The State v Dominic Mangirak (2003) N2368

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Kandakasi J
• Judgment Date: 29 April 2003
• Citation: (2003) N2368
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2003
• Judgement Number: N2368

Full Title: The State v Dominic Mangirak (2003) N2368

National Court: Kandakasi J

Judgment Delivered: 28 or 29 April 2003

N2368

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO. 625 of 2003

THE STATE

-V-

DOMINIC MANGIRAK

WEWAK: KANDAKASI, J.

2003: 24th and 29th April

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Manslaughter — Guilty Plea — Provocation in the non legal sense – One spear wound leading to loss of blood and death –First time offender – Sentencing guidelines considered – Sentence of 12 years imposed.

Cases cited:

Rex Lialu v. The State [1988-89] PNGLR 487.

Anna Max Marangi v The State (08/11/02) SC702.

Antap Yala v. The State, (Unreported judgement 31/05/96).

Jack Tanga v. The State (1999) SC602.

John Kapil Tapi v. The State (2000) SC635.

The State v Jimmy Morgan (17/12/01) N2171.

Counsel

Mr. M. Ruarri for the State

Mr. D. Kari for the Accused

DECISION ON SENTENCE

28th April, 2003

KANDAKASI J: You pleaded guilty to one charge of manslaughter or unlawful killing contrary to s. 302 of the Criminal Code. Upon reading the material in the deposition, which was admitted into evidence with your consent, I was satisfied that there was enough evidence to support your guilty plea. I therefore, accepted your guilty plea and had you convicted as charged.

The facts are straight forward. In the evening of 12th August 2002, you were in your house, when one Steven Sawingu and his relatives came to resolve some differences you had with them. That appears to have been over a gossip about your sister being spread by the Sawingu’s. When the Sawingu’s got to your house, an argument ensued between you and them. That led to a fight.

In the fight, your father who was armed with a wild palm spear fought with Steven Sawingu’s elder brother, August Sawingu. Steven Sawingu went to his brother’s aid and fought with one of your brothers, Gering Mangirak. You were also armed with a sharp bamboo spear and attacked Steven Sawingu. You shot him on his left chest below his arm pit and quickly pulled the spear out and tried to spear August Sawingu too but he avoided it.

Steven and August Sawingu then started to run away from the scene back to their house. But, before they could reach their house, Steven collapsed on the way. August Sawingu and another carried Steven Sawingu into his house and there he passed away due to heavy loss of blood.

In your address on sentence, you said it was true that you committed the offence and asked the Court to be merciful toward you. Your lawyer took it further on your behalf, urging the Court to note that you pleaded guilty and co-operated well with the police and the other authorities up to this Court. This saved the State and the Court substantial time and costs associated to a denial and trial. He also asked me to note your personal background and that, this is a case of unintentional killing unlike a case of willful murder or intentional wounding leading to death. He also urged me to distinguish your case from other manslaughter cases such as those in domestic settings and spleen deaths. Taking these factors into account, he submitted on your behalf that your sentence should start at 6 years.

In support of his argument, your lawyer drew the Court’s attention to the Supreme Court’s judgement in Rex Lialu v. The State [1988-89] PNGLR 487. That case set the following guidelines for sentencing in manslaughter cases at page 497 of its judgement as follows:

(a) The Court must have careful regard to the circumstances of death and the way in which death was actually caused.

(b) The following matters may be relevant to the nature of the act causing death:

(i) the nature and frequency of any attack or assault;

(ii) whether the injury which caused the death arose directly from an attack or assault or was caused by, for example, falling on an object;

(iii) whether the injury was caused by the person or by a weapon;

(iv) whether there was deliberate intention to harm;

(v) whether there was provocation in the non-legal sense;

(vi) whether the deceased had a thin skull, and

(vii) whether the deceased had an enlarged spleen.

The State agrees that this case sets guidelines for sentencing in manslaughter cases. But it argues at the same time that, it is now outdated and as referred to the most recent Supreme Court judgement in Anna Max Marangi v The State (08/11/02) SC702. This is the latest case on manslaughter. The Supreme Court in that case, referred to three of its earlier judgements namely Antap Yala v. The State, (Unreported judgement 31/05/96); Jack Tanga v. The State (1999) SC602; and John Kapil Tapi v. The State (2000) SC635. They represent cases in which the prisoners were treated more leniently. The Court sounded a warning in the Antap Yala (supra) case that, unintentional killing is becoming prevalent and that, sentences will increase. The Supreme Court through this judgement has also reiterated that, whilst murder sentences would be higher than manslaughter sentences, there are killings which will be regarded serious and would attract the maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

Based on these and other cases, the Supreme Court in the Anna Max Marangi (supra) case noted that, the current range of sentences for uncontested manslaughter cases in a domestic setting range from 4 years to 16 years imprisonment. It also noted that, and spoke of 3 main categories of manslaughter cases.

The first are cases in which force is used in an uncalculated manner, such as a single blow, punches or kicks on any part of the deceased’s body. This also includes cases in which death is caused by an acceleration of a pre-existing disease or condition leading to death. These kinds of killings attract sentences between 3 and seven 7 years.

The second involve cases in which there is repeated application of vicious force, with or without the use of an instrument or weapon, such as repeated kicks and punches applied to the head or chest with intent to wound or cause bodily harm. Deaths caused by a single or multiple knife stab wounds applied to the head, neck, chest or abdomen or on any other vulnerable part of the body, even if there is no other special aggravating factors, come under this category. This category attracts sentences between 8 and 12 years.

The third involve cases which where direct force in a calculated manner is applied on the deceased body using a weapon such as a knife, bush knife or axe...