Crown v Laufilu [2022] SBHC 85; HCSI-CRC 145 of 2019 (28 October 2022)

	Home \| Databases \| WorldLII \| Search \| Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

Case name:	Crown v Laufilu

Citation:

Date of decision:	28 October 2022

Parties:	Crown v Memuel Laufilu

Date of hearing:

Court file number(s):	145 of 2019

Jurisdiction:	Criminal

Place of delivery:

Judge(s):	Maina; PJ

On appeal from:

Order:

Representation:	Rachael O for the Crown Gay G for the Defence

Catchwords:

Words and phrases:

Legislation cited:

Cases cited:

The Defendant Nemuel Laufilu was charge of murder contrary to section 200 of the Penal code but the Crown Nollie prosequi the charge, and filed an amend information of the manslaughter contrary to section 199 of the Penal Code. The Defendant Nemuel Laufilu caused the death of Francis Mark of Manaoba village, Malaita Province.

On amended charge of the manslaughter, Defendant Nemuel Laufilu pleaded guilty and accordingly the court convicted him upon own plea to the charge.

Defendant Nemuel Laufilu is from Poposa village, Marau Sound Guadalcanal Province and the Deceased Francis Mark is from Malaita Province.

On 17^th August 2018, the Defendant was walking back to his house at Abira. He followed the road that leads up to Lolo Rest House. On his way and just after the LKP area he met the Deceased and his friends. Defendant then decided to return and sort out certain the matter with water at the SIWA office. It regard the work he had done for them at the Panatina Water Tank and boreholes.

Deceased who was drinking Kwaso approached the Defendant and swore at him with the words “fuck your sisters”, and then he challenged to fight the Defendant. Deceased then grabbed the Defendant’s neck and he struggled to free himself. Another person came and tried to control and calm down the Deceased but he also tried to punch him.

Deceased grabbed a piece of timber to hit the Defendant but he managed to run away by taking a short cut road after LKP to Panatina ridge.

Defendant went back to his house and asked for a knife from his cousin. His cousin gave the knife thinking it was to cut tobacco. Defendant took the kitchen knife and he went to Abira market to look for Jimmy, a community leader who involved in the policing within the Abira community to sort out the matter with the Deceased. Defendant was not able to find Jimmy at his house and so he returned back to the Abira market. As he came, he met the deceased walking along the Panatina road and the Defendant waved his hands for the Deceased to wait for him. Deceased saw the Defendant waved to go to him.

When the Defendant saw these acts and behaviours from the Deceased, he immediately responded and quickly ran to the Deceased. As he ran to the Deceased the kitchen knife fell from him. He picked the knife, put it again at the side of trousers and covered down with his shirt.

Defendant reached the Deceased, tapped his right shoulder and told the Deceased that it is wrong in custom to swear at him with his sisters. Defendant then told the Deceased to go with him to Abira market and see Mr Jimmy. The Deceased turned around and the Defendant moved to his right side and both headed towards Abira market. Defendant walked first and the Deceased was behind him. As they went, the Deceased took a stone and hit the Defendants head. Defendant held his head as it was very painful to him. Deceased hit the Defendant with the stone a second time and landed on the Defendant’s right eyebrow, which caused the bleed on him.

At that state or moment, the Defendant took out the knife and threatened the Deceased with it and that the Deceased not to move closer to him. The Deceased jumped up and gave another punch to the Defendant with the stone he tiredly held in his hands.

Defendant tried to block the punches of the Deceased so he grabbed the knife and stabbed the Deceased at his left chest. After the stabbing of the Deceased, he walked away and fell to the ground and the Defendant also walked away.

Deceased was then taken to Central Hospital on the same today but he was already died. And the autopsy report showed that the weapon entered at the 2^nd and 3^rd rib cause the death of the Deceased.

The starting point in the sentence of manslaughter and that circumstances would be at the vicinity of 8 years as stated by the Court of Appeal in the Regina v Pitu [2015] CRAC 42 of 2014.

Beside the Crown’s submission that the Accused has no previous conviction, the aggravating factor of using the knife and pre-custody period since 18^th August 2018, Counsel submits for the court to impose the general and deterrence sentence in the case. Such should raise an alarm in the community, for people to be aware that their actions are subject to the law.

Defence counsel submitted that the Defendant has no previous conviction and has been in custody since he was arrested by the Police. He also as mitigation factor that the Defendant took a knife at his house purposely to look for Jimmy, but he did not find him to help in the matter. It was then that he found the Deceased and on trying to talk to him to settle the swearing in custom then the Deceased was stabbed by the Defendant.

The fact of the case shows clearly the acts and behaviours of the Defendant and Deceased had resulted to the stabbing and death of the Deceased.

The Deceased started the brawl when he swore at the Defendant with his sisters. When the Defendant went up to their settlement, he turned violent and armed himself with a kitchen knife. He searched for the Deceased around the place until he found the Deceased at the road. It was there again that the Deceased injured the Defendant and the Defendant took the kitchen knife and stabbed the Deceased on his chest which resulted to the death.

I noted the Defence Counsel submission as mitigating factors and in particular with the possession of the knife and went out to look for Jimmy to assist or settle the problem between him and the Deceased. However submission has an ambiguity or doubt on his part.

A person who intend to search for the way to sort out a problem may not arm himself with such a weapon otherwise he is with different motives. Such person may have an intention to do or cause further problem to the people. The fact stated that the Defendant found the Deceased and he approached him in such manner. This defence’s submission is absurd and has no merit.

Manslaughter is a serious offence as a life of the person has been unlawfully taken away. The seriousness also depend on the circumstances of each case. There is no mathematical formula for determining the appropriate sentence than the starting point with the consideration of the mitigating and aggravating features.

Both Counsels in the submissions had referred on the various sentences of the imposed on the manslaughter cases in this jurisdiction and I noted them. It is also important to acknowledge that the sentences in those cases were determined on their own facts and or the circumstances of the respective cases.

High Court of Solomon Islands

Crown v Laufilu [2022] SBHC 85; HCSI-CRC 145 of 2019 (28 October 2022)