Regina v Lomon [2017] SBMC 26; Criminal Case 275 of 2017 (28 June 2017)

IN THE CENTRAL MAGISTRATE’S COURT )
OF SOLOMON ISLANDS )

(Criminal Jurisdiction)

Criminal Case No. 275 of 2017

REGINA
-v-
JASPER LOMON

Date of Hearing: June 23, 2017
Date of Sentence: June 28, 2017

T. Mosese for the Prosecution
D. Hou for the Defence

SENTENCE

1. Jasper Lomon pleaded guilty to a total of 5 charges. The facts have been tendered and adopted in its entirety. I don’t need to repeat them again.
   
2. The aggravating and the mitigating factors have been submitted by the prosecution and defence so no need for me to repeat them again. I agreed with perhaps most of them.
   
3. The common theme that I need to stress is despite his actions are inappropriate, the assault charges were committed against his own wife and arouse from a domestic relationship setting. Both of them already settled this matter and his wife had been visiting him at Rove as indicting her desire for him to return back to their family and children. Since most of the charges are domestic violence case and taking into account that both of them had already reconciled, the court must where possible facilitate their early reunion so that they live normally back in their marital relationship. When sentencing cases like this, principles of retribution and general deterrence may be of less significance but on rehabilitation so that the offender may mould his character and behaviours whilst living with his partner in their community.
   
4. However, wife beating is very common and husbands should not see wives as mere objects to satisfy their anger/grudges but as previous souls in our society. The court is part of partial of the institution that play an active role in the elimination of violence against women.
   
5. The accused needs to manage his anger as it appeared that he is very quick to resort to violence against his wife as revealed from the facts. Hence, I recommend that if there is a chance of attending anger management courses then he should make use of any available opportunity for counselling purposes.
   
6. In my view, the sentence should be concurrent since the assault charges being the most serious ones were committed against same victim.
   
7. I have to consider his case on each own set of facts and impose the following sentences:
   
   • Common assault – (3^rd Feb 2010) – 2 months imprisonment
   • ACABH (13/3/20110) – 6 months imprisonment
   • ACABH (1/12/2013) – 9 months imprisonment
   • Intimidation and molestation (10^th February 2017) – 3 months imprisonment
   • Drunk and disorderly – 1 month
     
8. 9 months concurrent sentence to be served by the accused.
   
9. Reduced 1 month from this sentence to reflect the delay occasioned in this case. 8 months imprisonment is imposed.
   
10. This sentence will commence on the date he was taken by police into custody.
    

...........................................................................
THE COURT
Augustine Aulanga – Principal Magistrate