suppression motion and directed that the criminal trial continue.
Jalloh and the other defendants are facing charges of armed robbery, aggravated assault and criminal conspiracy stemming from alleged incidents between April 2025 and February 2026.
According to the indictment, the accused allegedly used firearms and knives during attacks on residents in Zubah Town. In one incident, prosecutors allege that US$875 and L$49,000 were taken from a shop operated by Aboubacar Diallo.
A separate allegation involves an attack on Decontee Krakue while she was inside her vehicle.
The court’s latest decision does not determine the defendants’ guilt or innocence. Instead, it clears the way for the prosecution to rely on the disputed statements as the trial moves forward.
The case is expected to resume following the issuance of a notice of assignment.
