The State v Relvie Joe (2005) N2832

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Batari J
• Judgment Date: 10 May 2005
• Citation: (2005) N2832
• Docket Number: CR No 1332 of 2004
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2005
• Judgement Number: N2832

Full Title: CR No 1332 of 2004; The State v Relvie Joe (2005) N2832

National Court: Batari J

Judgment Delivered: 10 May 2005

N2832

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO. 1332 OF 2004

THE STATE

v

ELVIE JOE

Kavieng: Batari J

2005: 9, 10 May

CRIMINAL LAW Sentence Murder Accused stabbed deceased with knife Killing of relative – De facto provocation Plea Mitigating factors – Need to consider all compelling interests for and against the accused – Sentencing discretion – Application of. CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Murder – Accused as mother of children – Welfare of children – Whether applicable as mitigating factor

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Murder – Purpose of sentence Personal and deterrence sentence called for 12 years appropriate.

Cases Cited: Lawrence Simbe v The State [1994] PNGLR 38 The State v Laura (2) [198889] PNGLR 98 Marangi v The State (Unreported Supreme Court Judgment 2002) No. SC702 Kesino Apo v. The State [1988] PNGLR 182.

Counsel: K. Umpake, for the State A. Turi, for the Accused 2

2

SENTENCE

10 May, 2005

BATARI J: You pleaded guilty yesterday following your arraignment on a charge of murder. After hearing from you and your lawyer on the important question of sentence I reserved to today to consider the punishment the court should be imposed on the type of murder you committed. You were alleged to have killed one, Janet Anisa Palun in contravention of s. 300 (1) (a) of the Criminal Code. The maximum penalty prescribed under that provision for murder is life imprisonment. You will now be sentenced.

The facts showed that on 6th July, 2004 at Omo village on the outskirts of Kavieng town, you initially attacked the deceased by assaulting her at Kuluton beach and then followed her to another part of the beach called Pono where you again attacked her. On this second occasion, you assaulted her with your hands before stabbing her once from the back on her left shoulder with a kitchen knife. The massive bleeding that resulted from a penetrating knife wound to the heart led to the death of the deceased.

That is the brief summary of what is a very serious crime of unlawful killing. You have been convicted of murder which is one type of unlawful killings that involved an intention to cause grievous bodily harm to another person. When you armed yourself with the knife, you no doubt knew the tragic consequences that would likely flow from its conversion into a weapon against your intended victim. The knife penetrated into the heart and a

3

penetrating wound into the heart is always a fatal injury to a vital part of the body that invariably leads to instant death as it did in this case.

The nature of the attack showed aggression on your part. You pursued the deceased after an initial assault and on the second occasion you showed more aggression with use of a weapon. You were also undeterred by the presence of others, particularly, members of her own family at the scene. Having assaulted the deceased the first time, you could have simply retreated and she would be alive today. However, it is plain you were not satisfied and seemed determined on vengeance. As a result, she is now dead at her tender age of 18 years. She died violently at your hands at the prime of her youth. You had no regard for her right to live. By your callous and cowardly act, her young life was suddenly snapped from her and that is a very serious matter.

You are aged 30 years and married with four children ages from 3 years to 15 years. Your husband was employed and provided the financial support while you minded the children and attended to other family household tasks. That family support by you will no longer be there for your husband and the children because you will be treated the in same manner as those who have been convicted and sentenced for unlawful killings. If they, in particular, the children suffer from lack of motherly love, guide and support, you can only blame yourself for their suffering because of your idiocy.

For the purpose of sentencing, children’s welfare may be a relevant factor. However, there is no evidence before me to support your lawyer’s contention on that issue and the extent to which the children might experience difficulties

4

if their mother were incarcerated. The children still have their father and I think it is fair to say that in Papua New Guinea, occasions where a child is left without support, be it from the same family, extended families, village clan or tribe, would be rare, if not, unheard of. I am not convinced the welfare of the children is a significant mitigating factor on its own in this case.

You have pleaded guilty and expressed remorse. Ms. Turi has also made very useful submissions on your behalf.

I have considered all that both you and your lawyer have put to the court. I accept that your plea of guilty...