Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

Regina v Awa [2005] SBHC 58; HCSI-CRC 001 of 2003 (14 April 2005)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Criminal Case Number 001 of 2003

REGINA

-v-

SIMON TOHUBO AWA, EDWIN WAITEINAOMAE WAHU
AND SANIEL AWA

High Court of Solomon Islands
(Palmer CJ)

Date of Hearing: 14^th April 2005
Date of Judgment: 14^th April 2005

J. Cauchi (Director of Public Prosecutions) for the Crown
S. Baker for the Defendants

Palmer CJ: The Three Defendants were initially charged with the murder of Rocky Kereta’ai tried and convicted on 6^th December 2002. They appealed to the Court of Appeal and were successful in having the matter remitted to the High Court for re-trial. At the re-hearing, the original charge for murder was withdrawn and substituted with a lesser charge of manslaughter. The three Defendants were re-arraigned. Simon Awa and Edwin Wahu entered guilty pleas, Saniel Awa pleaded not guilty to the charge.

Saniel Awa was released on bail on his own recognisance of $500.00 with conditions to appear at trial at a time to be fixed. Those conditions included to reside with his uncle Robert Sulinae at Mbua Valley, to report to Kukum Police Station between 8.00 – 4.00 p.m each Friday and not to contact or communicate with any of the witnesses. A call over date has been fixed for that case for 29^th April 2005 at 3.30 pm.

Mr. Baker for Simon Awa and Edwin Wahu (“the Defendants”) has presented a powerful mitigation on behalf of the Defendants. The circumstances giving rise to the death of the victim (“the Deceased”) were tragic and unfortunate. It arose out of an argument with another accused Moses Haitalemae over what were termed customary offences but then spiralled out of control resulting in the Defendants getting involved. Alcohol obviously played a part in the melee. The Defendants were provoked by the swearing of the Deceased and got involved in the fight which occurred over some distance. There were attempts by others to control the fight but these were unsuccessful. There appear to be some timber and rocks thrown into the scene. I accept that the fracas was not the making of these Defendants. I accept that they have no previous offences and that this happened to a one off incident. It had an unfortunate and tragic ending though in the death of the Deceased. I note there was no continuous bashing or kicking of the Deceased and that the most likely cause of death was intracranial bleeding secondary to the head injury. The evidence did also reveal that the Defendants or at least one of them was wearing stockman type boots which would have been capable of delivering quite severe injuries when delivered with a strong kick to any part of the body. I note in mitigation that apart from the few blows there was no incessant attack on the Deceased.

I note also the report of the Defendants whilst in prison has been favourable. They had undertaken courses whilst in prison and had not gotten involved in any riotous behaviours that had occurred during their time of remand. I accept their remorse and that some form of compensation and reconciliation had been conducted. No weapons were used though the attack was by a group of men. Taking all factors into account, an appropriate sentence is one of four years. The period spent in custody to be taken into account. In view of the fact that a substantial part of the sentence has already been served, the Defendants are to be released at the rising of the court.

THE COURT