Regina v Ta'au - Judgment [1996] SBHC 81; HC-CRC 095 of 1993 (31 October 1996)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Criminal Case No. 95 of 1993

REGINA

-V-

NELSON TA’AU

High Court of Solomon Islands
(LUNGOLE-AWICH, J)

Hearing: 31st October 1996
Judgment: 31st October 1996

F Mwanesalua for the Prosecution
Accused In Person

JUDGMENT

(LUNGOLE-AWICH), J: The summary of facts together with answers given by accused confirm unequivocal plea of guilty to offence under S:271 (1) (c) (ii) of the Penal Code. The court enters plea of guilty on the charge and convicts the accused of the offence of conversion contrary to section 271 (1) (c) (iii) of the Penal Code.

Mitigation:

PROSECUTOR:	Accused is now 33 years old, from Maranu’u village in Makira Province. He is married and has 5 children. Now unemployed, convicted of false pretence on 31.8.92 sentenced to 4 months in prison. The bank has sent letter dated 11.10.96. That money has been repaid and hand in letter - dated 11.10.1996.
ACCUSED:	The conviction of 1992 was about cocoa not money of the banks. Read out letter he wrote - included as annexure No. 2. I did not mean to use the money without refunding. Usually withdrawal is 30% and profit is 70%. Bank official came to check without warning and found money missing. I have now repaid. I have 5 little children. I had asked prosecution to withdraw.

Sentence

Mr Nelson Ta’au has pleaded guilty to the offence of conversion under section 271 (1) (ii) of the Penal Code. That offence is regarded as a serious one by the legislators. Although described as misdemeanour, the maximum penalty provided for is 7 years imprisonment. Accused has a record of conviction for offence of obtaining by false pretence, committed in 1992. So it would appear the sentence to pass in this case would be on the higher side of the scale.

On the other hand, accused at the age of 33 years only is now a father of 5 children who at this stage need all his support and attention. He has admitted his guilt and has written a plea in mitigation which indicates remorse. He has also made effort and paid in full the sum of $3,054.87 he converted. These factors call for leniency in sentencing him.

It is my view that a sentence part of which is suspended may well be an appropriate threat that will keep him out of what may develop into a habit. I am aware that in some countries suspended sentence has been a subject of much debate and in England restricted to special or extraordinary circumstances. I however consider that appropriate sentences in one country may not be appropriate in another, because social circumstances differ greatly. It is fundamental that a sentence must suit the offence and the offender. A suitable sentence here, taking into account the seriousness of the offence and accused’s record, and on the other hand his plea of guilty, him being a father of five, and his effort to have paid off the money converted, I sentence Mr Nelson Ta’au to 2 years imprisonment, but suspend 15 months of the 2 years, on condition that he does not get convicted for offence of theft, or offence including theft and false pretence, over a period of 3 years.

Accused has right of appeal only in respect of sentence. He may not appeal in 30 days.

Delivered and
Dated this 1st day of October 1996
At the High Court
Honiara

Sam Lungole-Awich
Judge