State v Kaupa [2000] PGNC 66; N2009 (14 November 2000)

N2009

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR 713 of 2000

THE STATE

V

WARI KAUPA

Unlawful Killing

LAE: GAVARA-NANU, J

2000 : November 14

CRIMINAL LAW – Manslaughter – Aggravating and mitigating factors, prevalence of the offence – Degree of culpability.

Cases cited:
Rex Lealu v The State [1990] PNGLR 487

The State v Betty Kondai CR 553 of 2000

Counsel:
N. Miviri for the State
J. Kaumi for the Accused

SENTENCING

The prisoner is a young woman aged 19 years, charged with manslaughter of one Rome Simeon on 11th February, 2000, under Section 302 of the Code. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment.

The prisoner killed the deceased with a kitchen knife by stabbing her on the chest. According to the prisoner’s record of interview, she was on her way to Bundi Camp market in Lae, when suddenly the victim armed with an iron bar came from behind and hit her. She said, she managed to fend off the attack and escaped to Bundi Police Station to report the matter. She said, near Bundi Police Station the victim caught up with her and tried to hit her with a stone but missed, the victim then tried to hit her with the iron bar again, but the prisoner held onto the iron bar and both of them got into a scuffle and in the process, the prisoner got a kitchen knife and stabbed the deceased on the chest which resulted in her death.

Applying the principles in Rex Lealu v The State [1990] PNGLR 487, I make following findings of fact:-

1. There was provocation by the victim in the non legal sense.

2. The death occurred as the direct result of the attack by the prisoner.
3. The death was caused by a weapon, namely a knife.
4. There was deliberate intention to harm the deceased.
   

Having found these facts, I also find that the attack on the deceased by the prisoner was because the deceased was attacking the prisoner with an iron bar. Therefore there is that explanation for the prisoner’s actions.

In this case, the deceased was the aggressor. There appears to be some grudges between the prisoner and the deceased prior to the fight which resulted in this death. The statement of facts suggest that the deceased may have been suspecting the prisoner of having a sexual relationship with her husband, which may be the reason why she attacked her with stones and iron bar but this was never put to the prisoner in her record of interview, so I do not give weight to it, other than to say that something had angered the deceased prior to the fight.

I consider this case to be different from the recent case of The State v Betty Kondai CR 553 of 2000, where his Honour Mr. Justice Injia sentenced the prisoner to 10 years for stabbing the deceased to death with a kitchen knife. There, the prisoner was the only instigating and aggressive party. In that case, the prisoner hit the deceased with a stone then went on to stab him with a kitchen knife, the deceased never fought the prisoner.

As I said, the deceased here was the aggressor. She attacked the prisoner with stones and an iron bar and it was when the deceased was trying to hit the prisoner again with the iron bar that the prisoner stabbed her.

However, that is not to say that the prisoner is totally free from fault or blameworthiness, because she deliberately pulled the knife and stabbed the deceased. Knife is a deadly weapon to use in any situation and those who use it especially in a fight must realise that the possibility of causing serious injury or even death with it is ever so present.

This type of killing is becoming prevalent and those who use knives to attack people must be punished in order to deter others.

There are mitigating factors which mitigate the sentence such as the young age of the prisoner and that this is her first offence, she pleaded guilty, she paid K1,000.00 compensation to the relatives of the deceased.

Therefore having considered all the circumstances of this case, I consider sentence of 4 years IHL to be appropriate. She has been in custody for 9 months 1 week. I deduct that period. She will serve 3 years 2 months 3 weeks IHL.

Lawyer for the State: Panuel Mogish

Lawyer for the Accused: Cronox Manek