Regina v Mana [2006] SBHC 143; HCSI-CRC 100 of 2003 (24 February 2006)

	Home \| Databases \| WorldLII \| Search \| Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

The defendant Lawrence Mana ("Mana") is charged with the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 199(1) of the Penal Code (cap. 26). The relevant part reads:

"Any person who by an unlawful act or omission causes the death of another person is guilty of the felony known as manslaughter."

"Lawrence Mana of Fishing Village, Gizo at the said Fishing Village on the 14th day of March 1998 unlawfully killed one namely John Wao."

The burden of proof in a criminal case lies with Prosecution from the outset. That burden is to prove the elements of the offence in this case, beyond reasonable doubt. I have to be satisfied so that I am sure that the defendant committed the offence. If I entertain a reasonable doubt, not just any doubt, it must go in favour of the defendant.

There is however only two crucial elements in this case which prosecution must prove to the requisite standard. These are elements (4) and (5); that Mana by an unlawful act caused the death of John Wao ("the Deceased").

The case for the prosecution is that Mana was responsible for the death of the Deceased when he pushed him with both hands causing him to fall down backwards resulting in his death.

The Defence Case is that Mana had nothing to do with the death of the Deceased, he did not touch his body; he was sitting on a canoe where he had been taken to when the Deceased approached him and fell down and died.

Prosecution called a total of 9 witnesses; 4 were police officers involved in the investigations. Vincent Eria and Ofoniel V Tambo conducted the interview with Mana on 16 April 1998. A typed copy of their transcripts ("recorded interview") has been produced as evidence in court, there being no issue taken regarding its accuracy or admissibility.

Michael Maeta gave very brief evidence about the knife Mana had at that time. He later identified it as his knife.

Raymond Samani (one of the sons of the Deceased) gave evidence about what happened to the post of their verandah when Mana arrived and "whipped" (cut) it with his knife causing it to fall down. He told the court he went inside the house and stayed inside as he was frightened of Mana but he did hear his other brother John Siake Wao ("Siake"), arguing with Mana outside the house. He did not see what happened to his father regarding how he fell down but he did see him lying on the ground after he had fallen down.

Trixie Simeon ("Trixie") was attending Sabbath service at that time, being a member of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. He heard shouting, noises outside and went out. He witnessed the alleged push by Mana with both hands which caused the Deceased to fall backwards on his knee. By the time he reached him the Deceased was already unconscious; he described this as "having blacked out". He says he could only feel the Deceased’s pulse but nothing further; there was no physical response from the Deceased.

Tina Sate also witnessed the critical push by Mana. She told the court she was married to the son of the Deceased at that time and was present at the scene of the incident. She is now separated from him.

Siake, another son of the Deceased who was present at the scene told the court he was upset with Mana and argued with him for causing the post of their verandah to fall down by striking it with his knife. He was an eye witness to the alleged push by Mana on his father.

Four Exhibits consisting of four documents were submitted in evidence to the court. These were:

EXHIBIT NO.	DESCRIPTION.
1.	Sketch map of the scene of crime drawn by Police Officer Vincent Eria.
2.	Copy of record of interview dated 16 April 1998
3.	Medical report of Dr. Stirling dated 17 March 1998.
4.	Sworn Statement of Philip Bae during the Committal hearing.

The sketch map showed where the alleged incident occurred. It showed there were two separate spots marked indicating two places where the Deceased was alleged to have fallen down. The first one occurred when he was pushed with Philip Bae, another old man who attended the scene to intervene but is now deceased. The second spot (marked no. 2) was where the fatal push occurred.

The record of interview showed what Mana told the Police when interviewed after being cautioned. What he says is relevant in so far as what he told police regarding use of the knife compared to what his witnesses said in court. He has elected to remain silent in court and so what he told the Police immediately after the incident in relation to the post is pertinent and does not assist his case.

The sworn statement of Philip Bae given at the committal hearing was admitted without objection. It described the events prior to the death of the Deceased. He had approached the Deceased and attempted to take him away when he was pushed and separated from the Deceased. He says he was dizzy for sometime as a result. By the time he looked around they were carrying the Deceased towards the kitchen. His statement is consistent with the evidence of other witnesses who described two pushes by Mana. His description of the push was consistent with the first push described by other witnesses.

Mana called two witnesses in his defence, Jacob Jack and George Peter. Both claimed to be present at the scene of the incident and gave evidence describing events prior to and after the incident. Their version differed markedly however regarding what caused the post of the verandah of the house of the Deceased to fall down. They claimed the post fell when Mana put his hands to it. They say the knife had been removed from his hands by then. They were behind Mana throughout. They say they heard Mana telling Bae to take the old man, referring to the Deceased, away and saw him being pushed. They say that Mana pushed Bae who then fell onto the Deceased and causing him to fall down. They then took Mana away. They say he was already sitting on his canoe at the time when the Deceased came towards him but fell down before he reached him. They say Mana never touched the Deceased or pushed him in any way.

It was not disputed that Mana was drunk and that when he went to the house of the Deceased he was armed with a knife and angry. It is not disputed that he was looking for his family at that time. At the house of the Deceased he spoke with Samani and asked about his children. When told they were not there, he did something to the post of the verandah and it fell down. As a consequence, an argument occurred between him and Siake. Siake was upset about his behaviour and for causing the verandah of his father’s house to fall down.

There were many people around the scene at that time. At some point in time the knife was removed. Jacob Jack says George Peter removed the knife; this has not been contested. What is contested is the time the knife was removed. Prosecution says it was after he had struck the post of the verandah with it, the defence says before.

It is not in dispute the Deceased came onto the scene and remonstrated with Mana. One of the persons around at that time was Bae. Mana told Bae to take him away. As Bae was leading him away there was a push and they both fell. Prosecution says they were both pushed and fell together; defence says only Bae was pushed but he fell onto the Deceased and caused him to fall down.

Did Mana cut the post of the verandah with a knife? Defence disputes that Mana cut the post of the house. They say the knife had already been removed before he put his hand to the post. This is in direct contrast to clear evidence from Samani, Siake and Tina. All three were present at the scene when Mana arrived. That is not denied. Defence however never put their version to those witnesses. In his own statement obtained under caution by the police, Mana told police he whipped (cut) the post with his knife.

On the issue of credibility of the version put by defence it is highly unlikely that a post will fall down simply because someone touches it or holds it unless some force is applied to it. No evidence has been led by defence as to the type of force applied to the post. How did the post fall down if he merely put his hand to it? Prosecution witnesses were never given opportunity to comment on this. They merely said he put his hand to the post and it fell. That version sounds so improbable, incredible to be true. I have had the benefit of listening to the evidence and observing those defence witnesses. I find their evidence on this to be too general, vague, inconsistent and unreliable. I do not believe them regarding this account.

The second contested issue relates to the question what caused the Deceased to fall down the second time? Was it a push from Mana or did the Deceased have a heart attack and collapse as he approached Mana?

I have listened carefully to the evidence adduced in court and the closing submissions of learned Counsels. I have had opportunity to observe witnesses in court.

On the issue of whether it was a push from Mana, Tina, Trixie and Siake were unshaken in evidence. They were direct eye witnesses. That however has to be contrasted with the evidence of Jacob Jack and George Peter. Their credibility however has been tainted regarding their observations of what happened to the post and verandah of the Deceased’s house. That credibility is further tarnished when Jacob Jack could not stand up under cross examination by learned Counsel Mr. Talasasa and his inconsistency exposed. In chief he told the court the Deceased fell when he approached Mana sitting on his canoe. In cross examination he recanted and agreed with Mr. Talasasa that he did not see what happened when the Deceased fell down and died. He hasn’t been an impressive witness. His credibility tarnished I find I cannot rely on his evidence.

This leaves the second Defence witness, George Peter as the sole witness of the claim that Mana had nothing to do with the death of the Deceased. I have had opportunity to observe him in the witness box. He doesn’t impress. He appears unsure of himself and his evidence. When asked by Mr. Talasasa why he did not tell Police at the first opportunity about his observations and now comes to court for the first time about this version, 8 years later, he says because Police never asked. I hardly believe him on this explanation. Mana was remanded in custody for almost 11 months and at the least he could have gone to the Police and given a statement to them about what happened. He never did. Could this be more consistent with the fact that what he now says did not happen? I do not believe him that ignorance of the processes of the criminal justice system assist him in terms of his credibility assessment. I do not believe him and accept his explanation as a justifiable excuse. There is strong motivation for coming to court and saying that he did not see Mana do anything; Mana is his elder brother.

I have considered carefully version of prosecution witnesses. Of most significant is the direct evidence of Trixie, now a manager of the Gizo Hotel. He gave his evidence frankly and clearly. He was impressive as a witness that can be trusted in what he said. He had no natural or other ties to the parties in this case. He was attending Sabbath service at that time when the incident occurred. He recalls clearly the push by Mana and the manner in which the Deceased fell. He said he fell backwards on his knees. His version is consistent with that of Siake and Tina. I take note of Tina’s evidence 8 years after the event. At that time she was married to Samani. They had been separated for sometime now and if she had any reason to lie during the committal hearing, she could have corrected that now when she no longer has any connections with Samani. She maintained her evidence throughout regarding the push.

In accepting prosecution’s version, the causal link regarding death becomes obvious, direct and clear.

According to the medical report of Dr. Stirling he formed the view that the Deceased could possibly have suffered a heart attack when he fell. In my view that conclusion taken at its lowest would still be sufficient for a conviction to be reached on manslaughter. The heart attack occurred in any event as a direct result of the push by Mana. The sequence of events would be that he was pushed; he fell backwards, suffered a heart attack, blacked out as a result and died shortly thereafter. He never regained consciousness thereafter. The law on this is clear. It is sufficient if it is established that the unlawful act caused the shock which in turn caused the heart attack (see Blackstone’s Criminal Practice 1992, at paragraph A1.24). The heart attack was not a separate and intervening cause. It was directly linked/connected to the push. But for the push there is no evidence to suggest he would have suffered a heart attack and died. Although he had a medical condition which indicated that increased physical activity and argument could serve to elevate blood pressure and may precipitate a heart attack or stroke, the Deceased died as a direct result of the push by Mana. There is no evidence to suggest he suffered a heart attack prior to the push. I am satisfied Prosecution has discharged the onus placed on it to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and Mana is convicted of the manslaughter of John Wao.

High Court of Solomon Islands

Regina v Mana [2006] SBHC 143; HCSI-CRC 100 of 2003 (24 February 2006)