The State v Charlie Langu (No 1) (2004) N2651

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Cannings J
• Judgment Date: 26 August 2004
• Citation: (2004) N2651
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2004
• Judgement Number: N2651

Full Title: The State v Charlie Langu (No 1) (2004) N2651

National Court: Cannings J

Judgment Delivered: 26 August 2004

1 Criminal Law—indictable offence—Criminal Code, Division V.3, Homicide: Suicide: Concealment of birth—murder—s300(1)(b), person kills another person—death caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose and of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life—purpose and act must be distinct—verdict.

2 R v Kiandari [1967–68] PNGLR 31, R v Koito Kartogati [1974] PNGLR 225, Joseph Maino v The State [1977] PNGLR 404, Herman Pasi, Daniel Tangole and Hubert Bola v The State [1991] PNGLR 254, The State v Tau Ted Lahui and Others [1992] PNGLR 325, The State v Okun John (2000) N1977 referred to

___________________________

N2651

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO 628 0F 2003

THE STATE

V

CHARLIE LANGU (No 1)

WEWAK : CANNINGS J

19, 20, 23, 26 AUGUST 2004

Criminal Law – indictable offence – Criminal Code, Division V.3, Homicide: Suicide: Concealment of birth – murder – Section 300(1)(b), person kills another person – death caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose and of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life – purpose and act must be distinct – verdict.

Cases cited

R v Kiandari [1967-68] PNGLR 31

R v Koito Kartogati [1974] PNGLR 225

Joseph Maino v The State [1977] PNGLR 404

Herman Pasi, Daniel Tangole and Hubert Bola v The State [1991] PNGLR 254

The State v Tau Ted Lahui and Others [1992] PNGLR 325

The State v Okun John (2000) N1977

Mr J Wala for the State

Mr L Siminji for the accused

CANNINGS J:

INTRODUCTION

This is a criminal case. The accused, Charlie Langu, is a man aged about 27, who lives in the Maprik District. He faced the following indictment:

Charlie Langu of Samgit in East Sepik Province stands charged that he on the 6th day of November 2002 at Samgit in Papua New Guinea, murdered one Rita Sora.

The indictment was presented under Section 300(1) of the Criminal Code. This creates the offence of murder. It says that a person who kills another person in any one of a number of prescribed circumstances is guilty of murder. Included amongst the prescribed circumstances is death caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose and of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life. The maximum penalty for such an offence is imprisonment for life.

Section 300 states:

(1) Subject to the succeeding provisions of this Code, a person who kills another person under any of the following circumstances is guilty of murder:—

(a) if the offender intended to do grievous bodily harm to the person killed or to some other person; or

(b) if death was caused by means of an act—

(i) done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose; and

(ii) of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life; or

(c) if the offender intended to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating—

(i) the commission of a crime other than a crime specified by a law (including this Code) to be a crime for which a person may only be arrested by virtue of a warrant; or

(ii) the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit an offence referred to in Subparagraph (i); or

(d) if death was caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for a purpose specified in Paragraph (c); or

(e) if death was caused by wilfully stopping the breath of a person for a purpose specified in Paragraph (c).

Penalty: Subject to Section 19, imprisonment for life.

(2) In a case to which Subsection (1)(a) applies, it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who was killed.

(3) In a case to which Subsection (1)(b) applies, it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) In a case to which Subsection (1)(c), (d) or (e) applies, it is immaterial that the offender—

(a) did not intend to cause death; or

(b) did not know that death was likely to result.

In this case the State relied on Section 300(1)(b).

BACKGROUND

The alleged incident giving rising to the charge occurred on 6 November 2002. On or about 9 December 2002 a complaint was made to the Police at Maprik. On 9 December 2002 the accused was interviewed by the
Criminal Investigation Division attached to Maprik Police Station. On 11 March 2003 the accused was committed to stand trial.

On 19 August 2004 the indictment was presented and the accused was arraigned. He pleaded not guilty. He was present throughout the trial on 19, 20 and 23 August.

ORAL EVIDENCE

State witnesses

The State called three witnesses: the husband of the deceased, one of the deceased’s sons and a village peace officer.

Sora Yasaku

He is the deceased’s widower.

His evidence in chief was as follows. Prior to the incident in which his wife, Rita Sora, was killed, on 6 November 2002, there was a mediation session at the village of Nindiko. That village is about 2 kilometres from the village of Samgit, where his wife was killed. Samgit is his family’s village.

The mediation session was about a bilum (a string bag) that was owned by his daughter, Scholastica. The billum had been cut by her husband, Rayon Buingu. Sora Yasaku had taken possession of a lamp owned by Rayon. He would not return Rayon’s lamp unless and until Rayon paid Scholastica K16.00 for the bilum that he had cut.

The mediators agreed with Sora’s proposal that Rayon should pay K16.00. But Rayon said he could not pay. Rayon then started a fight with Sora’s two sons, Bruce Lee Sora and Darius Sora.

The accused, Charlie Langu, was at the mediation session. The accused is also from Samgit. Sora Yasaku knows him well. He also knows Rayon well. Charlie supported Rayon in the fight. Charlie and Rayon interrupted the mediation session. Others also joined in the fight. As a result of this fight, the mediation stopped. An attempt was made to injure Sora. But he did not sustain big injuries at this first fight. (The later incident at Samgit, where Rita Sora was killed is referred to as the second fight.)

Sora Yasaku and his two sons and his wife were outnumbered by Rayon and Charlie and their supporters. So they fled to Samgit. Shortly after they arrived, two men appeared. They were Rayon and Charlie. They were both holding spears. It was about 3 o’clock in the afternoon.

Sora said that he was talking to a man called Douglas. Then Rita called out that they were surrounded. Then Rayon threw a spear at him. He received three wounds.

He looked around and saw Charlie Langu throw a spear at his wife. It missed and Rita took cover at the doorway of their house. Charlie Langu then threw a second spear, which struck his wife at the back of her neck and came out through her throat. She staggered around like a chicken and fell down. Blood flowed from her body like water. She was dead. Rayon and Charlie ran away.

He had a clear, uninterrupted vision of this incident. He saw Charlie Langu with his own eyes throw the spear that killed his wife. Charlie did not have his face covered. He was only about four metres away from Charlie Langu and about five metres from his wife. The incident happened right at the front of their house. Straight after the incident, Charlie and Rayon ran away.

He has not received any compensation for the death of his wife.

His family had previously had problems with Charlie Langu. This arose out of an affair that Charlie had with the wife of a man called Martin Pauka. That matter had been taken by Martin to the Village Court. The magistrate who dealt with the case was Jack Kiaparu. Charlie was ordered to pay K1,000.00. Charlie did not accept that decision. He did not agree with it. It was a big issue in the village. Charlie Langu had a grudge against Rita Sora, who was his aunty.

In cross-examination, it was put to Sora Yasaku by Mr Siminji that there was no enmity between Rita Sora and Charlie Langu’s family. He replied that no, Charlie Langu had a big problem with the Sora family and with Rita in particular. Mr Siminji suggested to Sora Yasaku three times that he was lying. Three times he denied lying. He denied receiving compensation. He said that if he received compensation, his signature would be on “the paper” as proof.

Charlie Langu was at the mediation session at Nindiko. He was part of the fight that broke out at the mediation. Mr Siminji put to the witness that it was in fact Rayon who speared his wife to death. He denied that emphatically.

In re-examination by Mr Wala, Sora Yasaku repeated that Charlie Langu was involved in the fight at the...