John Kapil Tapi v The State

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Kapi DCJ, Injia J, Sawong J
• Judgment Date: 30 March 2000
• Citation: (2000) SC635
• Court: Supreme Court
• Year: 2000
• Judgement Number: SC635

Supreme Court: Kapi DCJ, Injia J, Sawong J

Judgment Delivered: 30 March 2000

SC635

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[In the Supreme Court of Justice]

SCA 61 OF 1999

JOHN KAPIL TAPI

-Appellant-

THE STATE

-Respondent-

MT. HAGEN: Kapi DCJ, Injia & Sawong JJ

2000: 27th, 30th March

Criminal Law — Sentence — Manslaughter — Plea — Killing of Wife — 16 years — Principles and range of sentences for manslaughter discussed — Appeal dismissed — Criminal Code (Ch 292), S302.

CASES CITED:

Rex Lialu v The State [1990] PNGLR 487

Antap Yala v The State Unreported judgment of the Supreme Court SCR 69/96, dated 31 May 1996

Jack Tanga v The State Unreported judgment No. SC 602 dated 19 April 1999.

Appellant in Person

K. Umpake, for the Respondent

30th March 2000

BY THE COURT: This is an appeal by the appellant in person, against sentence only. He was convicted and sentenced to sixteen (16) years imprisonment for unlawfully killing his wife contrary to S.302 of the Criminal Code (Ch. 262). That sentence was imposed upon him by the National Court in Mt. Hagen on 19 August 1999 after the Appellant pleaded guilty to the charge.

The short facts were that the deceased was married to the appellant. They had been living in the Appellants' village. Prior to 5th April 1999, the deceased left the appellant and went back to her village. And so on 5th April 1999, the appellant armed with a bush knife went searching for her and her relatives intending to cause some harm to them. When he arrived at the deceased's village he hid himself to avoid being seen by the deceased or her relatives. He waited until it was dark and then went and waited outside the house of the deceased's mother. He waited for some time waiting in ambush and when the deceased came out of the said house he cut her on the hand with the bush knife nearly severing the hand. She fell down and he then cut her a second time on the neck. She died from a massive loss of blood as a direct result of the cuts she sustained.

We now turn to the submissions made in respect of each ground of the Appeal. We deal with grounds 2 and 3 first. The appellant submits that the trial judge erred in either not taking into consideration or giving sufficient weight to the facts that quite a substantial amount of compensation had been paid and that he had surrendered.

Mr Umpake submitted that these two grounds have no merit as the trial judge did infact take those two factors into consideration and gave whatever weight to them.

We accept Mr Umpake's submission. The trial judge did say inter alia, that because compensation had been paid and that the appellant had pleaded guilty, he was not going to impose the maximum sentence of life imprisonment. We find that there are no merits in these two grounds and we dismiss them.

In ground (1), the Appellant complains that the sentence of 16 years imprisonment is excessive. In relation to this ground the main argument advanced was that the trial judge was influenced by the false...