R v Sale [2021] SBHC 177; HCSI-CRC 503 of 2019 (30 September 2021)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	R v Sale
Citation:
Date of decision:	30 September 2021
Parties:	Regina v Mike Sale
Date of hearing:	30 September 2021
Court file number(s):	503 of 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Palmer, CJ
On appeal from:
Order:	1. Convict the defendant of the offence of manslaughter. 2. Impose sentence of 2½ years. 3. Direct that the period spent in remand in custody is to be deducted from the total sentence. 4. Direct that the defendant be released at the rising of the Court, the bulk of the sentence having been served in pre-trial custody.
Representation:	Mrs M. Suifa’asia and Ms A Mono (assisting) for the Crown Mr B Ifuto’o for the Defence
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Blackstones Criminal Practice 1999 Page 120
Cases cited:	R v Misila Baeta HCSI-CRC 319 of 2020, Rongodala v Regina [2006] SBCA 2, R v Shelton [1979] 1 Cr App R (s) 202

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 503 of 2019

REX

V

MIKE SALE

Date of Hearing: 30 September 2021
Date of Sentence: 30 September 2021

Mrs M Suifa’asia and Ms Mono (assisting) for the Crown
Mr. B Ifuto’o for the Crown

Palmer CJ.

1. You have been charged with a very serious offence, that of manslaughter, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, which the court can impose depending on the circumstances of each case and the presence of aggravating and mitigating features
2. A brief summary of facts has been produced and sentencing submissions and mitigation heard.
3. The summary of facts showed that you were not the aggressor in the attack in this case. You were drinking with friends when the deceased drinking from a nearby place came to your group and attacked your group. You were involved in a fight with him when stones were thrown at your group. You all ran away when the deceased picked up a brick and threw this at you.
4. The brick hit your leg and caused you to fall down. You then retaliated by picking up a stone and threw it at the deceased. It hit the deceased and caused him to fall down. You then ran away. The deceased was taken to the National Referral Hospital but died later that night.
5. I note again sadly that alcohol played a part in this tragic incident with the loss of a life. It is the loss of life which makes such offence of great gravity, although the circumstances in which death is caused are manifestly relevant to assessing the degree of criminal responsibility and wickedness.”^[1]
6. I note that while the act of throwing the stone on your part was unlawful, it was in the context of an attack and possible imminent danger to yourself after having been shot with a brick, which caused you to fall down.
7. In the case of R. v. Misila Baeta^[2], paragraphs 5 and 6, this Court said:
   • “5. There are obviously varying degrees of manslaughter, with sentences ranging from 2 – 10 years, depending on the seriousness of the facts of each case and level of culpability^[3]. The offence of manslaughter, almost more than any other offence, varies in degree, from near murder at one extreme to almost an accident on the other^[4]. Each case is to be dealt with on its own merits and appropriate sentences imposed. The Court however does take into account cases of similar facts to assist in arriving at an appropriate sentence.
8. In the Court of Appeal case of Rongodala v Regina^[5], the Court noted:
   • “It can be said that there are many grades of seriousness when it comes to the offence of manslaughter. In determining the appropriate penalty many factors have to be taken into account. Without suggesting that these are the only considerations, ordinarily a Court would have regard to the age of the offender, previous criminal history of the offender particularly whether there are previous convictions involving violence, provocation, intoxication, type of weapon if any used, persistence of the attack, vulnerability of the victim, and the relationship between the parties.””.
9. I am satisfied taking into account the circumstances of offending in this case and the level of culpability, that this case falls well at the lower range of sentences between 2-4 years. I note there was no pre-planning as to what transpired that evening. It was a spur of the moment thing and tragically resulted in the loss of a life.
10. I thank Counsel for taking the time to provide written submissions and succinctly summarising case authorities for my consideration. I have taken time to carefully consider those cases as well to assist me in reaching an appropriate sentence in this case.
11. I take note of your personal circumstances, set out in the written submissions of your lawyer that you are young and single and prospects of rehabilitation are good.
12. You have no previous convictions, this is your first encounter with the law and credit is given for that.
13. I give credit for your guilty plea, although given at the beginning of the trial, its utilitarian benefit cannot be overlooked. It has saved court time, resources and expense in avoiding a trial.
14. I am satisfied it is also consistent with remorse and being sorry for your actions and accepting the consequences of your actions which has resulted in the unintended death of the deceased.
15. I also take into account the element of delay in having your trial listed and heard quickly and in having to wait for about 2 years and 4 months for hearing of your case. I take that into account.
16. Taking everything into account, the circumstances of offending, level of culpability and personal circumstances of the defendant, I am satisfied this case attracts a sentence of 2½ years. I am also satisfied any period spent in pre-trial custody should be deducted from the total sentence.
17. In the circumstances, I am also satisfied and direct that the defendant be released forthwith at the rising of the court, the bulk of the sentence having been served in pre-trial custody.

Orders of the Court:

1. Convict the defendant of the offence of manslaughter.
2. Impose sentence of 2½ years.
3. Direct that the period spent in remand in custody is to be deducted from the total sentence.
4. Direct that the defendant be released at the rising of the Court, the bulk of the sentence having been served in pre-trial custody.

The Court.

---

^[1] Per Cumming-Bruce L.J. in R. v. Stuart and Williams [1979] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 228 (Park and Smith J.).
^[2] HCSI-CRC 319 of 2020 (17 September 2021)
^[3] Blackstones Criminal Practice 1999 page 120: ".... Such offences vary very widely in culpability and circumstances".
^[4] R. v. Shelton [1979] 1 Cr. App. R (S.) 202, per Roskill L.J., Bristow and Michael Davies JJ.
^[5] [2006] SBCA 2; CA-CRAC 008 of 2006 (25 May 2006).