Regina v Kaoni - Sentence [2016] SBHC 178; HCSI-CRC 259 of 2015 (30 September 2016)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Criminal Jurisdiction

CRC. No. 259 of 2015

Regina v. Steven Kaoni

Date of hearing: 28^th September 2016
Date of Judgment: 30^th September 2016

Talasasa with Suifasia for the Crown

Alasia B for the Accused

SENTENCE

Kouhota PJ:

The accused Steven Kaoni (a. k. a. Kakao) was originally charged with rape contrary to section 136 of the Penal Code. The DPP however filed an amendment charged of defilement contrary to section 143 (1) (a) of the Penal Code and entered a Nolle Prosequi to the charge of rape. The accused pleaded guilty to the amended charge of defilement and was convicted on his own plea.

The agreed facts were;

Between the 1^st and 31^st day of July, 2014 the victim, Luisa Kisu was alone in the house. Her parents at that time were at a funeral in another village. Before they left, the victim’s mother Emmy Anna instructed her to pin the door which she did.

While the parents were away the accused who is a first cousin of the victim went to the victim’s house and called her so the victim unpinned the door. The victim recognised the accused’s voice. The accused went inside the house and had sexual intercourse with the victim inside the house.

The victim’s father and the accused mother are brother and sister.

The victim Luisa Kisu was born in the year 2000 and was 14 years old at the time of the incident. She lives with her parents at Chelamamata village in Central Guadalcanal. The victim was born blind so she could not go to school but stayed at home. Whenever left alone in the house her parents would normally instructed her to stay in the house and pin the door.

In his sentencing submission the DPP Mr. Talasasa urge the court to impose a sentence that reflect the criminality in offending and a punishment that appropriately reflects the societies abhorrence of such evil. He submits that the nature of this offence was a serious violation of the girl and breach of trust position as an older cousin brother and it is was not expected that he would do what he did to the victim which he submits is beyond imagination. The age difference at the time of incident was the accused was 25 years old and the victim was 14 years old.

Counsel for the accused on the other hand submits that the court should take into account the mitigating factors which includes;

1. That the accused is a first time offender
2. That he is remorseful for his conduct;
3. That he had cooperate with the police and that there is some indication of reconciliation between the accused and victims family.

Counsel for the accused referred the court to a number of cases dealing with sentencing principle and comparative sentences.

In considering the appropriate sentence to impose, I give credit to the accused for the guilty plea and for no previous convictions. I also take into account the facts of this case and the submission by counsel. I had considered both aggravating and mitigating factors. I also take onto account a victim impact statement form file by the prosecution and the statement of the victim contained therein.

I had viewed cases on comparative sentencing referred to by counsel for the defence but as it was often said, each case should be determine on its own merit and that I will do in this case.

I noted that the cases referred to by the counsel for defence were mostly cases which came before the courts more than 10 years ago. No doubt circumstances have changed since then and from my recent experience as magistrate I am aware that there was an increase in cases of sexual offence coming before the courts. On that note I agree with Mr. Talasasa’s submission that Parliament has heed the cries of the community against this evil and acted by bring into force the Penal Code (Amendment) (Sexual Offences) Act 2016 and increasing the penalty for this offence to 15 years imprisonment. He submit that the courts too must act by imposing penalties that not only reflect the criminality but also deter others from committing similar offences.

Sentencing is a discretion of the courts however, if Parliament passed any law or increase the penalty for any offence the people expect the court to impose the law and the increased sentence. Generally the laws passed by parliament reflects the values and views of the society and the communities therein and must be imposed.

Having considered the mitigating and aggravating factors and all circumstances of this case, I sentence you to 4 years imprisonment. Time spend in custody to be counted as part of the sentence.

IRA.

The Court

Emmanuel Kouhota

Puisne Judge