Regina v Tamana [2017] SBMC 56; Criminal Case 131 of 2017 (14 November 2017)

IN THE CENTRAL MAGISTRATE’S COURT
OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 131 & 473 of 2017

REGINA

V

ROLLAND TAMANA

Date of sentencing hearing: November 8, 2017
Date of sentence: November 14, 2017

Mr. D. Tepai for the prosecution
Accused in person

SENTENCE

1. The accused has pleaded guilty to a number of offences he committed in 2016 and 2017. In 2016, he committed the offence of common assault and threatening violence against his former partner Ms. Margaret Daiwo. These involved the shooting of the victim with a kitchen knife but was missed and utterance of threatening words that he would kill her or her family with an axe. These took place on 30^th of July 2016 at their residence at fishing village in Honiara.
   
2. In 2017, he swore at the same victim, Ms. Daiwao, through phone call here in Honiara using foul words against his father. This occurred on 5^th of January. Again on 8^th of April, he burned her cloths including their children’s cloths. The value of the cloths was $150. On 14^th of April, he threw a stick broom at another victim or his current partner Ms. Mary Maeasi and at the same time attempted to throw a pot of cooked rice at her. These took place at their residence at fishing village here in Honiara.
   
3. Those are essentially the summary of facts for all these offences.
   
4. It is clear that these incidences arouse from domestic disputes. The causes of these emanated mainly from lack of cooperation between the accused and the victims as wife and husband and at one instance from drunkenness. Although there are not that serious or life threatening, they started to grow in numbers to the point that they are not acceptable to the victims. The accused as the head of his family should exercise common sense in some of the incidences since the throwing of the broom and the burning of the cloths for example are unnecessary and should not ever happen at all. I also noted that some of the incidences occurred in front of the children which is not good. Domestic violence should not be committed in the presence of the child for fear that the child will develop anger and other negative behaviours and attitudes copied from their parents at a young age.
   
5. I take into account that he has 6 children who depended on him. His eldest daughter is currently under medical treatment. Also, he is the only one in his family who looks after his mother who is now old and mentally retarded. He said that he is the only one who would take proper car of her and provide her with food and other necessities. I also noted that he has already paid $400 to Margaret Daiwo and $100 to Mary Maeasi as compensation. These reflected his own sorry for the harm and hurtful feelings he caused to the two victims not only by mere apology but through giving of money which is the usual form of appeasing the victims of any crime.
   
6. I take all these factors into account and give him full credit for this.
   
7. For the common assault charge, it has a maximum penalty of 1 year imprisonment. For the threatening violence, it has the same maximum penalty. For the using abusive words, it has a maximum penalty of fine of $1000 or 1 month imprisonment. For the domestic violence charge, it has a maximum penalty of $30,000 or 3 years imprisonment.
   
8. For the common assault charge, it does not involve any physical contact but only a throwing of a kitchen knife that somehow missed Margaret. The victim did not sustain any physical injury in other words. For the threatening violence, the victim at the very least was threatened by the accused that he would use the axe to kill her or any of his family member so there is no issue about that. The most serious offences of these are the two domestic violence offending which involve the burning of the cloths valued at only $150 and the throwing the broom at her current wife.
   
9. So what should be the appropriate sentence for an offending that involves the throwing of a kitchen knife but missed the victim or swearing and threatening of the victim or the throwing of a broom at the victim or the burning of the cloths valued $150. Is it really need custodial sentence? I would say no to almost all of them. In my view, the nature and the gravity of these offences are at the bottom scale of the structure of each offence so the sentence that fits well the accused are as follows:
   
   • (i) Common assault contrary to section 244 of the Penal Code – imposed good behaviour bond for $300 for 6 months.
   • (ii) Threatening violence contrary to section 89 of the Penal Code - imposed good behaviour bond for $300 for 6 months.
   • (iii) Using abusive words contrary to section 178 (n) of the Penal Code - imposed good behaviour bond for $200 for 6 months.
   • (iv) Domestic violence (burning of cloths) contrary to section 4 (1) (c) and section 58 of the Family Protection Act - imposed good behaviour bond for $1000 for 1 year.
   • (v) Domestic violence (throwing of broom at victim) contrary to section 4 (1) (a) and section 58 of the Family Protection Act – imposed 1 month imprisonment. Having spent 18 days in custody, I order that he is to be released forthwith at the rising of the Court. This sentence equates his offending since the victim at the least suffered pain as a result the broom landed at her body.
     
10. The sentences imposed herein should be a warning to the accused since by committing again the same or further offence in future against the same victims, he will continue to be imprisoned.
    
11. Right of appeal applies to any aggrieved party.
    
12. Order accordingly.
    

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE COURT
Augustine Aulanga – Principal Magistrate