The State v Margaret John (No 2)
| Jurisdiction | Papua New Guinea |
| Judge | Injia J |
| Judgment Date | 22 June 1995 |
| Citation | [1996] PNGLR 298 |
| Court | National Court |
| Year | 1996 |
| Judgement Number | N1341 |
National Court: Injia J
Judgment Delivered: 22 June 1995
N1341
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]
STATE
V
MARGARET JOHN (NO 2)
Kundiawa
Injia J
19 June 1995
22 June 1995
CRIMINAL LAW — Murder — Plea — Prisoner wife killed defacto wife of common husband — Appropriate sentence — 6 years imprisonment. (less 8 months 26 days in pre-trial custody) — Criminal Code Ch. 262, s 300 (1) (a); 1991, ss 3.
CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Murder — Appropriateness of a compensation order where sentence for murder considered appropriate by the Court is in excess of 12 months imprisonment — Criminal Law (Compensation) Act 1991, ss 3, (1) (a), (e); 6 (b) — Compensation not awarded.
Facts
The accused was charged with murder of the wife of common husband. The victim's relatives demanded compensation pursuant to Criminal Law (Compensation) Act 1991. The Court required a means assessment report in order to decide on the issue of compensation.
Held
1. Means assessment report is necessary to determine an appropriate compensation under the Criminal Law (Compensation) Act (the Act).
2. Compensation under the Act can only be made against the offender and not his relatives and is not appropriate in this case. Husband and relatives of the prisoner are only to pay some compensation to maintain harmony.
3. Plea of guilty of murder is noted but assault on the accused by deceased and other extenuating circumstances is also taken into consideration.
4. Found guilty and imprisioned for 6 years for murder.
Cases Cited
Papua New Guinea cases cited
Lialu v State [1990] PNGLR 487.
State v John (No 1) [1995] PNGLR 446.
Counsel
P Kumo, for the State.
G Gendua, for accused.
22 June 1995
INJIA J: On 20th April 1995 I adjourned this matter for a means assessment report pursuant to s 4 of the Criminal Law (Compensation) Act 1991 (the Act). I am now provided with that report. The report is a very detailed and comprehensive report which covers most of the aspects relevant to the question of a compensation order.
On 20 April, I requested for a means assessment report to be done on the prisoner's husband. At page 6 of my judgment, I said:
"Where a wife is the offender, the husband is obliged to pay compensation for his wife's wrong-doing, whether or not the husband is at fault in causing or contributing to his wife's wrong-doing. Where the husband is at fault, there is every reason for him to pay compensation. In the instant case, the prisoner knows this and wants him to pay compensation. The question is will he pay it? If so, how much will he pay? How much compensation will be demanded by the relatives of the victim? Will he have the means to pay it himself? Will other relatives or clan members be required to contribute? If he does not pay the compensation demanded of him, what are the likely consequences in the village? These and other questions need to be addressed properly. In deciding whether a compensation order against the offender is appropriate under the Criminal Law (Compensation) Act 1991, a means assessment report prepared by the Probation Office is required. There is no provision for a Means Assessment Report to be done on the spose or other relatives of the spouse. But I would hold that in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manu Kovi v The State (2005) SC789
...State v Angaun Kakas & Others [1994] PNGLR 20 (K17,000); State v Billy Kauwa [1994] PNGLR 503 (K100,000); State v Margaret John (No. 2) [1996] PNGLR 298 (K25,000); State v Maria Pelta Pung [1995] PNGLR 173 (K20,000); State v Lucy Moro (1998) N1328 (K25,000); The State v Paulus Non Pable [19......
-
State v Mavis Uraro (2012) N5164
...98; Public Prosecutor v Tardrew [1986] PNGLR 91; The State v Maria Pelta Pung (Yamai) [1995] PNGLR 173; The State v Margaret John (No 2) [1996] PNGLR 298; Antap Yala v The State (1996) SCR 69 of 1996; The State v Maria Er [1998] PNGLR 26; Jack Tanga v The State [1999] PNGLR 216; John Kapil ......
-
The State v Eddie John Naopa (2003) N2411
...(2001) N2172, The State v James Gurave Guba (2000) N2020, The State v Rex Lialu [1988–89] PNGLR 449, The State v Margaret John (No 2) [1996] PNGLR 298, The State v Dobi Ao (No 2) [2002] PNGLR 55, The State v Raphael Kimba Aki (No 2) (2001) N2082, The State v Kennedy Arus (2001) N2081 and Ja......
-
The State v Henry Idab (2001) N2172
...in accordance with this Act." (Emphasis added) . . . This is why the Courts in cases like that of The State v Margaret John (No 2) [1996] PNGLR 298 have decided not to order compensations against persons other than the offender. That was a case in which the defendant was in a way caused to ......
-
Manu Kovi v The State (2005) SC789
...State v Angaun Kakas & Others [1994] PNGLR 20 (K17,000); State v Billy Kauwa [1994] PNGLR 503 (K100,000); State v Margaret John (No. 2) [1996] PNGLR 298 (K25,000); State v Maria Pelta Pung [1995] PNGLR 173 (K20,000); State v Lucy Moro (1998) N1328 (K25,000); The State v Paulus Non Pable [19......
-
State v Mavis Uraro (2012) N5164
...98; Public Prosecutor v Tardrew [1986] PNGLR 91; The State v Maria Pelta Pung (Yamai) [1995] PNGLR 173; The State v Margaret John (No 2) [1996] PNGLR 298; Antap Yala v The State (1996) SCR 69 of 1996; The State v Maria Er [1998] PNGLR 26; Jack Tanga v The State [1999] PNGLR 216; John Kapil ......
-
The State v Eddie John Naopa (2003) N2411
...(2001) N2172, The State v James Gurave Guba (2000) N2020, The State v Rex Lialu [1988–89] PNGLR 449, The State v Margaret John (No 2) [1996] PNGLR 298, The State v Dobi Ao (No 2) [2002] PNGLR 55, The State v Raphael Kimba Aki (No 2) (2001) N2082, The State v Kennedy Arus (2001) N2081 and Ja......
-
The State v Henry Idab (2001) N2172
...in accordance with this Act." (Emphasis added) . . . This is why the Courts in cases like that of The State v Margaret John (No 2) [1996] PNGLR 298 have decided not to order compensations against persons other than the offender. That was a case in which the defendant was in a way caused to ......