R v Lulu [2020] SBHC 40; HCSI-CRC 228 of 2016 (5 June 2020)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	R v Lulu
Citation:
Date of decision:	5 June 2020
Parties:	Regina v Silas Lulu
Date of hearing:	29 May 2020
Court file number(s):	228 of 2016
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Bird J
On appeal from:
Order:	I hereby sentence you to a term of two years imprisonment I further direct that the time spent in pre-trial custody be deducted from the total sentence.
Representation:	Mrs. Olivia Ratu Manu and Mr. Andrew Meioko for the Prosecution Mr. Benham Ifuto’o for the Accused
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Penal Code, s142 (1) [cap 26]
Cases cited:	Regina v Runikera

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 228 of 2016

REGINA

V

SILAS LULU

Date of Hearing: 29 May 2020
Date of Published: 5 June 2020

Mrs. Olivia Ratu Manu and Mr. Andrew Meioko for the Prosecution
Mr. Benham Ifuto’o for the Accused

SENTENCE

Bird PJ:

1. On the 29^th May 2020, the defendant, Silas Lulu was convicted after a trial, of the offence of defilement of a girl under the age of thirteen years contrary to section 142 (1) of the Penal Code, cap 26. I sentenced him to a term of imprisonment and the reasons for the sentence are now published.
2. The complainant was single at the time of offending and she was 12 years and 10 months old. The age of the complainant was not disputed by the defendant and the complainant’s birth certificate was tendered by consent and marked as exhibit “A” at trial.
3. I have found that you met the complainant and Naeri on the road. As you walked back with them, you asked the complainant for sex. She refused and after asking her for the second time, you pulled her to the road side in the bush. You had a knife in your possession at that time. You tore her trouser and her pant, laid her down and had sex with her.
4. Before you could gain full penetration into her vagina, some boys came from Rawaki and disturbed you. You then got dressed and chased the boys with your knife. It was then that the complainant dressed herself with her shirt and ran away. The first person that she talked with was her cousin Rudi at the security house. After telling Rudi what you did to her, she ran all the way to their house. After calling to her mother, she fell down. Her mother dressed her, took her to the house, massaged her with holy oil and asked what had happened to her.
5. She told her mother what you did to her. The matter was then reported to the police and the complainant’s family left Taloa Village back to her mother’s village at Vona, the same night.
6. You are a married man with two children and at the time of offence you were 30 years old then. The complainant was barely 13 years old. The age disparity was 18 years.
7. You are not a stranger to the complainant. At the time of the offence, you were living at the same village as the complainant. You are related to the complainant’s step-father and you used to go to their house at Taloa Village.
8. You have intended to use violence on the complainant. In fact, you were in possession of a knife on that occasion. You grabbed the Complainant’s hand and pulled into the bush and had sex with her.
9. In your own evidence in court, you saw the complainant as a female with big breasts, big thighs and big ass (buttock). You are a sexual pervert.
10. On your behalf, it was submitted that you are a first offender and you are given credit for that. I have also noted that since the date of your offending, you have not re-offended. That shows that you have a good prospect of setting your life on a correct course. There was reconciliation done between your family and the complainant’s family which shows that the relationship had been mended.
11. The court’s main concern about your case is the period of delay since this matter was reported to the police. The court had noted from the file that you were committed to this court on the 16^th March 2016. The information against you was only filed by the Director of Public prosecutions on the 17^th July 2018 even though, a letter dated 2^nd June 2016 was sent to them by the Registrar of the High Court to file the information. A delay of two years 4 months was caused by the late filing of the information against you by the DPP’s office.
12. I wish to reiterate the comments by the then Chief Justice, Justice Ward in the case of Regina v Patterson Runikera CRAC 14/87, whereby he was very critical of a five years delay in the prosecution of the case. He termed the delay as amounting to scandalous and likely to cause injustice. If I may, I wish to add the maxim “justice delayed is justice denied”.
13. The offending in this case occurred on the 25^th July 2015. The defendant was arrested and remanded in custody on the 5^th August 2015. He was released on bail on the 21^st August 2015. From the 25^th July 2015 to the current is a period of four years 10 months.
14. Having heard submissions of both counsel for the prosecution and the defence and having weighed what had been said in this case, I would have imposed a sentence of 5 years imprisonment on the defendant. However, having considered the lengthy delay in the prosecution of this case, I hereby sentence you to a term of two years imprisonment. I further direct that the time spent in pre-trial custody be deducted from the total sentence.

Orders of the court

THE COURT
Justice Maelyn Bird
Puisne Judge