Regina v Tii - Sentence [2015] SBHC 71; HCSI-CRC 351 of 2012 (21 August 2015)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua, J)

Criminal Case No. 351 of 2012

REGINA

V

JOHN TII

Date of Sentence: 21 August 2015

R.B.Talasasa (Director of Public Prosecution) for the Crown
S.Valenitabua for the Defendant

SENTENCE

1. John Tii the Defendant was charged with one count of murder, contrary to section 200 of the Penal Code. The offence was committed on 21 April 2012 on the main road adjacent to the Honiara Central Market. He was a juvenile aged 17 years when he committed the offence. He pleaded guilty to the charge on 9 May 2014.
   
2. Murder is a very serious offence in Solomon Islands carrying a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment. However, there is a provision in law here in Solomon Islands that where a defendant committed murder while still a juvenile that person ought not to be sentenced to mandatory sentence of life imprisonment as an adult. As pointed out by the defence this principal arose out of the interpretation of section 13 of the Juvenile Offenders Act (Cap.26) in Pese v Regina [2008] SBCA 10; CA-CRAC 4 of 2008.
   
3. There are agreed facts in this matter. They are that the Defendant is originally from Saua village, Saua Artificial Island, North Malaita. He had formal education up to Form 1. He left school at Form 1 at Gounatolo Community High School. He was living and working in Honiara at the time of the offending. He was residing with his uncle who was also working in Honiara. He also lived in various other places in Honiara including Tasahe, Koa Hill, Nggosi and behind Henderson Airport. He was 17 years old at the date of the offending. He had been drinking beer before the incident at the Central Market in Honiara. He took part in assaulting the deceased Simon Fuo'o. There was no planning for the attack on Simon Fuo'o. Simon Fuo'o died as a result of bleeding in his head and outside of the body from external wounds and multiple injuries to his body. The Defendant is a first offender.
   
4. The facts material to Defendant's case. In particular, he was 17 years at the date he committed his offence. That he was among a group of young men walking on the road adjacent to the Central Market in the early hours of Saturday 21 April 2012. Then a fight broke out between these young men and another group consisting of the deceased and others. That the Defendant and the group of young men he was with later assaulted the deceased at the Naha/Kola bus stop located adjacent to the Central Market in Honiara. During that fight the deceased received slash wounds, stab wounds, lacerated wounds, bruises and abrasions. A slash wound measuring 24 x 3mm x 19mm deep fractured the skull. In the opinion of Dr. Roy. R. Maraka, General Pathologist, the slash and stab wounds were inflicted by the use of a knife or other sharp objects by the assailants.
   
5. The crown and the defence made written and verbal sentencing submissions. The crown sought lengthy sentences for murder committed by juveniles because they may use youth as an excuse to commit homicide. On the other hand the defence submitted that the Defendant was drunk, had no previous conviction and expressed regrets for his action. He apologised to the deceased's family members and he was a juvenile at the date when the deceased was injured to death with a weapon.
   
6. Counsel for the Defendant submits that the starting point to consider the appropriate sentence for the Defendant should be 7 years with some time to be served in the community. Unfortunately this court would not consider making an order for the Defendant to serve part of his custodial sentence in any community outside the prison. This is because the community and the person to be responsible for the wellbeing of the Defendant have never been identified to the court.
   
7. The nature and extent of the slashed, lacerated, and the other wounds inflicted on the deceased's body demonstrated the severity of mob violence. Such attack must be discouraged by the imposition of appropriate sentences.
   
8. It is the view of this court after considering the submissions for crown and the Defendant that the appropriate starting point of sentence in that case is twelve years imprisonment. However 3 years of that period be deducted as he had been remanded in custody for that period.
   
9. The Defendant is sentence to an effective sentence of 9 years imprisonment from the today's date 21 August 2015. Order accordingly. Right of appeal against this sentence has been explained to the Defendant if does not agree with it.
   

THE COURT