Republic v Uriam [2008] KIHC 18; Criminal Case 27 of 2008 (21 July 2008)

In the High Court of Kiribati
Criminal Jurisdiction
Held at Betio
Republic of Kiribati

High Court Criminal Case 27 of 2008

The Republic

v

Aremira Uriam

For the Republic: Ms Tumai Timeon
For the Accused: Mr Raweita Beniata

Date of Hearing: 21 July 2008

JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore)

On his first arraignment, on 6 June, the accused pleaded guilty to count 1 indecent assault and not guilty to count 2, indecent assault and to count 3, rape. The trial on counts 2 and 3 was fixed for today. Before proceeding today Ms Timeon applied to amend count 3 by substituting for the charge of rape the charge of indecent assault. This meant that counts 2 and 3 became identical – indecent assault "sometimes between 1 and 31 December 2006 at Anraei Bonriki -----". When I pointed this out, after a short adjournment Ms Timeon amended the dates in count 3 to "sometimes between 1 and 28 February 2007".

Count 1 to which the accused has pleaded guilty is sufficiently particularized – to within a bracket of a week between Christmas and the end of December but count 2 is at some time overlapping it – sometime during December. Count 3 is finally put sometime in the month of February 2007.

The dates are so vague as to make me doubt whether it is fair to the accused for him to have to meet the charges.

I did allow the prosecutor to open and to call the alleged victim, a girl now aged 15. I allowed Ms Timeon to examine her on count 1 even though it was admitted so that it would be separated in the girl’s mind from the other two alleged occasions. But when the victim talking of count 1 described a rape – that he inserted his penis into her vagina – I queried it with Ms Timeon. Ms Timeon confessed that this was new to her. I asked whether she had any corroborative evidence to call. It seems that she has only the slightest. I told Ms Timeon that I would not be able to have other than a doubt about the girl’s reliability and reminded her of the danger of convicting in a sexual case on the uncorroborated evidence of the alleged victim.

All this persuaded me to do what I had earlier been hesitating to do – strike out counts 2 and 3 for lack of particularity.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice