Regina v Tebitanga [2013] SBHC 103; HCSI-CRC 75 of 2009 (15 February 2013)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(PALMER CJ.)

Criminal Case Number 75 of 2009

REGINA

-V-

Ben TEBITANGA

HEARING: 14 February 2013
RULING: 15 February 2013

F. Taeburi and J. Naiqulevu for the Crown
B. Ifuto'o and S. Valenitabua for the Defendant;

Palmer CJ.

This is an application for the admission of the statement of Anaa Reo made and taken by the police on 31st March 2008. This is three days after the events had occurred, which she referred to in her statement.

Her husband, Reo Tebitara who was also present at the same time the victim arrived at their house on the evening of 28 March 2008, had his statement taken on 30 March 2008. He was able to attend court and has given oral testimony before this court.

It is not disputed that she was present and spoke with the victim later that night separately from her husband. Her statement is about what happened that night, when the victim arrived at their house, what they did that night and her recollection of the contents of her conversation with the victim and what the victim told her happened later that same night.

The application has been made under Section 118 of the Evidence Act 2009. I have had the opportunity to consider the requirements of that section and the submissions made in support and objections by the defence in this matter.

In essence, there are two main objections, that of lack of reasonable notice and that the matters referred to in her statement are similar to that of her husband, Reo Tebitara who was later called to testify.

I am more than satisfied that the requirements of the Evidence Act have been complied with in this particular case, in terms of the circumstances pertaining to the reliability of the statement (the nature of the statement, that it was made in the presence of a police officer, its contents, describing what happened and the conversation that took place, its veracity and accuracy) the unavailability of the maker of the statement due to ill health, and that reasonable notice had been given.

The statement was made to police in the course of investigations and shortly after the events that had occurred. They refer to her observations of the victim on her arrival and what she told them on arrival and later in the evening when she was with the victim and she related to her in more detail what happened. I find nothing to suggest that her statement may have been lacking in truth and accuracy in detail. It is fairly consistent with what the witness Reo Tebitara told this court in his evidence other than the additional description of what she was told.

The victim herself testified of the things that happened to her and defence have had the opportunity to cross examine her on her evidence. The value to be obtained in the interest of justice weighs in favour of admitting her statement as evidence in court under the relevant section and I do so order.

Her statement is to be marked as Exhibit "J" and taken to have been read in Court.

The Court.