State v Mark [2010] PGNC 262; N4182 (22 October 2010)

N4182

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO 629 OF 2009

STATE

V

LILLIAN MARK

Alotau: Manuhu, J.
2010: 11, 20 & 22 October

CRIMINAL LAW – Particular offence – Murder – Sentence - Deceased stabbed during argument over suspected extra-marital affair – Deceased instigated argument – Deceased stabbed from behind – Sentencing considerations – Female offender to be sentenced differently to male offender.

Case cited:

Manu Kovi v The State (2005) SC789.

Counsel:

L. Kuvi, for the State.
E. Wurr, for the Prisoner.

22 October, 2010

1. MANUHU, J.: The prisoner, Lillian Mark, pleaded guilty to one count of murder. On 8 February 2009, deceased Monica Mona was stabbed by the prisoner from which she later died following an argument over suspicion of an extra-marital affair. She is before me again for decision on sentence.

2. Monica suspected that the prisoner was having an affair with her husband so she went to the prisoner's residence on the day in question obviously to confront the prisoner. There was an argument which drew the attention of the public. The prisoner went to the house and returned with a knife. She approached Monica who was facing the public and stabbed her at her back. Monica turned around and further stab wounds were inflicted. The prisoner denied intentionally inflicting the subsequent wounds. Monica died from massive loss of blood from the wounds.

3. The prisoner is 33 years old. She comes from Western Highlands Province. She is married with 2 children. Her parents are deceased. They died when the prisoner was a small girl and one of her sisters took care of her. She is a member of the CRC mission. She completed Grade 10 and then attended Madang Teachers College but withdrew. She then took up secretarial and computing studies at Commercial Training Centre in Madang.

4. She was employed by Ela Motors in Madang from 1996 to 2003. Then she joined PNG Motors in Mount Hagen. She then moved to Mapai Transport in Mount Hagen in 2008. At the end of 2008, she joined Star Shipping in Alotau as Branch Manager. Her employment was terminated after the killing. She is currently employed as Administration Clerk with Alotau Primary School.

5. Her personal background is impressive. Her command of the English language is above average. She is an intelligent woman. She possesses leadership and managerial attributes. She was Branch Manager when she committed this offence.

6. With such a background, I can understand the feeling of hurt and humiliation when the deceased confronted her in the privacy and confines of her home and in the presence of her children. The confrontation drew the attention of the public and her neighbours. Given her standing, her reputation, and her integrity as a manager, to be openly accused, rightly or wrongly, for having an affair with a married man must have been humiliating. It may have been the ultimate test of her mental strength.

7. With her background, it can be said that she should have been the wiser. She should have avoided the stabbing to avoid losing her job, to avoid leaving her children behind, and to avoid the risk of going to jail. But her weakest side was exposed and had the better of her during the argument. From the way she was brought up, she gets easily agitated and is over defensive. Within minutes, she armed herself with a knife to stab Monica. Then she stabbed Monica. That decision would be a life changing decision for the prisoner and her children.

8. The killing was unfortunate. It was not premeditated. It was committed on the spur of the moment. The prisoner is a first offender. She pleaded guilty to a very serious offence. Her plea of guilty has saved the State time and money it would have spent to conduct a trial. She cooperated with the police during the conduct of the record of interview. She is willing to make compensation payment. She has expressed genuine remorse. But a life has been lost. Monica was a wife, a mother, a sister and a friend in the community. The sanctity of life has to be respected. No one has the right to take another person's life.

9. The prisoner's lawyer has asked the Court to impose a sentence between 12 and 15 years. The State's lawyer has asked the Court to impose a sentence between 16 and 20 years. I agree with both lawyers. Their submissions are based on the Supreme Court case of Manu Kovi v The State (2005) SC 789, where sentencing guidelines for murder are prescribed. On the basis that the prisoner used a knife, her sentence should be between 16 and 20 years. But the confrontation, justified or not, was brought upon the prisoner by Monica and the prisoner acted on the spur of the moment, as I have described. The prisoner did not set out to fight Monica. It was Monica who went to the prisoner's residence and instigated the argument.

10. In the circumstances, 15 years would be an appropriate sentence. But I would, in the exercise of my sentencing discretion, give further discount because the prisoner is a female offender. In my view, the male population of this country is largely responsible for the high rate of crime in this country. The female population is more law abiding. If men could be as obedient as women, our country would be a better place. Proof of this is in the prison institution where male population is 4 times more than the female population. In my view, therefore, female offenders should generally be sentenced differently to men. This, by the way, is consistent with our Melanesian culture.

11. Ultimately, I am of the view that a sentence of 13 years is appropriate. The prisoner has been in custody for 7 months, which is deducted from the head sentence. She has 12 years and 5 months to serve in hard labour. Her bail money shall be refunded.

_________________________________

J W Tamate, Acting Public Prosecutor: Lawyer for the State
F Pitpit, Public Solicitor: Lawyer for the prisoner