The State v Andrew Aisa Keake (No 3) (2001) N2079

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Citation: (2001) N2079
• Date: 27 March 2001
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2001

Full Title: The State v Andrew Aisa Keake (No 3) (2001) N2079

National Court: Kandakasi J

Judgment Delivered: 27 March 2001

1 CRIMINAL LAW—Sentence—Particular offence—Wilful murder—Death caused by a single shot from a shotgun to the neck area—Imprisonment for term of 20 years

2 Ure Hane v The State (1984] PNGLR 105, Avia Aihi v The State (No 3) (1982] PNGLR 92, Goli Golu v The State (1979] PNGLR 653, Mako Ranjigi v The State (1994] PNGLR 44, Kutapa Keapu v The State (1994] PNGLR 135, The State v Angaun Kakas (1994] PNGLR 20, The State v Yapes Paege and Relya Tanda (1994] PNGLR 65 and Luingi Yandasingi v The State (1995] PNGLR 268 referred to

___________________________

Kandakasi J: This Court found you guilty of wilful murder of one Theodore Aisa Ani in the written judgment the Court delivered on 27 February 2001. Arguments were then heard both for and against you on the kind of sentence you should receive. I then reserved a ruling on that to 23 March 2001 with liberty to bring that forward if the decision was ready before that time. Unfortunately, I was sent to Goroka on short notice and that made it difficult for me to deliver the Court's decision until today. This is the Court's decision on sentence.

Issue

The main issue is, whether this case is one of the "worse types" of wilful murder case and therefore the maximum prescribed penalty of death should be imposed? This issue can properly be determined by having regard to the both the Supreme and National Court decisions on point having particular regard to the particular facts of the case before me.

Facts

The relevant facts are set out at page 2 of the decision on the verdict delivered on 27 February 2001. In summary, however, for the purposes of sentencing the facts can easily be summarised in terms of this being a case of wilful murder of an unsuspecting victim. The deceased was a relative of yours and your were the only person with the deceased at the time of his death. On the available evidence, this Court found that the deceased was shot at a close range by with a shotgun. You claimed that the deceased committed suicide but on the evidence, the Court found that there was no suicide. Instead it was a case of wilful murder by you. The killing appeared to have been related to or following a dispute between your family and that of the deceased over land on which the deceased's family put up a house. Apart from that, there was no other reason for which the deceased could have been killed.

The Offence

The offence of wilful murder is prescribed by s299(1) of the Criminal Code (Chapter 262) (hereinafter "the Code") as follows:

"(1) Subject to succeeding provisions of this Code, a person who unlawfully kills another person, intending to cause his death or that of some other person is guilty of wilful...