State v Geai [2024] PGNC 329; N10999 (3 September 2024)

N10999

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR No. 1253 OF 2022

THE STATE

V

RICHARD GEAI & FELIX GEAI

Waigani: Miviri J
2024: 21^st August, 3^rd September

CRIMINAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Manslaughter S302 CCA – Plea – Drunken Brawl Deceased Chased and Stabbed – Severe Internal Injuries Right Chest – Massive Bleeding – Knife Used – First Offenders – Unlawful Action – Death Resulting – Prevalent Offence – strong deterrent sentence – 15 years IHL.

Facts

Both Accused chased the deceased culmination of a drunken brawl stabbing him in the chest from which he bled to his death.

Held

Guilty plea.
First time offenders.
Protection of Life
Prevalent Offence
15 years IHL
Remand Deducted.

Cases Cited:
Lialu v The State [1990] PNGLR 487
Tardrew, Public Prosecutor [1986] PNGLR 91
Marangi v The State [2002] PGSC 15; SC702
Avia Aihi v The State (No 3) [1982] PNGLR 92
Kovi v The State [2005] PGSC 34; SC789
Lawrence Simbe vs. The State [1994] PNGLR 38
Kumbamong v State [2008] PGSC 51; SC1017
State v Hurotove [2017] PGNC 114; N6754
Tapi v The State [2000] PGSC 2; SC635
State v Walus [2005] PGNC 147; N2802
State v Jeribanu [2021] PGNC 264; N8979
State v Hagei [2005] PGNC 60; N2913
Public Prosecutor v Hale [1998] PGSC 26; SC564

Counsel:

S. Kuku & M. Tamate, for the State
K. Watakapura, for the Defendant

SENTENCE

3^rd September 2024

1. MIVIRI J: Brothers Felix Geai and Richard Geai both of Kuirapo Korina village, Koiari District, Central Province appear to be sentenced for Manslaughter of Paul Memea after pleading guilty to the Indictment pursuant to section 302 of the Code.
   
2. Both were arraigned that on the 24^th October 2021 around 1.00am and 2.00am they, Richard Geai and Felix Geai were at Rabiagini Settlement two (2) Mile Hill National Capital District. Paul Memea the deceased was at the same time drunk. He returned to Rabiagini settlement and started arguing with his wife and other ladies who were watching Television outdoor. The wife and other ladies with the bystanders fought with him, He hit one of the ladies on the head with a stone during that argument.
   
3. Richard Geai upon seeing this went and fought with the deceased. During the fight Richard Geai slipped and fell and the deceased punched him on this face and ran away. Felix Geai ran into help his brother and both chased the deceased to take revenge. Both of them chased the deceased into one Cletus Gomeai’s yard and he tripped on a water supply pipe lying exposed on the ground and fell to the ground. Both Accused came upon him instantly kicking and punching the deceased until the deceased was unconscious. They left him at the scene on the ground in pain. He was rushed to the Port Moresby general hospital where he was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). He died the next day on the 25^th October 2021 from the injuries sustained.
   
4. Both Accused unlawfully caused the death of the deceased contrary to section 302 of Manslaughter of the Criminal Code Act. That section is in the following terms, “A person who unlawfully kills another under such circumstances as not to constitute wilful murder, murder or infanticide is guilty of manslaughter.
   

Penalty: Subject to Section 19, imprisonment for life.”

5. Each has admitted the offence by pleading to the facts set out above. Each prisoner could be sentenced to the maximum of life imprisonment. But their facts and circumstances do not fit as the worst offence of Manslaughter. Because had Richard Geai minded his own business and not stepped into helping those who were assaulted by the deceased, it would not have led to the participation of Felix Geai. He was beaten by the deceased drawing his brother Felix into the assault in retaliation. But in so doing they outnumbered him by the amount of force that they used upon him. Felix Geai stabbed the deceased in the right chest with a knife leading eventually to his death therefrom. He is their in-law having married to their big brother’s daughter, but they paid no heed of that fact presumably they also were affected by alcohol or driven beyond reason by anger in retaliation. Both are first offenders from Kuirapo Korina village, Koiari District, Central Province. This is the unlawful fact of their commission of the offence. They defied the law in committing the assault that eventually led to his demise. This level of violence is independently verified by Doctor Damien Hasola Senior Specialist General and Urologist of the Port Moresby General hospital dated the 7^th December 2021. Of grave is the fact that Paul Memea 21 years old was admitted on the 24^th October 2021 and died on the 25^th October 2021. His cause of death was, “Severe haemorrhage shock (class 1V shock) as a result of penetrating stab wound to the right chest.” This is not a single punch as in Lialu v The State [1990] PNGLR 487. This is the use of a knife drawn out against the deceased by his own flesh and blood, his in-laws pursuing him like a pig to be slaughtered for the feast. This level of violence cannot be ignored. It outweighs even in the face of the fact that the prisoners have each pleaded guilty.
   
6. Richard Geai is 29 years old, and Felix Geai is 31 years old. Both are married, Richard with four children aged from 16, 13, 9, and 2 years old. Whilst Felix also married has three children aged 15, 12 and 5 years old. He is educated to grade 8 at Kuriva St John’s Primary School. He did not pursue further education but was employed with Kwila Insurance in their maintenance section. He spent 3 years 9 months on remand which is the same for his brother Richard Geai. He too was educated to grade 8 at Kilakila High School. He too was employed at the same company with his brother. Both brothers are of the Catholic faith. Both are first offenders who have each pleaded guilty to this offence. Presentence report has been filed in respect of both prisoners. In each case there is nothing materially substantive to show a sentence other than a custodial term. Both are not youthful first offenders. They are mature men married with children. The attainments in spiritual development within the prison is indication of attempt to lift their morality. By itself is not basis for a suspended sentence.
   
7. Because such in my view will be accorded if there is a program involving work and development of life outside the prison in industry, perhaps school to qualify higher in education. And a placing for the same outside prison. In my view that would be basis to give credence to the views set out in Tardrew, Public Prosecutor [1986] PNGLR 91. Because suspension is punishment on proper basis. Particularly in the light of the fact that, "Manslaughter is a very serious matter or offence and it carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. And the life imprisonment is because a life is gone, and that person is never going to come back. "No matter whose fault it is, the person is dead, and it is tragic.” Marangi v The State [2002] PGSC 15; SC702 (8 November 2002).
   
8. But the imposition of life imprisonment is not warranted here as it is not the worst offence: Avia Aihi v The State (No 3) [1982] PNGLR 92. In my view it is a serious offence of manslaughter but not the worst. It is a culmination of an action between biological brothers against the deceased who is their in-law marrying daughter of their elder brother. A proportionate sentence will be the aggregate after consideration of all mitigating, aggravating, and any extenuating circumstances. What is particularly aggravating is the fact that a knife was used in stabbing the deceased in the chest a venerable part of the body. It cannot be category one, because that would be applicable if there is no weapon used. Realistically this is category two of manslaughter beginning with 13 to 16 years imprisonment. It was not a planned offence. But it was joint by both prisoners out spanning the force that was used to commit the offence: Kovi v The State [2005] PGSC 34; SC789 (31 May 2005).
   
9. Because it is basic and paramount that the life of a fellow human being must be accorded respect by some time spent in custody. And sentence will be drawn out by its own facts and circumstances posed individually: Lawrence Simbe vs. The State [1994] PNGLR 38. It is not proportionate urged by the defence that part of the sentence be suspended. There is no material basis in the evidence and the presentence report warranting exercise of discretion entailing. No one case is the same and will be subject only to the will of the legislature inscribed here of life imprisonment. To adhere to tariff and range will be legislating not the territory of the Courts: Kumbamong v State [2008] PGSC 51; SC1017 (29 September 2008). Sentences imposed have not defeated the fact that the offence is very prevalent. By that fact imposing upon the Court the duty to impose sentences that will punish and have a deterrent effect on like or would be offenders: State v Hurotove [2017] PGNC 114; N6754 (5 June 2017).
   
10. Using a weapon like a knife as here would draw time in custody demonstrated in Tapi v The State [2000] PGSC 2; SC635 (30 March 2000) maintaining that it was the top end of manslaughter cases for 16 years to have been imposed on a husband who had cut up the wife causing massive bleeding from which she died. Further the level of violence as in State v Walus [2005] PGNC 147; N2802 (25 February 2005) 18 years IHL was imposed upon the prisoner who pleaded guilty to assaulting the deceased who sustained a broken neck as well as a ruptured spleen from which she died. That would be tipping the scale in seriousness comparably here. Comparably State v Jeribanu [2021] PGNC 264; N8979 (16 July 2021) would be similar to an extent in that the deceased was married to the prisoner’s daughter. But he was 70-year-old which is not the case here. Both prisoners are not advanced in their ages. Their facts do not draw 10 years imprisonment and suspension of part of the sentence.
    
11. There is nothing exceptional setting out sentence from the ordinary: State v Hagei [2005] PGNC 60; N2913 (21 September 2005). Here it has not been drawn outstanding warranting a sentence other than a custodial term at the lower end of Manu Kovi (supra). The presentence or probation report does not contain material that outweigh to impose a non-custodial term, Public Prosecutor v Hale [1998] PGSC 26; SC564 (27 August 1998). It would not be erroneous to consider that 15 years IHL is appropriate for the reasons I set out above. I particularly take account that both are first offenders who have pleaded guilty to assaulting stabbing with a knife and taking the life of their in-law. The family unit extended in Papua New Guinea must be protected from disintegration by violence. Alcohol must not conceal the impact of the law upon those who see fit to offend. I hold so because without its play both prisoners would not have gone to the level of violence played out here. Their families will suffer their service of the sentence imposed. That is the deterrence called. But time spent in remand awaiting is deducted of three (3) years nine (9) months from the head sentence of each prisoner. Both will serve the balance in jail.
    
12. The sentence upon Richard Geai and Felix Geai for the manslaughter of Paul Memea committed on the 24^th October 2021 at Rabiagini Settlement two (2) Mile Hill National Capital District is 15 years imprisonment in hard labour. Three (3) years nine (9) months is deducted forthwith for their respective remand periods. Both will serve the balance in jail of eleven (11) years three (3) months in jail in hard labour forthwith. I do not see any basis to further suspend that or part of that sentence.
    

Sentenced accordingly.

Public Prosecutor: Lawyer for the State

Public Solicitor: Lawyer for the Defendant