By: Yassah J. Wright
The Civil Law Court “Annex” for Montserrado County has summoned Col. Gregory Coleman, Inspector General of the Liberia National Police (LNP), for allegedly wrongfully withholding a 2013 Ford Edge SUV belonging to plaintiff Ruth Hena Varfley.
According to the Writ of Summon, Col. Coleman and his co-defendants—Officer Rufus Smith and Robert Vah—are to appear before Judge Peter W. Gbeneweleh on Monday, March 23, 2026. Failure to appear could result in a default judgment.
The Writ of Summon stemmed from a lawsuit filed by the plaintiff’s legal team. The controversy is also linked to an ongoing gold-smuggling investigation involving Rao’s stepdaughter, which is cited as part of a pattern of alleged impropriety.
Varfley said the car was among several vehicles her fiancé, Erickson Vah, shipped to her from Canada, and he sent her the tracking number of the ship on which the car was loaded.
When the vehicle arrived in Liberia, her brother-in-law and co-defendant, Robert Vah, offloaded all the cars from the container along with US$500 that her finance sent to register the car at the Ministry of Transport.
When she went to collect the US$500 from co-defendant Robert Vah, he insisted on accompanying her to the Ministry of Transport to register the car, which she objected to. Upon her objection, co-defendant Robert Vah misinformed his brother, her partner, that she had taken another man with her to register the vehicle. This angered him, and he said he was terminating the relationship with her.
She registered the vehicle and notarized the hand-to-hand bill of sale, which defendant Vah had turned over to her. Thereafter, the Ministry issued her a Motor Vehicle Registration Certificate in her name making her the legitimate titleholder.
According to the suit, in January 2026 she received a call from Samuel G. Ford, a son-in-law to Mr. Erickson Vah and the head of Community Policing at the LNP, informing her that a complaint had been filed against her regarding a vehicle. He instructed her to go to LNP Headquarters with the vehicle.
Upon arriving at LNP Headquarters and meeting Mr. Samuel G. Ford, seized her vehicle key and confiscated the vehicle. He also intimidated her and told her to turn the vehicle over to co-defendant Robert Vah, who had complained to Mr. Ford, claiming that she stole her own car from him.
Varfley said that, due to Mr. Ford’s conduct, she informed her lawyer, Cllr. Lawrence Suah, who texted Mr. Ford stated that he had intimidated his client, who was not represented by a lawyer at the time, and had confiscated her vehicle in violation of her constitutional right to ownership of property.
Based on that message, Ford forwarded the matter to the relevant section of the LNP to investigate co-defendant Robert Vah’s allegation against her. The investigation was conducted with Varfley represented by her lawyers at every stage.
During the investigation, defendant Robert Vah denied his signature on the hand-to-hand bill of sale. The police requested that Varfley bring other documents in her possession bearing defendant Robert Vah’s signature, which she did. Robert was then asked by the police to come and sign for verification/signature audit, but he refused, neglected, and failed to do so.
While she and her lawyers were awaiting the outcome of the signature audit so the matter could be forwarded to court, she received a call from Orange GSM number 0776250738, believed to be assigned to one Larry Brown of the LNP, who informed her that Police Inspector General Gregory Coleman had instructed that the vehicle be turned over to co-defendant Robert Vah. Accordingly, her vehicle was illegally turned over to co-defendant Robert Vah.
Upon hearing this news, she informed her lawyers, who followed up at LNP Headquarters and confirmed that Police Inspector General and co-defendant Gregory Coleman had instructed that her vehicle be turned over to co-defendant Robert Vah, and that co-defendant Rufus Smith had carried out the handover, thereby denying her access to her vehicle.
She claimed the defendants, without legal justification, seized her vehicle on January 28, 2026, and has since refused to release it to her, causing serious embarrassment and economic loss. She said she has had to spend US$75.00 daily on car rentals. She is therefore bringing an action to recover chattel so that her property will be returned in accordance with the statute.
She argued that the defendants’ conduct is contrary to the statutes and laws of this jurisdiction, amounting to self-help and abuse of power without any legal order from this Court or any court of law. She therefore petitioned this Honorable Court to issue a Writ of Replevin to be served on the defendants to release and return the seized vehicle.