State v Kaivi [2007] PGDC 50; DC557 (26 March 2007)

DC557

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE SITTING
IN ITS GRADE FIVE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION]

GFCr 851 OF 2006

BETWEEN

THE STATE
Informant

AND

ALBERT KAIVI
Defendant

Wewak: J. Singomat
2007: 23, 26 March

CRIMINAL LAW – Threatening Behaviour – Section 7 (a) Summary Offence Act.

Plea: Not guilty – behaviour quite offensive and threatening to Person and at a reasonable man standard and accused Guilty.

Cases followed
1. Ward .vs. Holman [1964] 2 All E.R.729
2. Worcester .v. Smith [1951] V.L.R.316
3. Anderson .v. Kynastor [1924] ArgusLawRp 26; [1924] V.L.R 214
4. Criminal Jurisdiction of Magistrates in PNG

References

Counsel
Police Prosecutor C/Sgt Sella, For The State
Defendant, In Person

23, 26 March 2007

DECISION

J Singomat: On the night of 01 October 2006, the defendant, Albert Kaivi (A.K) allegedly used abusive, insulting and threatening words and behaviour towards the complainant, (Heather Kaivi) his brother’s wife. The circumstances (it seems) relate to words Albert Kaivi admitted to have used when he generally talked about his posts for building a house. However, Heather (Complainant) denied he said anything about the posts.

2. The words allegedly used were;

“You people think I live on the earnings of prostitution by my daughter and you gossip about me every time”.

3. Immediately, Albert Kaivi had also uttered, “you wait for me, I am coming...” then he advanced towards the direction of the complainant and her daughter.

4. Upon seeing the defendant’s action and hearing of the insulting and threatening words, the complainant and her daughter escaped into the dark but in different directions of each other and in fear of the defendant who had a bush knife in his hands.

5. Eventually word got to Stanley Kaivi (Heather’s husband) and George Kaivi. There was a fight minutes after what Albert Kaivi did and between his brothers and himself (Albert Kaivi).

6. There is evidence that the defendant and his brothers and infact, the Kaivi’s family have had continuous differences amongst themselves and within the family itself over time already before the 01 October 2006 incident.

7. In the light of the circumstances of this particular case, the Court find the defendant guilty for using words and gestures that did cause a real fight between himself and other members of the Kaivi family.

8. Thus the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for five (5) months. However, the said sentence is suspended in the following conditions:

8.1 The said Albert Kaivi shall pay K100-00 cash fine in default 3 months imprisonment term.

8.2 He shall pay K100-00 cash surety to the State to keep peace with the State and especially each and every member of the Kaivi family (including his own family) for two (2) years.

8.3 Albert Kaivi shall not consume alcoholic drinks during the period of the bond.

8.4 In the event of breach of any or all of the conditions, Albert Kaivi shall have the imprisonment term as imposed be re-instated against him.

8.5 The K100-00 cash bail shall be converted as Court Fine.

8.6 The said K100-00 cash surety shall be paid forthwith.

Given under my hand at Wewak this day and year first above mentioned.

Police Prosecutor, For the State Chief Sergeant Sela
Defendant in Person