The State v Ronny Aike (2006) N3455

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Kandakasi, J
• Judgment Date: 24 October 2006
• Docket Number: CR NO. 244 OF 2006
• Citation: (2006) N3455
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2006
• Judgement Number: N3455

Full Title: CR NO. 244 OF 2006; The State v Ronny Aike (2006) N3455

National Court: Kandakasi, J

Judgment Delivered: 24 October 2006

N3455

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO. 244 OF 2006

THE STATE

-V-

RONNY AIKE

Kerema: Kandakasi, J.

2006: 9 and 24 October

DECISION ON SENTENCE

CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING – Manslaughter – Domestic argument – Wife taking refuge at deceased’s house – Prisoner getting drunk and going to deceased’s house calling for wife – Deceased getting punching prisoner down – Prisoner pulling out pocket knife and swinging at deceased but missed – Deceased and prisoner collided – Deceased stubbed with the pocket knife on his left groin causing him to fall – Deceased dying due to loss of blood - Guilty plea – First time offender – Expression of remorse without tangible evidence of - Sentence of 16 years imposed - Criminal Code Sections 302 and 19.

Cases cited:

The State v. Sabarina Yakal [1988-89] PNGLR 129.

Dori Inaria v. The State (10/07/02) SC 688.

The State v. James Gurave Guba (12/99) N2020.

The State v Jimmy Banes Ere (24/7/02) N2254.

Roger Jumbo and Aidan Awatan v. The State (26/03/97) SC516.

Public Prosecutor v. Tom Ake [1978] PNGLR 469.

The State v. Roger Kivini (29/04/04) N2576.

Manu Kovi v. The State (31/05/05) SC 789.

Sakarowa Koe v. The State (01/04/04) SC739.

Anna Max Marangi v. The State (08/11/02) SC 702

The State v. Elias Peter Wano Miva CR 448 of 2005 (Judgment delivered 26/10/06)

The State v. Dominic Mangirak (29/04/03) N236.

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

The State v. Samuel Benimo (18/04/02) N2203.

The State v. Hobert Erick (18/04/02) N2201.

The State v. Saku Sogave (15/12/00) N2086.

The State v Charles Maniwa and Joseph Utura Maniwa (22/06/04) N2674.

The State v. Hiliong Gunaing (25/02/05) N2803.

The State v. Daniel Ronald Walus (25/02/05) N2802.

Simon Kama v. The State (01/04/04) SC740.

See Rudy Yekat v. The State (22/11/01) SC665.

Allan Peter Utieng v. The State (Unreported judgment delivered in Wewak on 23/11/00) SCR 15 of 2000.

The State v. Lucas Yovura (29/04/03) N2366.

Counsels:

Mr. D. Mark, for the State.

Mr. P.Kapi, for the Prisoner.

24 October 2006

1. KANDAKASI J: On Monday 9th this instant the State presented an indictment against you charging you with one count of manslaughter contrary to Section 302 of the Criminal Code. I reserved a decision on your sentence after receiving submissions on your behalf from your lawyer and the lawyer for the State on behalf of the State. Here is now the decision of the Court.

The Facts

2. The relevant facts as put to you during your arraignment and the depositions are these. On 30 November 2005, in the earlier part of that day at the Kaintiba government station, here in the Gulf Province, you had an argument with your wife. Your wife went to your sister in-law’s place and took refuge there. Your wife went and got drunk with some of your friends. After getting drunk you went to your sister in-law and her husband, Kenneth Kennedy’s house and called for your wife. The evidence from the depositions, which the law permits me to take into account

xxv See The State v. Sabarina Yakal [1988-89] PNGLR 129; Dori Inaria v. The State (10/07/02) SC 688; The State v. James Gurave Guba (12/99) N2020 and The State v Jimmy Banes Ere (24/7/02) N2254.

xxv1 as long as there is no conflict with any primary facts that is favourable to you

xxvi See for examples of authorities on point Roger Jumbo and Aidan Awatan v. The State (26/03/97) SC516, Public Prosecutor v. Tom Ake [1978] PNGLR 469 and The State v. Roger Kivini (29/04/04) N2576.

xxvi2 reveals that you swore at your wife and then broke part of the walls of the deceased’s house. The deceased and his wife came out and told you that your wife was with them. Thereafter, without any warning, the deceased punched you and you fell to the ground. You got up pulling a pocket knife as you did. You went with the pocket knife. You swung the pocket knife at the deceased but missed him. Eventually, the two of you collided. In the process, the pocket knife stubbed the deceased on his left groin, causing him to fall to the ground.

3. The deceased’s wife and others sought help and took the deceased initially to the Kaintiba Health Centre. The health workers there tried all their best to help the deceased. Unfortunately, nothing they could do was able to prevent the deceased from dying due to heavy loss of blood from the pocket knife stab wound you inflicted on him. That wound measured 10.1cm in depth, 3 cm in length and 1.6cm in width. This reveals that the wound you inflicted upon the deceased was a serious one.

Allocutus and Submissions

4. In your address on sentence, you said sorry for what you have done, to the deceased’s relatives including the untimely loss of her husband by your sister in-law. You are saddened too that you lost the deceased. You and the deceased have been very close friends like brothers well before the two of you married your respective wives who are biological sisters. As such, you have had no differences with the deceased. Also, you informed the Court that, you are married with two children and that this is your first ever offence. Finally, you asked the Court to exercise mercy toward you.

5. Your lawyer added by informing the Court that you are aged 30 and come from Karaeta Village, Kerema, Gulf Province. Both of your parents are alive and well. You are the eldest and the only male child in your family of one boy and three girls. Education wise, you graduated with a diploma in business management from the University of Technology in Lae. After your graduation and as at the time of the commission of the offence, the Department of Gulf employed you as the Business Development Officer for the Kaintiba District based at Kaintiba. By way of religion, you follow the Christian faith as a member of the United Church. Your lawyer concluded by pointing it out that you have been in custody awaiting your sentence from 22 November 2005, being the date of the commission of the offence.

6. Before the Court proceeds to consider an appropriate sentence for you, your lawyer urged the Court to note and take into account your family background as outlined above. He also urged the Court to take into account the fact that you pleaded guilty to a serious charge. That saved the State the time and money it could have outlaid to secure your conviction through a trial. He further urged the Court to take into account the fact that you are a first time offender, meaning that you have not been in trouble with the law before. Hence, this is your first ever offence. Furthermore, your lawyer urged the Court to note that your parents contributed financially to the funeral expenses of the deceased. Finally, your lawyer urged the Court to take into account the loss and your expression of remorse over the loss of a close relative and friend.

7. At the same time, your lawyer correctly acknowledged that you committed a very serious offence, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. However, he urged the Court to note that, the Supreme and the National Courts have imposed sentences below that. He then referred the Court to the Supreme Court decision in Manu Kovi v. The State

xxvii (31/05/05) SC 789, per Injia, DCJ; Lenalia and Lay JJ.

xxvii3 and before that the decision also of the Supreme Court in Sakarowa Koe v. The State.

xxviii (01/04/04) SC739, per Sevua, Kandakasi and Lenalia JJ.

xxviii4 The first decision seeks to further categorize homicide cases from what Parliament has already provided for in the Criminal Code. Going by that decision, your lawyer submits that your case falls in the second category of manslaughter or unlawful killing cases. Accordingly, he submitted that you should be given a sentence of 14 years having regard to all of the factors operating for and against you.

8. Counsel for the State, Mr. Mark, endorsed the submissions of your lawyer. In so doing, he pointed out that the offence you committed is a prevalent one. He also pointed out the fact that, the medical report shows that the wound you inflicted upon the deceased directly contributed to his death. A life has thus been lost prematurely and directly by your actions and as such you should be appropriately punished.

9. These submissions gives rise to only one issue for this Court to determine and that is. What is the appropriate sentence in your case? This issue can be decided by having regard to the sentence prescribed by Parliament, the sentencing guidelines and trends per the Supreme and National Court judgments and the particular circumstances in which you committed the offence from which comes, the factors in your aggravation as well as those in your mitigation.

The Offence and Sentencing Trend

10. In the decision I have just handed in the matter of The State v. Elias Peter Wano Miva (CR 448 of 2005), I pointed out that s. 302 of the Criminal Code creates the offence of manslaughter and prescribes the penalty of...