Regina v Waidia [2016] SBHC 24; HCSI-CRC 296 of 2013 (4 March 2016)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua, J)

Criminal Case No. 296 of 2013

REGINA

V

MICHAEL WAIDIA

Date of Hearing : 11,12,15,17
Date of Ruling : 4 March 2016

R.Olutimagin and O.Ratu for the Crown
M. Holara and L. Waroka for the Defendant

RULING

Mwanesalua, J: The Defendant has been charged with murder under section 200 0f the Penal Code. At the close of the case for the Crown, the defence made a no case to answer submission under section 269 (I) of the Criminal Procedure Code Act.

Section 269 (I) States:

"When the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded, and the statement or evidence (if any) of the accused person before the committing court has been given in evidence, the court, if it considers if it considers that there is no evidence that accused or no one of several accused committed the offence, after hearing, if necessary, any arguments which the public prosecutor or advocate for the prosecution or defence may desire to submit, record a finding of not guilty".

The Prosecution and the Defence both made written submission. Prosecution witnesses James Manetavoa, James Manetavoa, Alison Bara, Richard Collin and Reuben Kobol were at the scene of the crime. They saw the defendant; Michael Waidia stabbed the victim, Rex Bara on the head on 21 March 2013. The victim was taken to the National Referral Hospital in Honiara, but passed away on 28 March 2013.

The Medical Report showed a horizontal stab wound, 18 x 4mm, on the left side of the head (temporal area) located 5mm above the left ear. In the opinion of the General pathologist Dr. Roy R Maraka, the weapon used to inflict the stab wound, was a sharp object, more likely a knife.

The Defence based their no case to answer on the ground of self-defence and not "no evidence" as provided in section 269 (I) above. The view of this court is that this defence ought to be decided at the conclusion of the trial when all the evidence is before it see R –v- Loball [1957] QB547 at page 551 Lord Goddard CJ said-:

"It must, however, be understood that maintaining the rule that the onus always remains on the prosecution does not mean that the Crown must give evidence-in-chief to rebut a suggestion of self-defence before that issue is raised, or indeed need give any evidence on the subject at all. If an issue relating to self-defence is to be left to the jury there must be some evidence from which a jury would be entitled to find that issue in favour of the accused, and ordinarily no doubt such evidence would be given by the defence. But there is a difference between leading evidence which would enable a jury to find an issue in favour of a defendant and in putting the onus upon him. The truth is that the jury must come to a verdict on the whole of the evidence that has been laid before them. If on a consideration of all the evidence the jury are left in doubt whether the killing or wounding may not have been in self-defence the proper verdict would be not guilty".

The no case to answer submission is rejected. The Defendant does have a case to answer. Order accordingly.

THE COURT