The State v Jerry Mana (2003) N2367

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Kandakasi J
• Judgment Date: 02 May 2003
• Citation: (2003) N2367
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2003
• Judgement Number: N2367

Full Title: The State v Jerry Mana (2003) N2367

National Court: Kandakasi J

Judgment Delivered: 2 May 2003

1 CRIMINAL LAW—Sentence—Manslaughter—Guilty Plea—Death resulting from drunken brawl—One punch causing deceased to fall on his head on hard concrete floor—Serious injuries to head leading to death—First time offender—Sentencing guidelines considered—Sentence of 9 years imposed—s302 Criminal Code.

2 Rex Lialu v The State [1990] PNGLR 487, Anna Max Marangi v The State (2002) SC702, Antap Yala v The State (1994) (CRA No 64 of 1994, Unnumbered and Unreported Supreme Court judgment of Amet CJ, Salika J and Injia J dated 31 May 1996 at Mt Hagen; SCR 69/96), Jack Tanga v The State (1999) SC602, John Kapil Tapi v The State (2000) SC635, The State v Dominic Mangirak (2003) (CR 625 of 2003, Unreported and Unnumbered judgment delivered on 29 April 2003), The State v Jimmy Morgan (2001) N2171, Kesino Apo v The State [1988] PNGLR 182, The State v Abel Airi (2000) N2007, The State v Gilbert Peter Diga (2000) N1991 and The State v Lucas Yovura (2003) N2366 referred to

___________________________

N2367

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO. 53 of 2002

THE STATE

-V-

JERRY MANA

WEWAK: KANDAKASI, J.

2003: 28th April

02nd May

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Manslaughter — Guilty Plea — Death resulting from drunken brawl – One punch causing deceased to fall on his head on hard concrete floor – Serious injuries to head leading to death - First time offender – Sentencing guidelines considered – Sentence of 9 years imposed – s.302 Criminal Code.

Cases cited:

Rex Lialu v. The State [1988-89] PNGLR 487.

Anna Max Marangi v The State (08/11/02) SC702.

Antap Yala v. The State, (Unreported judgement 31/05/96).

Jack Tanga v. The State (1999) SC602.

John Kapil Tapi v. The State (2000) SC635.

The State v. Dominic Mangirak (unreported and unnumbered judgement delivered 29/04/03) CR 625 of 2003.

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

Kesino Apo v. The State [1988] PNGLR 182.

The State v Abel Airi (28/11/00) N2007.

The State v. Gilbert Peter Diga (17/04/00) N1991.

The State v. Lucas Yovura (unreported and unnumbered judgement delivered 29/04/03) CR 2002 of 2003.

Counsel

Mr. M. Ruarri for the State

Mr. D. Kari for the Accused

DECISION ON SENTENCE

02nd May, 2003

KANDAKASI J: You pleaded guilty to one charge of manslaughter or unlawful killing contrary to s. 302 of the Criminal Code. Upon reading the material in the deposition, which was admitted into evidence with your consent, I was satisfied that there was enough evidence to support your guilty plea. I therefore, accepted your guilty plea and convicted you on the charge presented.

The facts are straight forward. Around 8:00 p.m. on 11th September 2001, you were at the Kaprai Club here in Wewak, drinking beer. There were a number of other people also drinking beer and playing darts. Amongst them, was a Philip Beiso, who is now deceased. Also at the club was a Robert Jagi, who bought you two bottles of beer. Upon seeing that, the deceased continued to ask Robert Jagi in terms of “what kind of a person were you that he (Robert) was buying you two bottles of beer?” You got fed up of that and asked him to stop but he continued. That made you to slap him in his face and he fell down on the hard concrete floor on his back. You tried to resuscitate the deceased without success.

The deceased was then taken to the Boram Hospital. There was nothing the doctors could do to save his life. He was pronounced dead later the same night. According to the medical report and other evidence on file, the deceased died of a fractured head and brain hemorrhage or bleeding.

In your own address on sentence, you told this Court that you did not mean to kill the deceased. You said you were sorry for what you had done. You also told the Court that you have taken steps to pay compensation to the deceased relatives but his people have not yet come to you to receive it. Further, you told the Court that this is your first offence. You are married with 3 children. Your third born child died whilst you were in custody. In addition to your own, you told the Court that you are also looking after your elder brother’s illegitimate children who are all in school. Your brother is away in Japan studying. His children are quite undisciplined and they need your close supervision. If you are sent to prison, your children and those of your brothers will suffer. You therefore asked this Court to be merciful and be lenient to you in placing you under a good behaviour bond or probation.

At your lawyers request I ordered a pre-sentence report to assist me in determining an appropriate sentence for you. I also directed you to get your brother to confirm your claims in relation to his children and show why he is not able to take care of his own children.

I am now in receipt of the report from the probation service. The report recommends a non-custodial sentence to avoid sufferings to you and your brother’s children.

Your lawyer took it further on your behalf and urged the Court to note that you pleaded guilty and co-operated well with the police and the other authorities up to this Court. This saved the State and the Court substantial time it could have taken if there was a denial. He also asked me to note your personal background and that this is a case of unintentional killing only as opposed to a case of willful murder or intentional wounding leading to death. Further, he urged me to distinguish your case from other manslaughter cases. Taking these factors into account he submitted on your behalf that your sentence should start at 6 years.

In support of his argument, your lawyer drew the Court’s attention to the Supreme Court judgement in Rex Lialu v. The State [1988-89] PNGLR 487. That case set guidelines for sentencing in manslaughter cases at page 497 of its judgement. Subsequently the Supreme Court in Anna Max Marangi v The State (08/11/02) SC702, revisited those guidelines. In so doing, it had regard to its earlier judgements in Antap Yala v. The State, (Unreported judgement 31/05/96); Jack Tanga v. The State (1999) SC602; and John Kapil Tapi v. The State (2000) SC635.

It spoke of 3 main categories of manslaughter cases. These categories as I noted in the case of The State v. Dominic Mangirak (unreported and unnumbered judgement delivered 29/04/03) CR 625 of 2003 are as follows:

“The first consists of cases in which force is used accidentally or in an uncalculated manner, such as a single blow, punches or kicks on any part of deceased’s body. This also includes cases in which death is cause by an acceleration of a pre-existing disease or condition leading to death. These kinds of killings attract sentences between three (3) years and seven (7) years.

The second are cases that involve repeated application of vicious force, with or without the use of an instrument or weapon, such as repeated kicks and punches applied to the head or chest with deliberate intention to wound or cause bodily harm. Deaths caused by a single or multiple knife stab wounds applied to the head, neck, chest or abdomen or on any other vulnerable part of the body, even if there is no other special aggravating factors, come under this category. This category attracts sentences between 8 and 12 years.

The third and final involve cases in which there is direction application of force in a calculated manner, on the body using a weapon such as a knife, bush knife or axe causing serious bodily injuries, such as piercing vital organs or severing vital parts of the body. Deaths caused by chopping the neck, legs and arms with an axe or bush knife are examples of this kind of killings. This includes death caused by single or multiple knife stab wounds on the head, face, neck, chest or the abdomen if accompanied by other special aggravating factors may also fall under this category. These kinds of killings attract sentences between...