Public Prosecutor v Wotu [2009] VUSC 89; Criminal Case 82 of 2009 (23 September 2009)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU
(Criminal Jurisdiction)

Criminal Case No 82 of 2009

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

V

REUBEN WOTU

Mr. Tevi for the State
Defendant in person

SENTENCE

Reuben Wotu, you appear for sentence, having pleaded guilty to one charge of incest, the maximum term of imprisonment for that is that of 10 years.

I record that I’ve read the pre-sentence report which sets out your background and has within it a comment from your de facto partner for 22 years. The content of which I have conveyed to you and given you the opportunity to comment upon it and the report itself accepts that it is inevitable that a term of imprisonment is imposed and draws to my attention as judge the submission from the Prosecutor of your prior conviction which is of some importance.

But I need to cover firstly the fact that you were represented by counsel when you entered your plea. When you entered your plea I indicated that I required an agreed statement of facts. That was not forthcoming and I then indicated to counsel that I would proceed to sentence you on the basis of your statement and the eye witness accounts which by inference observed you having sexual intercourse with your daughter.

Of importance is the statement made by yourself particularly the passage that I record I have put to you which was "I love my daughter Helen more than her mother, that’s why I have sex with her. If there is no law against this I would take her as my wife because it says in the book of James in the Bible on the New Testament that you keep all the laws but if you break one of them that means you break all the laws."

The passage that I put to you was the confirmation that you’re engaged in regular sexual conduct with your daughter.

The summary of facts provides in it the relevance of those features drawn from the independent eye witnesses and of course your statement containing specific and such detail that only the parties involved in it would be aware of its content.

The principles in respect of sentencing for incest are contained within the decision placed before me of the Court of Appeal of Vanuatu in Public Prosecutor v. Bae Appeal Case 3 of 2003. Within which there was comment (page 2)"The principles are simple. Parents who use their children for their own sexual gratification will go to prison. It is almost impossible to imagine circumstances in which that will not be the necessary response. This Court will anticipate that it will only be in the most truly exceptional circumstances which are clearly and unequivocally demonstrated to exist that this will not apply".

I say to you quite clearly, you have completely misunderstood your obligation to your daughter. The obligation of a parent certainly is to love and care for a child but not to use her for the purpose of sexual gratification; for the period of time that is reflected here, and for the consequences on the child.

The starting point set out in the case I have referred to is approximately 5 years but of course it depends on the circumstances and the basis of that is a sentence of 3 to 5 years would have withstood an appeal which was specifically mentioned.

The lengthy time I record which you were allowed to address the Court for approximately 50 minutes gave you the opportunity without the benefit of counsel to place before the Court your personal circumstances for which you should receive considerable credit, indicated to the Court the background of your service to the community, in the police force and in the 1980 rebellion, and you are somewhat concerned that of all the other soldiers (my term not yours) all received medals but not you.

You spoke of your physical and athletic achievements for being three times golden boy of Vanuatu, twice being in the semi-finals at the Commonwealth Games in 200 and 400 meters. I express my reservation about your time of 20 seconds being the time that you ran at the 200 meters but I accept the 48 seconds. The 20 seconds seems to be very close to the world record recently broken. But in any event that’s a matter of background and in addition you went to Edinburgh Scotland in July 1986 as a Vanuatu ambassador.

You emphasized that you were involved in commercial activities in respect of limestone and nickel timber project and tourism that you anticipate would bring income in the future.

I balance that against my question to you as to whether or not you are in a position to make compensation to your daughter for the very serious wrong you have imposed upon her. Your response was that she would receive land in due course together with other family members.

You spoke and went from Adam and Eve in the Bible, comment by the Chief Justice which is no doubt drawn which I indicated to you of Christ showing the coin when He was questioned about the obligation to God and the State and He showed them the coin and said "render to Caesar what is Caesar and render to God what is God’s" a comment that is moved to a different perspective by the Chief Justice recently which attracted your interest. You also spoke of Adam and Eve and the beginning.

What you completely failed to do was to make any mention at all in my view of the wrong and the apology that is due to your daughter that you have abused. You failed to show any remorse with the impact of your conduct upon this very young child who was entirely in your care.

You are a person and in this instance should receive credit for your contribution to the community but also that needs to be balanced against your prior conviction, the period of time over which this offending occurred and your complete lack of insight into your obligation as a parent.

I feel sad indeed that you have no insight at all into your obligation to this young child other than as a person of sexual attraction which you describe in your statement to the police as love. I record that I questioned the translator whether the correct interpretation of the word should be "lust" which is an entirely different concept but I am told that the word is the same in bislama but it depends upon context for the translation.

Against the background of a maximum of 10 years imprisonment having regard to your prior conviction in 1996 for unlawful sexual intercourse two counts and two counts of rape when you were sentenced to 8 years imprisonment. I need to take that into account, I need to take into account the length of time of the conduct and as I previously indicated the consequences upon the complainant.

You should receive credit for your plea of guilty which saved the complainant the stress (which is at a very high level for people that are asked to come to Court and before strangers give detail of sexual activity which is extremely sensitive) and the consequence to them is frequently worse than the incident itself. I’m giving you credit for those features particularly the guilty plea I endeavor to balance in there of course your public service but fixing that maximum term against you that I give you a 3 years discount from the maximum. I regard this as a very serious case and I regard as a serious aggravating feature your complete lack of insight into your obligations as a parent. You are sentenced to 7 years imprisonment.

You have 14 days to appeal my decision.

DATED at Port Vila, this 23th day of September 2009.

BY THE COURT

J. CLAPHAM
Judge.