Rudy Yekat v The State (2000) SC665

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Jalina J, Kirriwom J, Kandakasi J
• Judgment Date: 22 November 2000
• Citation: [2000] PNGLR 225
• Court: Supreme Court
• Year: 2000
• Judgement Number: SC665

Full Title: Rudy Yekat v The State (2000) SC665

Supreme Court: Jalina J, Kirriwom J, Kandakasi J

Judgment Delivered: 22 November 2000

SC665

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE]

SCRA No. 61 of 2000

BETWEEN:

RUDY YEKAT

-Appellant-

AND:

THE STATE

-Respondent-

WEWAK: JALINA, KIRRIWOM, KANDAKASI, JJ.

2000 : NOVEMBER 20 & 22

CRIMINAL LAW — Appeal against sentence — Aggravated rape of a married woman — Eight years sentence confirmed.

Cases Cited

John Aubuku v. The State [1987] PNGLR 267

Lawrence Hindemba v. The State, SC593

James Mora Meoa v. The State [1996] PNGLR 280

Counsel:

Appellant, In Person

P. Kaluwin, for the Respondent

22 November 2000

BY THE COURT: This is an appeal against sentence on a plea of guilty to a rape of a married woman. Initially the Appellant denied the charge. That necessitated preparation for trial by the State and the Court. Thus it did not save the State the time and expenses to prepare for trial. It did however, prevent the victim from reliving the bad memories of the incident.

Facts

On the 27th of January 1999 between 10.00am and 12:00 noon, at Ambunti, East Sepik Province, the victim, Anna Peter was on her way back home alone from the Ambunti Health Centre. The Appellant followed her and repeatedly tried to entice the victim into having sex with him. The victim continuously refused and kept on her way. The Appellant eventually realised that he was not going to have sex with the victim freely. He therefore approached the victim and threatened her with a bush knife and took her to a riverside bush and forcefully had sexual intercourse with the victim. That was without the victims consent and therefore aggravated rape. Out of fear for her life the victim did not shout or scream and the Appellant repeatedly raped the victim. As soon as the Appellant was satisfied, the victim was left to go and she immediately reported the matter and the appellant was arrested and charged with rape. The evidence does not suggest, whether the Appellant had knowledge of the victim being a married woman. However on the other evidence on file it seems the Appellant knew the victim and the victim knew the Appellant, as she was able to name the Appellant in her statement to police. Therefore, the Appellant had knowledge of the fact that the victim was a married woman. As was found by the learned trial judge, it is reasonable to expect that the rape on the victim traumatised her. It could also have affected her marriage and that she was forced to bear a lot of shame, anguish and pain because of the scars left by the rape.

Before sentencing, we note that the learned trial judge considered the factors that went in favour of the Appellant including his belated guilty plea, him being a first time young offender and coming from a simple village background or setting. We also note that the learned trial judge after considering all the factors decided that a custodial sentence was called for and imposed an eight-year imprisonment term. The Appellant is now appealing against that sentence and states in his ground of appeal "Appeal against sentence".

The Offence

The crime or offence of rape is on the increase. Without any argument it is a very terrible crime against women in particular and society in general. Only people who are sick in their heads or completely out of their minds and have no sisters, mothers, wives or female relatives could commit these types of offences. They therefore, need to be locked away from the community for its protection.

The offence has to be condemned in the strongest term possible. It has now gotten to a stage were our women and girls can not freely move around in a...