Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Kiribati

Repulic v Uera [2014] KIHC 11; Criminal Case 36.2013 (5 May 2014)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI 2014
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 36 OF 2013
Held at Kiritimati

BETWEEN

THE REPUBLIC
PROSECUTOR

AND

KOMWATI UERA
ACCUSED

Before: The Hon Chief Justice Sir John Muria

2 May 2014

Mr Taburuea Rubetaake for Prosecutor
Mr Teetua Tewera for Accused

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

Muria CJ: The accused has been charged with attempted murder contrary to section 208(b) of the Penal Code. In the alternative the prosecution also charged him with grievous harm with intent contrary to section 218(a) of the Penal Code. The accused pleaded guilty to the alternative charge of grievous harm with intent.

At the pre-trial conference, the prosecution accepted to proceed with the alternative charge of grievous harm with intent to which the accused pleaded guilty. The prosecution was allowed to amend the particulars of the charge to reflect the elements of the offence under section 218(a) of the Penal Code.

The offence of grievous harm with intent is equally serious as attempted murder. They both carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Depending on the factual circumstances, the Court should treat the two offences as grave offences within the top range of such class of crimes.

The factual circumstances of this case reveal a near-fatal situation to the victim. Following an argument with the victim, the accused seriously assaulted her. The victim fell to the ground. He got on top of the victim and bashed her head with a piece of brick several times. The accused went to the house, took a knife and returned to the victim. He stabbed the victim on her left neck. The victim was bleeding from her injuries. The victim fainted, very weak and near fatal.

The medical report from Dr Harry Tong who examined the victim revealed the seriousness of what happened to the victim, in particular, the injuries she suffered. The doctor's report describing the injuries states as follows:

"Patient's Name: TEAIRO IOANE 05/08/13

History: (1) Knifed on left side neck

(2) Hit on head with rock

Injuries: x 3 lacerations over back of head

x 2 deep bleeding cuts over lower left side of neck. At depth of superior wound sternomastoid muscle and internal jugular vein were severed."

The injuries suffered by the victim were quite serious, in fact near-fatal. They were quite at variance with the magnitude of injuries suffered in the cases referred to by both Counsel.

It has been said that the victim provoked the accused. I do not accept that the victim's action can amount to provocation in this case. But even for argument's sake that the victim's reply to the accused's words provoked the accused, it was insufficient in law to justify the accused's action in assaulting the victim, bashing her head with a piece of brick several times and stabbing her neck severing the stern mastoid muscle and internal jugular vein. The wounds in the neck were deep.

Fortunately the cuts did not reach the main artery. Otherwise the accused would be standing in Court today facing a more serious case.

The accused was in fact already filled with anger about his wife running away from him for five nights. The victim's words were only used by the accused as a means to release his anger.

The case is not about his problem with his wife. It is about his senseless attack on the victim.

The assault on the victim by the accused was fuelled by rage and anger for something that the victim can hardly be blamed for. There can be no justification for the nasty attack on the victim in this case.

The only thing going for the accused in this case is his plea of guilty which I accept has weighed heavily in his favour. His guilty plea has saved the victim the trauma of having to re-live the agony she had gone through.

I also take into account the personal circumstances of the accused as submitted by Mr Tewera. The accused has a wife and children and that his incarceration will affect his family.

At the end of the day, the Court will have to balance the accused's interest as against the seriousness of the offence and interest of society in not condoning such grave actions of the accused. Having done so, the scale tips in favour of a prison sentence. As I have already said, the accused's guilty plea has greatly benefitted him.

The proper sentence, in the circumstances of this case, is one of 4½ years imprisonment with effect from 2 May 2014.

Dated the 5th day of May 2014

SIR JOHN MURIA
Chief Justice