R v Fasiadi [2021] SBHC 26; HCSI-CRC 490 of 2020 (30 April 2021)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	R v Fasiadi
Citation:
Date of decision:	30 April 2021
Parties:	Regina v Michael Fasiadi
Date of hearing:	26 April 2020
Court file number(s):	490 of 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Bird; PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	1. The defendant is convicted on one count of acts intended to cause grievous harm contrary to section 224 (a) of the Penal Code (cap 26). 2. The defendant is hereby sentenced to 3 ½ years imprisonment. 3. I further direct that the time spend in pre-trial custody be deducted from the total sentence. 4. Right of appeal
Representation:	Mr. Andrew Kelesi for the Crown Mr. Henry Kausimae for the Defendant
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Penal Code section 224 (a) [cap 26]
Cases cited:	Regina v Osiri [2018] SBHC 37, Regina v Kada [2008] SBCA 9, Regina v Bitiai [2010] SBCA 3, Regina v Paewa [2016] SBHC 86, R v Tuita [2018] SBHC 81

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case 490 of 2020

REGINA

V

MICHAEL FASIADI

Date of Hearing: 26 April 2021
Date of Decision: 30 April 2021

Mr. Andrew Kelesi for the Crown
Mr. Henry Kausimae for the Defendant

SENTENCE

Bird PJ:

1. By information filed on the 1^st December 2020, the defendant Michael Fasiadi is indicted with one count of acts intended to cause grievous harm contrary to section 224 (a) of the Penal Code (cap 26). Upon being arraigned the defendant had entered a guilty plea. He was accordingly convicted.
2. The offence of acts intended to cause grievous harm is a felony and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

The facts

3. The facts of your case are as follows:

You are 20 years old and you are from Wesliliu Village, Baegu in the Malaita Province. The victim is a 17 year old Margaret Seno Talo. She is from Koare Village, Fataleka, Malaita Province. You are the victim’s husband.
On the 27^th May 2020 between the hours of 4.00am to 6.00 am the victim and your 3 months old baby were sleeping in your house at CEMA plantation, Tina Road, Central Guadalcanal, Guadalcanal Province when you arrived home. You were heavily intoxicated and you started to argue with the victim.
In the cause of the argument, the victim ran away to your parents’ house leaving the baby behind. You called for the victim but she did not respond. You looked for her and found her at your parents’ house. You then got hold of a bush knife and attacked the victim with it. The victim received slash wounds to both of her hands, her right ankle, her up and lower back and her buttock. She was taken to the Good Samaritan Hospital and referred to the National Referral Hospital in Honiara. She was admitted at NRH for 3 threes before she was discharged.
You were arrested on the 28^th May 2020 and have been remanded in custody since the 29^th May 2020. A reconciliation ceremony was held between your family and the victim’s family over the incident.

Aggravating features

4. In your case, it was submitted by Mr. Kelesi of the crown that there is a presence of several aggravating features in your offending. Firstly is the seriousness of injuries sustained by the victim. I am told that you cut the victim multiple times with a knife. She sustained multiple injuries to her hands, her upper and lower back, her buttock and her right ankle. You might have realised after the event that you have almost killed the victim who is said to be your very young wife.
5. I am also told that you were heavily intoxicated at the time of offending. I have noted that a lot of serious cases like yours occurred whilst offenders are intoxicated with liquor. You should also by now have realised, that if you have been sober, you might just have been able to control your temper. You were unable to exercise restraint on that occasion because you were heavily intoxicated. You must understand that intoxication is not an excuse to commit an offence.
6. I have noted from the agreed facts that you used a knife, a lethal weapon to attack the victim. You are of a stronger sex and your wife is of a weaker sex. If you have been angered by the victim, you could have slapped her with your hands but the use of a knife on her is highly unnecessary and uncalled for. The court implored you ruthless behaviour on your wife.
7. It is also evident from the agreed facts as well as the victim’s medical report that she had sustained multiple injuries to different parts of her body. The multiple injuries sustained by the victim showed how ruthless you have become under the influence of alcohol and worse still, having being armed with a lethal weapon.
8. I have also seen from the agreed facts that you committed the offending between the hours of 4.00am to 6.00am. The victim was sleeping at your house with your 3 months old baby when you arrived and caused an argument with her. There is no justification for your action on the victim. Your action had deprived the victim of her peace and tranquillity at home. You terrorised her in her own home in the early hours of the date of offending.

Mitigating features

9. On your behalf it was submitted by Mr. Kausimae that you have pleaded guilty to the offending at first opportunity. I give you credit for your early guilty plea. Your early guilty plea shows that you are remorseful and you are willing to face the consequences of your actions. It also saves courts time and resources to conduct a trial in to the matter. Even in your record of interview with the police you have stated that you were very sorry for what you did to the victim.
10. I have also heard that you have no previous criminal history. I am being referred to in the case of R v Osiri [2018] SBHC 37, HCSI- CRC 338 of 2017 which stated inter alia that first offenders should not be punished with maximum sentence. I have noted and will observe those guidelines in your case.
11. I am also told by your lawyer that you have good prospect of rehabilitation. You are a very young man. You were 19 at the time of offending. You are now 20 years old. With your young age and the fact that you are truly sorry for what you did to the victim, I am inclined to believe that you have a chance of rehabilitation. I urge you to learn from your mistake and try and rehabilitate yourself for the betterment of yourself and your family.
12. From your record of interview with the police, you have admitted to the offending. I commend for being honest and owning up to your actions.
13. I have also seen from the agreed facts that there was a reconciliation held between your family and the victim’s family over the incident. I have heard that the victim being your wife has accepted you back as a husband and father because you are the only person that would provide for her and the baby. Take this opportunity as a positive step for you to try and live a more respectable and dignified life with you small and young family. Learn to discuss and dialogue with your wife to settle issues affecting your family. There is no need to commit violence on your wife. Respect yourself so that you can also respect your wife and your child.

Sentencing guidelines & case authorities

14. After having stated the aggravating and mitigating features in your offending, I would now refer to the case of R v Kada [2008] SBCA 9, CA- CRAC 35 of 2007. The Court of Appeal in that case had set out guidelines in sentencing of like offences as that against you. The two important factors to be considered in sentencing like offences is the extent of the injury and the intention and motive of the offender.
15. Having regard to the two relevant features discussed above, I have seen from the agreed facts and the medical report, that the victim had sustained multiple injuries, (about 10 in total) to various parts of her body. The victim was blest that the various injuries were not fatal. The wounds were debrided and stitched. The victim was given pain relief medication and intravenous antibiotics to stop infection of the wounds.
16. If one looks at the medical diagnosis outlined above, the injuries sustained by the victim were multiple but not very serious in nature. They were merely debrided, cleaned and stitched. The victim was then covered by antibiotics to prevent infection of the wounds. She was discharged after being admitted for about 3 weeks.
17. The other feature discussed in the Kada case is the intention and motive of the offender. After having read the agreed facts in your case, I do not seem to make out your intention and motive in assaulting the victim. When asked in question 53 on the record of interview dated 29^th May 2020, why you attacked the victim with a knife, you stated ...”mi kros because pikinini cry den wife ranawe go out lo outside haos blo mi nomoa.” From that answer, your action on that day was a spur of the moment reaction coupled with the fact that you were heavily intoxicated and was not in your right state of mind. That does not mean that what you did to the victim on that day was justified or excusable.
18. From what had transpired on the date of the offending, it would be advisable that you must not allow yourself to get so intoxicated that you are unable to control your behaviour and temper. If you have killed the victim on that occasion, you could have been liable to face a sentence of life imprisonment. I urge you to learn from this grave mistake and do not reoffend.

Comparative sentences

19. This court had dealt with numerous cases of like offences for which you are charged. The sentences imposed by this court and Court of Appeal ranges from 3 years to 12 years imprisonment depending on the particular facts and circumstances of each offending. In the case of Regina v Bitiai [2010] SBCA 3, CA-CRAC 15 of 2009, the defendant had stabbed the victim with a knife. The Court of Appeal sentenced him to 4 years and 9 months imprisonment.
20. In the case of Regina v Paewa [2016] SBHC 86, HCSI- CRC 458 of 2014, the defendant was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment. He was under the influence of liquor and stabbed his drinking mate at the back of his head.
21. Another case on point is the case of R v Tuita [2018] SBHC 81, HCSI-CRC 179 of 2016. The defendant was sentenced to a higher range of 7 years imprisonment. There was pre-meditation of the offence and the injuries sustained in the stabbing were serious.
22. Taking into account the facts of your case together with the balancing of the aggravating and mitigation features therein and the guidelines and principles used in the cases cited above I am of the view that an imprisonment term of 3 ½ years is appropriate in this case.

Orders of the court

1. The defendant is convicted on one count of acts intended to cause grievous harm contrary to section 224 (a) of the Penal Code (cap 26).
2. The defendant is hereby sentenced to 3 ½ years imprisonment.
3. I further direct that the time spend in pre-trial custody be deducted from the total sentence.
4. Right of appeal

THE COURT
Justice Maelyn Bird
Puisne Judge