The State v Wallen Yamevi and Kem Dano (1990) N949

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Citation: (1990) N949
• Date: 05 November 1990
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1990

Full Title: The State v Wallen Yamevi and Kem Dano (1990) N949

National Court: Brunton J

Judgment Delivered: 5 November 1990

1 Criminal law—murder—sentence—killing during an armed robbery—shotgun—relatively young first offenders—plea of guilty

2 CRIMINAL LAW—Criminal Code s300(1)(b)—sentencing—killing during an armed robbery—shotgun—relatively young first offenders—plea of guilty.

3 Sentence: Fourteen years in hard labour, less six months on remand. To serve thirteen years and six months.

4 Gimble v The State [1988–89] PNGLR 271, R v Steward and Williams (1979) 1 Cr App 793, The State v John Gapaiho (1990) N880, The State v Eddy Kava Laura (No 2) [1988–89] PNGLR 98, The State v Kenneth Baupo and Fabian Girida (1989) N795 and The State v Mek Keroa Nentepa (1990) N878.

___________________________

Brunton J:

The indictment

The prisoners pleaded guilty to one count each of the murder of Rose Bobola, contrary to s300 of the Criminal Code.

The facts

The brief facts on which the prisoners were arraigned (which were altered following the allocutus when the State made certain factual concessions) were that in the middle of April this year Kem Dano borrowed a Winchester shot–gun from a villager. At about 2pm on 15 April he met with five other persons, including Wallen Yamevi and made a plan to holdup a coffee–buyer and steal the monies. Later that day they all went to the entrance of Bobola Coffee Plantation. The prisoners were in a group of watchmen away from a separate group who had the shot–gun, and another home–made gun. When a vehicle was seen to approach, the prisoner's group whistled to the other group a warning. Two armed men then tried to flag the vehicle down. The vehicle did not stop—it sounded its horn and drove on; as the vehicle passed the armed men the Winchester shotgun was discharged into the driver's side of the vehicle. The shot went through the driver's side window and hit the driver on the right side of the face and neck. She died more or less instantly.

At about 5.30pm Rose Bobola had dropped Patricia Bobola off at the Hospital. She then went to the Bena Vista restaurant to drop off a person call Paul. She went back to the hospital after doing some shopping, collected Patricia, and with her two children began to drive to her house at Magia Farm. Near Kama it was getting dark, she put on her lights and as they began to climb a hill passed the Medecine Bridge, two armed men appeared from round a corner. Patricia told Rose Bobola to stop—Rose Bobola said "No way" and kept on driving. As the vehicle came level with the robbers a shot was fired and Rose Bobola was killed.

The cause of death was given as respiratory arrest from a shattered windpipe and exanguination to death from haemorrage as a result of severed carotid arteries and internal jugular veins, caused by a shotgun wound.

Sentencing patterns and principles:

The sentencing patterns for killings that have taken place during armed robbery have risen sharply in the past two years. Whereas in 1988, a killing in the course of a highway robbery would attract a sentence of six years, by 1990 a killing in the robbery of a house attracted a sentence of 22 years (robbery 10 years, cumulatively on a sentence of 12 years for manslaughter).

Brutal and deliberate killing in the course of a robbery, as distinct from incidental killings in robberies which sadly go wrong as when a criminal panics, or a victim offers unexpected resistance, have always attracted the highest tariff life imprisonment.

The sentencing practice is a reflection of the times. Although on average the sentence for an armed robbery in which no one was hurt is about three to four years imprisonment, sentences for robbery with...