Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback National Court of Papua New Guinea

State v Herman [1997] PGNC 146; N1656 (10 November 1997)

Unreported National Court Decisions

N1656

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO 1027 OF 1997
THE STATE
VS
MARTIN HERMAN, PAULUS MAUTU, LUKE PHILIP BOION, BOLTON DARIUS TAPUNE AND VINCENT BRUDOL

Kimbe

Batari AJ
5 November 1997
10 November 1997

CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Serious assault - Offence committed at night in a home - Maximum or near maximum sentence appropriate.

CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Serious assault - Aggravation and mitigation - Facts considered - Orders of restitution and compensation upon suspended sentences.

Counsel

J. Gah, for the State

L. Mongko, for the Accuseds

SENTENCE

10 November 1997

BATARI AJ: You have each pleaded guilty to one count of serious assault under s. 341 of the Criminal Code. As for your Martin Herman, Paulus Mautu, Mike Philip Boison and Bolton Darius Tapune, you have been charged that on 29 July, 1997 you assaulted Paskalis Talingapua with intent to assault Leomba Talingapua and others. As for you Vincent Brudol, you have been charged that on the same day in question, you assaulted one Joseph Moia Linge with intent to assault Leomba Talingapua and others.

The brief facts for the purpose of sentencing were that on 29 July, 1997 the five of you entered the premises of Andrew Talingapua at Section 10 in Kimbe with intent to assault Leomba Talingapua and others at the house. When you accosted those sitting on the verandah, they fled into the house and closed the doors. The five of you broke down the door and entered the house. Paskalis Talingapua and Joseph Moia Linge intervened but you beat them both up. I do not think it mattered who beat up who as you were all acting together, aiding and abetting each other. The Medical Report showed Talingapua suffered lacerations and abrasions to various parts of his body. He also sustained a knife wound to the back part of his head. Linge on the other hand sustained some 16 points of lacerations and abrasions to various parts of his body. The injuries to both men I think have healed well.

Your offence carries the maximum penalty of three (3) years imprisonment . I have considered a sentence for each of you up to that term. There are features of your case which make it serious enough to call for the maximum or near maximum penalty. You entered a private home in the night and accosted the occupants as they sat on the veranda. When they retreated into the house and the rooms, you broke down the doors in your frantic determination to assault them. The mostly female occupants were literally terrorised. Two men, one of whom elderly, were beaten up while others escaped. There were also indications of assault of sexual nature against the females. There were evidence too that properties were either lost or damaged as a result of that raid.

You must have all been pleased with yourselves after the incident. Breaking the law is not something to be proud of. Your foolish and cowardice behaviour have now caused you and your families hardship, grief and shame. That is the price you must pay. It gives you no excuse to take the law into your own hands if someone had initially committed a wrong against you. One expects in a civilised society that settlement of disputes are through appropriate legitimate ways and not through acts of vegeance or payback. I have heard that you are either a member of the Catholic Church or United Church. When you solve your problems in this way, you bring shame also to your Church and you belittled your faith. I say this because it is morally, ethically and spiritually wrong for Christians to go about seeking revenge against wrongs that others have done them.

I also consider that when homes are invaded in the night by a gang of young people like you the occupants are presented with the most dangerous situation because of the risk to lives and properties which arises. Because of the presence of house-breaking element, thus aggravated your offence and in my view the maximum or near maximum imprisonment sentence is called for.

Your lawyer has urged me to consider a number of factors on your behalf. Except for one of your, I consider that you are all young men. This is the first conviction for all of you. The background, both personal and family of each of you appear normal with no special considerations. Your early admissions of guilt and your pleas of guilty is very much in your favour. Having deliberated those factors for and against you, I concluded that a useful punishment, one which will serve to penalise you and at the same time benefit you will adequately meet the purpose of sentence. In my view, an imprisonment term is called for. I have considered that the penalty must include redress for the properties lost or damaged and redress for the injuries to the victims.

I sentence each of you to a term of two (2) years imprisonment with hard labour. I also order restitution and compensation to the victims in the sum of K2,000.00 apportioned as follows:

(i) &ـ R60; Restitustitution (goods damaged or loss) - K1,600.00

(ii) &#16mpensation ttim Pingapungapua - K 400.00

(iii) Compenn tiovico m J.im J. m J. Ling Linge - K 400.00

I deduct three (3) monnd tw week the spent n custody. You will eacl each serh serve thve the reme remaining one (1) year, eight (8) months and two (2) weeks.

This sentence is wholly suspended on the following conditions:

(a)

(i) Martin Harman upon paymenF of Four Hundred Kina (K400.00) and a promise to be of good behaviour for a period of two (2) years.

(ii) &# P Maayo pK4 a K4 and misd mise to b to be of e of good good behavbehaviour iour for afor a period of two (2) years.

(iii) &##160; P Boisonoison pa ofpa of Four Hundred Kina (K400.00) and a pd a promisromise to e to be of good behaviour for a period of two (2) years.

(iv) ;ټ B Darius Tapune upne upon payment of Four Hunr Hundred dred Kina (K400.00) and a promise to be of good behaviour for a period of 2) years.

(v) ـ&#1incentncent BrudoBrudol upon payment of Four Hund Hundred Kina (K400.00) and a promise to be of good behaviour for a period of 2 years.

(b) &&#160mentybe mabe made to e to the National Court Registry in Kimbe and that evidence of payment and the signed promise to be of Good Behaviour Bond be shown to the CIS Superintendent before re.

Lawyer for the State: Public Prosecutor

Lawyer for the Accused: Latu Lawyers