R v Mokuniahaka [2020] SBHC 38; HCSI-CRC 160 of 2019 (4 June 2020)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	R v Mokuniahaka
Citation:
Date of decision:	4 June 2020
Parties:	Regina v Leonard Mokuniahaka
Date of hearing:	18 May 2020
Court file number(s):	160 of 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Bird J
On appeal from:
Order:	For the offence of manslaughter, I hereby sentence you to 12 years imprisonment. I direct that the time spent in pre-trial custody be deducted from the total sentence
Representation:	Ms. Belabitu appearing for Mrs. M Suifa’asia for the Prosecution Mr. A Tinoni appearing for Ron Dicky for the Accused
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Penal Code [cap 26] s 199 (1) (a)
Cases cited:	Regina v Hou [2015] SBHC 23, Hou v Reginam [2015] CRAC 9, R v Chambers [1983] 5 Cr. App. R 190, Regina v Tonafia [2016] SBHC 27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 160 of 2019

REGINA

V

LEONARD MOKUNIAHAKA

Date of Hearing: 18 May 2020
Date of Decision: 4 June 2020

Ms. Belabitu appearing for Mrs. M Suifa’asia
Mr. A Tinoni appearing for Mr. Ron Dicky Pulekera for the Accused

SENTENCE

Bird PJ:

1. The defendant Leonard Mokuniahaka is charged with one count of manslaughter contrary to Section 199 (1) (a) of the Penal Code (Cap 26). Upon being arraigned on the 28^th March 2020, the defendant had entered a guilty plea. For various reasons, sentencing submissions was not done until the 18^th May 2020.
2. You are hereby reminded that the offence of manslaughter for which you are charged is very serious. It carries a maximum term of life imprisonment to show the gravity of its seriousness.
3. The facts of your case are as follows:-

In this case, you attacked the deceased Jarinton Ohoi, a child of 7 years old with a kitchen knife. You were sitting with your family members under your house when you suddenly grabbed a kitchen knife, ran to where the deceased was playing with another child and stabbed him twice on his left chest. The deceased was taken to the National Referral Hospital by taxi but was pronounced dead upon arrival at the hospital.

An autopsy report dated the 8^th November 2019 showed that the cause of death was exsanguination, a result of the stab wound to the ascending aorta.

On your behalf, two reports have been done by Dr Paul Orotaloa on your medical assessment. The doctor had confirmed in the said reports that you have a history of “abnormality of the mind” also known as schizophrenia.

4. This is an unfortunate and sad incident for your family. The deceased was your little nephew.
5. The court had noted your early guilty plea in this case. It shows remorse on your part and you are given credit for that. However, the court is also very concerned about the aggravating features in your case.
6. The court is assisted in this case, by the reports of Dr Paul Orotaloa, Consultant Psychiatrist, at the National Referral Hospital dated the 12^th March 2018 and the 20^th February 2020 respectively. It is obvious from the reports that you were suffering from a psychotic condition. According to the reports, the symptoms became apparent in late 2013 after the breakdown of your marriage and the abuse of marijuana and kwaso.
7. You were found to have auditory hallucinations (hearing of abnormal voices) and talking non-sense where responses to questions put to you was out of context. As a result of your condition, your actions, feelings and behaviour were controlled by negative voices talking to you. You feel frightened by those voices. Sometimes, you could resist those voices as they seem to be distant. On occasions, you could not resist the voices saying negative things to you which cause you to become aggressive and threatening. It was on one such occasion that you stabbed your nephew to death with a knife.
8. It is noted that on that occasion, your father and other family members were sitting with you. They were helpless and were unable to restrain you in time. Your action was unexpected and was so sudden. Your attack on the little child was spontaneous, intense and deadly because of the use of a lethal weapon, being a kitchen knife. Given the fact that the deceased was a little child, he could not have struggled with you to escape.
9. In the case of Regina v Hou [2015] SBHC 23, HCSI-CRC 122 of 2014, and approved by the Court of Appeal in Hou v Reginam [2015] CRAC 9of 2014, the Honourable Chief Justice, Justice Palmer on page 2 of his sentence had outlined the some very useful guidance on sentencing of manslaughter cases as a consequence of diminished responsibility.
10. The Honourable Chief Justice, Justice Palmer referred to the case of R v Chambers [1983] 5 Cr. App. R 190 as the leading authority on sentencing manslaughter, on diminished responsibility. In that case Leonard J said:
    • “In diminished responsibility cases there are various courses open to the judge. His choice of the right course will depend on the state of the evidence and the material before him. If the psychiatric reports recommend and justify it, and there are no contrary indications, he will make a hospital order. Where a hospital order is not recommended, or is not appropriate, and the defendant constitutes a danger to the public for an unpredictable period of time, the right sentence will, in all probability, be one of life imprisonment.
    • In cases where the evidence indicates that the accused’s responsibility for his acts was so grossly impaired that his degree of responsibility for them was minimal, then a lenient course will be open to the judge. Provided there is no danger of repetition of violence, it will usually be possible to make such an order and will give the accused his freedom possibly with some supervision.
    • There will however be cases in which there is no proper basis for a hospital order; but in which the accused’s degree of responsibility is not minimal. In such cases the judge should pass a determine sentence of imprisonment, the length of which will depend on two factors: his assessment of the degree of the accused’s responsibility and his views as to the period of time, if any, for which the accused will continue to be in danger to the public.....”
11. In view of the guiding principles alluded to above and having to apply the principles in this case, I find that there is no recommendation by Dr Paul Orotaloa, Consultant Psychiatrist, for a hospital order.
12. I now turn to the accused’s degree of responsibility. Having had the opportunity to peruse the facts with great care, I am of the view that the accused’s degree of responsibility in this case is not minimal. My greatest concern in this case and is also the doctor’s concern is what happens if he has a relapse.
13. The offending occurred after the defendant had a relapse. He was on treatment in early 2014. His compliance with treatment was unreliable. Three weeks prior to the incident, the defendant’s behaviour changed. He was irritable and unable to sleep. His condition deteriorated until the 24^th October 2017 when he suddenly grabbed his nephew and stabbed him to death with a knife.
14. In Dr Paul Orotaloa’s report dated the 20^th February 2020, he expressed reservation of releasing the defendant due to his past psychiatric history and the relapse in October 2017. The defendant was in the care of his immediate family members at the time of offending and his family members were unable to restrain him from committing the offence.
15. I have also noted the difficulties discussed in the doctor’s report of the 20^th February 2020 about family support for the defendant. There is no guarantee that his family members would feel a great sense of responsibility for the defendant. In effect, the father had noticed the defendant’s behaviour and attitude had changed before the fateful incident but did nothing about it prior to the incident. That attitude would render it unsafe to have the defendant released back into the community.
16. There remain in my mind, the elements of unpredictability and uncertainty in this case. According to the doctor’s report of the 20^th February 2020, there is no guarantee that there will be no repetition of violence if the defendant is released into the community after a determine sentence.
17. On the other hand, I am also of the view that the defendant can be afforded an opportunity to rehabilitate himself. He had told his doctor that he could sometimes ignore the negative voices. He has also told his doctor that he hears negative voices when he is alone.
18. On the 19^th February 2020, the defendant was observed to be symptom free, stable and able to hold a free flowing conversation rationally with his doctor. His antipsychotic medication was stopped on the 27^th February 2019.
19. In light of the above, it is possible for the defendant to live in a community that accepts him in his current condition. He must however, continue to have medical consultation with his doctor. He should also be entitled to have counselling services from counselling organisations and churches in the country. It is noted that, should it be required through medical advice, that upon his release from incarceration, he should be referred to Kilu’ufi Hospital to the Psychiatric Unit for ongoing management of his condition.
20. For the defendant, I give him credit for an early guilty plea which shows remorse. He is a first offender and that is also noted.
21. In the case of R v Tonafia [2016] CRC 267 of 2012, the Chief Justice, Justice Palmer had sentenced the accused in a similar case to a period of 14 years imprisonment. In that case, the injuries inflicted by the accused on the deceased were multiple and were inflicted on several parts of the deceased’s body. In this case, the accused stabbed the deceased twice on his left chest and he died as a result of the stab wounds.
22. For the offence of manslaughter, I hereby sentence you to 12 years imprisonment. I direct that the time spent in pre-trial custody be deducted from the total sentence.
23. Right of appeal.

Orders of the Court

THE COURT
Justice Maelyn Bird
Puisne Judge