MONROVIA – A murder case that gripped Sinoe County for nearly two years, stirred public outrage, and raised serious questions about justice and accountability has now reached a decisive conclusion, with the court imposing the heaviest penalty under Liberian law. The case, marked by disturbing details and a complex trial process, tested both legal procedure and community patience before its final resolution. THE ANALYST reports, the Third Judicial Circuit Court in Sinoe County has sentenced 40-year-old Armah Dassay to life imprisonment for the killing of Isaac Kpakgpor, relying heavily on circumstantial evidence and the legal doctrine of “last seen” to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The Third Judicial Circuit Court in Sinoe County has sentenced Armah Dassay, 40, to life imprisonment for the murder of Isaac Kpakgpor, bringing closure to a case that has drawn widespread public attention and legal scrutiny since 2023.
The ruling was delivered by Resident Circuit Judge, His Honor Wesseh Alphonsus Wesseh, following a full trial that culminated in a unanimous guilty verdict by the jury on March 18, 2026, after more than a month of proceedings.
The conviction came after the court denied a motion for a new trial filed by the defense, which sought to overturn the jury’s verdict.
The case itself dates back to June 17, 2023, when the victim, Isaac Kpakgpor, was taken by the defendant to a palm wine tree located on the outskirts of the Golden Veroleum Liberia (GVL) plantation area in Butaw, Sinoe County.
According to the indictment, Dassay was the last person seen with the victim.
Witnesses testified that the defendant transported Kpakgpor on a motorbike to the location where the victim later disappeared.
Days later, the victim’s lifeless body was discovered under disturbing circumstances.
The body was found tied to a piassava tree, with severe mutilation, including the removal of the victim’s eyes, tongue, and testicles, and additional injuries to the head and body.
The brutality of the crime shocked the local community and intensified public demand for justice.
During the trial, the prosecution presented a total of eleven witnesses, constructing a chain of circumstantial evidence aimed at linking the defendant directly to the crime.
Among the most critical testimonies were those placing the defendant, the victim, and the defendant’s then 13-year-old son together at the scene shortly before the victim went missing.
Witnesses recounted seeing the group traveling toward a swamp area near the GVL airfield, where palm wine trees are located.
Further testimony revealed that later the same day, the defendant’s son reportedly informed friends that the victim was tied to a palm tree.
According to these accounts, when the children went to the scene, they saw the victim restrained, but were warned by the boy not to report what they had seen.
One of the children eventually informed his mother, which led to the involvement of community members and law enforcement.
The defendant, however, denied the charges.
In his testimony, Dassay claimed that after arriving at the palm wine tree, the victim climbed the tree, drank, and behaved unusually before he returned to town alone.
He initially denied any knowledge of the victim’s disappearance but later admitted that he had taken him to the area, offering inconsistent accounts during the investigation and trial.
The court took note of these inconsistencies.
In his ruling, Judge Wesseh emphasized that when a logical deduction from the facts presented leads conclusively to the conclusion that the accused committed the crime, such evidence can be sufficient for conviction—even when it is circumstantial.
He referenced established legal precedents, including Woods v. Republic (1944) and Williams v. Republic (2014), to support the principle that circumstantial evidence, when properly connected, can form a chain strong enough to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
A central element in the court’s reasoning was the doctrine of “last seen,” a legal principle often applied in homicide cases.
Under this doctrine, the last person seen with a victim bears a presumption of responsibility if the victim is found dead shortly afterward and no reasonable explanation is provided.
Judge Wesseh stated that the defendant’s conduct—particularly his failure to report the victim’s condition and his contradictory statements—supported the application of this doctrine.
The court also highlighted what it described as a breach of duty of care.
According to the ruling, the defendant had a responsibility to ensure the safety of the victim, especially after recognizing that he was intoxicated.
By leaving the scene and failing to inform others when the victim went missing, the defendant was found to have acted negligently and irresponsibly.
“These ambivalent patterns of conduct clearly depict the doctrine of last seen,” the court noted, reinforcing its conclusion that the chain of evidence pointed to the defendant’s guilt.
Before sentencing, the court conducted a pre-sentence investigation, after which it imposed life imprisonment in accordance with Sections 50.5 and 50.1.3 of Liberia’s Penal Code, which prescribe life imprisonment or death for murder.
The ruling brings an end to a case that experienced several procedural twists.
In June 2024, an earlier trial was vacated after the defense filed a motion alleging jury tampering and judicial bias. The presiding judge at the time declared a mistrial, disbanded the jury, and recused himself, delaying the case and heightening public frustration.
The trial resumed in June 2026, eventually leading to the verdict and sentencing now delivered.
Following the judgment, the defense team, led by Atty. Franklin Myer, announced an appeal to the Supreme Court of Liberia, signaling that the case may continue through the appellate process.
Meanwhile, the Acting County Attorney for Sinoe County, Cllr. Mmonbeydo N. Joah, welcomed the verdict, describing it as justice for both the victim’s family and the wider community.
For residents of Sinoe County, the ruling represents more than a legal conclusion.
It closes a chapter marked by fear, anger, and prolonged uncertainty, while reaffirming the role of the courts in addressing serious crimes.
For the judiciary, the case underscores the continued reliance on both direct and circumstantial evidence in criminal prosecution, as well as the importance of legal doctrines such as “last seen” in establishing accountability.
As the case moves toward appeal, its outcome at the Supreme Court level will be closely watched—not only for its legal implications, but also for its broader message about justice, procedure, and public trust in Liberia’s legal system.
