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

R v Ba'angaika [2023] SBHC 34; HCSI-CRC 6 of 2019 (27 March 2023)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 6 of 2019

REX

V

PAUL BA’ANGAIKA

Date of Hearing: 27 March 2023
Date of Decision: 27 March 2023

Ms H Naqu for the Crown
The Defendant in Person

Lawry; PJ

SENTENCE

Introduction

1. Paul Ba’angaika you have been found guilty to one count of attempted rape contrary to section 136 F(3)(a) of the Penal Code as amended by section 5 of the Penal Code (Amendment)(Sexual Offences) Act 2016. The maximum penalty for an offence against section 136F(3)(a) is twenty years imprisonment as you were over 18 years at the time and the victim was only 13 years old. You now appear for sentence.

Facts

2. The victim lived with her aunt. You are related to the husband of her aunt. On 19 September 2016 when the victim and her cousin brother were going to buy a tin of fish you met them, and took her to an area close by where you hugged her, tried to kiss her. You pulled up her shirt and touched her breast. You removed her trousers, she wore another pair of trousers underneath those. You started to undo those trousers when you were disturbed by her aunt. You ran off.
3. You were arrested later that night. You were held in custody until you were granted bail on 22 January 2019. You had been committed to the High Court for trial on 11 July 2017 but the Director of Public Prosecutions did not file an information against you until January 2019. You have then had to wait a further 4 years for your trial. After you were convicted you were remanded in custody. Your sentence was deferred as your counsel did not appear on Thursday 23 March 2023. The sentencing submissions were deferred until today Monday 27 March 2023. Your counsel has travelled to Marau and has not filed submissions. You have requested that I proceed to sentence you today and I have received sentencing submissions from the prosecution and have heard what you wished to say on your own behalf.
4. You are now aged 29 years. You have expressed remorse for your conduct and you have recognised the shame you feel you have brought on yourself and your family. You have apologised for what you did to the victim.
5. The Crown has pointed to the age difference between you and the victim, the fact that you were an adult relative of the husband of the victim’s aunt and submits that as such there is a degree of breach of trust. I do not consider you used greater force than was necessary to attempt to complete your offending. Although you had been drinking I cannot say how much you were affected by the alcohol as it appears to attended a function later that evening. The offending was at night probably around 8.45pm. I am satisfied that the victim was traumatised by your offending. The Court recognises the long term harm that is caused by the sexual abuse of a child.
6. I accept that the offending had no pre-planning. You were then a relatively young man at 22 years. You had no previous convictions and have expressed remorse. You have very clearly recognised the effect of your offending on your family. You have apologised for what you did.
7. In imposing sentence I recognise that before you were granted bail you had spent a little over 2 years and 4 months on remand and that 18 months of that time you had been on remand after committal for trial without the Office of the Director of Prosecutions filing an Information against you. You have then had to wait a further 4 years before your trial.
8. In imposing sentence I recognise the need for both specific and general deterrence. The community must know that those who prey on children for their own sexual desires will face terms of imprisonment.
9. The Crown has referred the Court to the leading authority for charges such as yours. That is R v Ligiau and Dori [1986] SBHC 15. There were two offenders and for the second of those, who was convicted of attempted rape a sentence of 5 years imprisonment was imposed.
10. In R v Natei [2022] SBHC 9 the Court took a starting point of 4 years imprisonment, increasing that by 12 months to take account of aggravating factors and then made a reduction of 2 years because of the delay involved. A final sentence of 3 years was imposed. I regard the facts of that case as more serious than yours as there were two offenders, and the facts were a little more serious. In R v Poka [2019] SBHC 94, a 25 year old pleaded guilty to the attempted rape of a 13 year old girl. A sentence of 3 years imprisonment was regarded as appropriate.
11. I bear in mind that in a case of attempted rape circumstances can differ significantly. I must impose a sentence of imprisonment to bring home to you and others how devastating such offending can be.
12. In your case, I take a starting point of 4 years imprisonment. I do not consider that the matters raised by the Crown warrant an increase in that starting point with the exception of the traumatic effect that your offending must have had on the victim. I make an increase of 6 months. That means a sentence of 4 years and 6 months imprisonment before considering mitigating factors.
13. For your previous good character and your expressed remorse, I reduce the sentence by 10 months. For the delay in filing an information while you remained in custody and the further four year delay in your case being able to be heard I reduce the sentence by a further 15 months.
14. That leaves a final sentence of 2 years and 5 months imprisonment. You were on remand for 2 years and 4 months and have been on remand since your conviction. I therefore direct that you have served your sentence and that you are to be released at the rising of the Court.

Orders

15. The Accused is convicted and sentenced to two years and 5 months’ imprisonment. That sentence is deemed to have been served. The Defendant is to be released at the rising of the Court.
16. The name and any identification of the complainant are permanently suppressed.

By the Court
Hon. Justice Howard Lawry PJ