The State v Mondo Baundo (2007) N5045

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Cannings J
• Judgment Date: 24 August 2007
• Citation: (2007) N5045
• Docket Number: CR NO 1320 of 2006
• Court: National Court
• Year: 2007
• Judgement Number: N5045

Full Title: CR NO 1320 of 2006; The State v Mondo Baundo (2007) N5045

National Court: Cannings J

Judgment Delivered: 24 August 2007

N5045

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO 1320 0F 2006

THE STATE

V

MONDO BAUNDO

Kimbe: Cannings J

2007: 8, 24 August

SENTENCE

CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – arson – guilty plea – bush material house – neighbourhood dispute – sentence of 6 years

A man pleaded guilty to arson. He became angered by a report that his pig had been speared, confronted the people allegedly responsible and, still angry, burned down their house.

Held:

(1) The starting point for sentencing for arson regarding a dwelling house is ten years imprisonment.

(2) Mitigating factors are: lives not at risk; sole offender; offence not planned; de-facto provocation; isolated incident; co-operated with police; no further trouble; pleaded guilty; remorse; first-time offender; favourable pre-sentence report.

(3) A sentence of six years was imposed. The pre-sentence period in custody was deducted and all of the sentence was suspended subject to conditions including payment of compensation.

Cases cited

The following cases are cited in the judgment:

Gimble v The State [1988-89] PNGLR 271

Saperus Yalibakut v The State (2006) SC890

The State v Alfred Awesa CR 1587/2005, 06.04.06

The State v Bernard Bambai CR 1931/2005, 23.03.06

The State v Bonifas Bowa CR 1930/2005, 23.03.06

The State v Jacob Patore CR 32/2005, 27.03.07

The State v Oscar Rebon, Alken Rebon and Nautim Benal CR 29-31/2005, 09.03.07

The State v Patrick Michael & Leo Koligen CR 281 & 283/2004, 10.10.05

The State v Pelly Vireru & Spelly Kaiwa CR 468 & 469/2002, 20.12.05

The State v Rex Hekawi Tami CR 1590/2005, 23.03.06

SENTENCE

This was a judgment on sentence for arson.

Counsel

F Popeu, for the State

R Beli, for the offender

24 August, 2007

1. CANNINGS J: This is a decision on sentence for a man who pleaded guilty to one count of arson arising from the following facts. On 28 May 2006 the offender, Mondo Baundo, was at his block at Buvussi, near Kimbe, harvesting oil palm. At 3.00 pm he was informed that the complainant, Rex Ignas, has speared his pig with the intention of killing it. Mondo armed himself with a bow and arrow and confronted Rex’s brother, Norman Ignas, asking why they wanted to kill his pig. Mondo went back to his house, got kerosene, found a stick, tied rags around it, poured the kerosene, lit the device and used it to set fire to Rex’s house. It was made of bush materials and was completely destroyed. Mondo acted intentionally and without lawful justification or excuse. He has been convicted of an offence under Section 436(a) of the Criminal Code.

ANTECEDENTS

2. The offender has no prior convictions.

ALLOCUTUS

3. The offender said:

I apologise for what I have done. I would not have done it without a reason. They killed my pig but said that a demon killed it. That is why I got angry and burned their house. I would like to reconcile with the victims and help them rebuild their house.

OTHER MATTERS OF FACT

4. As the offender has pleaded guilty he will be given the benefit of the doubt on mitigating matters raised in the depositions, the allocutus or in submissions that are not contested by the prosecution (Saperus Yalibakut v The State (2006) SC890). He cooperated with the police and made admissions in his police interview.

PRE-SENTENCE REPORT

5. I received a pre-sentence report from the Community Corrections and Rehabilitation Service, which is summarised below.

MONDO BAUNDO: male, aged about 40.

Residence: Buvussi, Section 2.

Family background: mother and father from Gon village, Kundiawa District, Simbu Province – Mondo is second-born in a family of five – family moved to WNB in 1978.

Marital status: married with two children – happily married.

Education: Grade 4, Buvussi Primary School.

Employment: worked as a labourer at Bilomi and Malalimi plantations.

Health: OK.

Financial status: earns income from sale of oil palm.

Plans: continue to raise his family and manage his oil palm block.

Offender’s family’s attitude: supportive – his wife and his sister do not want him sent to jail – this would create problems for the family.

Victim’s attitude: Rex does not want the offender to go to jail – he would prefer that the offender compensates him – Rex and the offender get along OK now but Rex’s parents still bear grudge against offender – Rex’s father wants K6,000.00 compensation.

Attitude of community: prior to offence his behavioural record in local community was sound – ward councillor speaks highly of him.

Religion: offender member of Evangelical Lutheran Church – involved in church activities and well regarded.

Assessment: not a threat to community – committed offence out of frustration.

Recommendation: suitable for probation.

SUBMISSIONS BY DEFENCE COUNSEL

6. Mr Beli highlighted the guilty plea, that the offender has no criminal record and he has a good pre-sentence report. Three years, fully suspended, subject to payment of K500.00 compensation, would be an appropriate sentence, he submitted.

SUBMISSIONS BY THE STATE

7. Mr Popeu submitted that though it was only a bush material house that was burned, it was somebody’s home. Hence the offence was serious and warranted a sentence of five or six years. The sentence would be suspended subject to payment of K1,000.00 he submitted.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

8. To determine the appropriate penalty I will adopt the following decision making process:

· step 1: what is the maximum penalty?

· step 2: what is a proper starting point?

· step 3: what sentences have been imposed for equivalent offences?

· step 4: what is the head sentence?

· step 5: should the pre-sentence period in custody be deducted?

· step 6: should all or part of the sentence be suspended?

STEP 1: WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM PENALTY?

9. The offender has been convicted of arson under Section 436(a) of the Criminal Code. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment. The court has discretion whether to impose the maximum penalty by virtue of Section 19 of the Criminal Code.

STEP 2: WHAT IS A PROPER STARTING POINT?

10. As I have said in recent arson cases in this province, the starting point for sentencing for the serious offence of burning down a dwelling house is ten years imprisonment (The State v Oscar Rebon, Alken Rebon and Nautim Benal CR 29-31/2005, 09.03.07; The State v Jacob Patore CR 32/2005, 27.03.07).

STEP 3: WHAT OTHER SENTENCES HAVE BEEN IMPOSED RECENTLY?

11. Before I fix a sentence, I will consider sentences I have handed down in other arson cases recently in West New Britain. These cases are shown in the following table.

SENTENCES FOR ARSON, WEST NEW BRITAIN, 2005-2007

No	Case	Details	Sentence
1	The State v Patrick Michael & Leo Koligen CR 281 & 283/2004, 10.10.05	Guilty plea – victim of arson was alleged to have sexually penetrated the daughter of one of the offenders – offenders were demanding compensation from victim – went with a mob – offenders ordered others to burn down the victim’s bush material house.	3 years, 3 years
2	The State v Pelly Vireru & Spelly Kaiwa CR 468 & 469/2002, 20.12.05	Guilty plea – dispute between one of the offenders and brother of a young female – brother damages windscreen on a bus belonging to one of the offenders – offender comes back with co-accused and a fight ensued and a dwelling house valued at over K30,000.00 was burnt down.	5 years, 5 years
3	The State v Bernard Bambai CR 1931/2005, 23.03.06	Guilty plea – a husband-wife argument (between the offender and his wife) – offender, drunk, deliberately set a pile of clothes on fire in the living room, causing the house to burn down – government property, valued at K36,000.00.	3 years
4	The State v Rex Hekawi Tami CR 1590/2005, 23.03.06	Guilty plea – prisoner suspected victims of stealing his money – pours kerosene and burned a dwelling house whilst under the influence of alcohol – victim and family were asleep in the house at the time.	6 years
5	The State v Bonifas Bowa CR 1930/2005, 23.03.06	Guilty plea – alleged infidelity of wife and victim – prisoner went with an angry mob – dwelling house was burnt down and properties looted – also convicted of stealing.	5 years
6	The State v Alfred Awesa CR 1587/2005, 06.04.06	Guilty plea – victim had smashed a beer bottle over offender’s head – offender went to victim’s house armed with bush-knife – chased everyone away and burned down the house.	5 years
7	The State v Oscar Rebon, Alken Rebon and Nautim Benal CR 29-31/2005, 09.03.07	Trial – offenders were in a mob that attacked the victim’s house late in the afternoon – terrorised the victim and his family – burned down the house and assaulted the victim.	10 years
8	The State v Jacob Patore CR 32/2005, 27.03.07	Trial – offender burned down two bush material houses and associated structures on land that he owned – apparent motive was to remove occupants of the houses as they were members of an ethnic group involved in dispute with another ethnic group living on the land – offences committed late at...