Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Papua New Guinea District Court

State v Salio [2005] PGDC 1; DC97 (1 January 2005)

DC97
PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE]

CASE NO CR 48, 49 OF 2005

THE STATE

AND

WORRIK SALIO
First Defendant

MOSES MAINO
Second Defendant

CHARGE
Unlawful Assault
Contravening Section 6 (3) Summary Offences Act.

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Both defendants were arrested and charged by Angoram Police (Constable Caspar Waisu) on the 22nd September, 2005 for the alleged assault of Father Lawrence (a Catholic Priest) at Angoram on the 19th of the same months (September).

(1) Moses Maino

On the 22nd September, 2006 only defendant Moses Maino appeared in custody at Wewak (Dagua Road) District Court and the defendant, Worrik Salio never appeared. Moses Maino pleaded not guilty and K100.00 cash bail was allowed by Court (Magistrate Susame) then.

On the next hearing date (01/11/05) Moses Maino did not appear and case was further adjourned to 15/11/2005. Then the Court made adjournments on 15th, 16th November, 2005 still Moses Maino never appeared while on K100.00 cash Bail.

On the 8th December, 2005 (next adjournment date) Moses Maino failed again to appear. Defendant was arrested under Bench (Arrest) Warrant early December and placed behind the bars at Boram. He was remanded until sentence for absconding his bail condition to appear in Court.

(2) Worrik Salio

On the 28th September, 2005 Worrik Salio failed to appear before the District Court (Dagua Road) at Wewak. Case was stood over to 03/10/05 and he also failed to appear.

On the 07/10/05, (next adjourned date), 10/10/05, 11/10/05, again Worrik Salio failed to respond. Then a Bench Warrant was issued against him. For reasons only known to Police at Angoram, both defendants, Moses Maino and Worrik Salio were not arrested. These defendants have been all the time residents of Angoram Township itself.

The two (2) cases were removed to Angoram for hearing there on 28th November, 2005 because the defendants were town residents and were believed on bail. Then they both did not appear so the cases were transferred back to Wewak.

Eventually both defendants were locked behind the bars due to Bench Warrants been issued against each of them.

For Worrik Salio, Police never arrested him until being arrested under a Warrant issued on 08/12/05 because the Warrant issued in Wewak on the order (by Magistrate Susame) was never accounted for. (See Court Order for Warrant Arrest dated 11/10/05).

The Wewak District Court (Singomat) then issued a Court Summons to both the Arresting Officer (C. Waisu) and the (Verbal Summons) to Salio Waipo (father of Worrik Salio) to appear before the Court and explain why the defendant Worrik Salio was still not appearing in Court with the full knowledge of both of this men (C. Waisu and Salio Waipo). The Court then on 28th November, 2005 at Angoram adjourned and transferred the case to Wewak for trial on 18th December, 2005.

On the 06th January, 2006 Caspar Waisu and Salio Waipo appeared before Wewak District Court and were cautioned to bring Worrik Salio to Court on 18/01/06. On the 18/01/06, Worrik Salio first appeared for his case (1st appearance) since 22nd September, 2005. After taking plea, the Wewak District Court remanded Worrik Salio for reason of absconding his bail condition to appear before the Court on many adjourned dates specified above.

Court conducted trial for both defendants on 18th January, 2006 and adjourned to 24th January, 2006 for continued hearing. So both defendants remained in custody until been sentenced by the Court.

Request for Leave of Court to Appear by T. Manei.

Request for Leave of Court to appear by T. Manei was refused. Mr Manei briefly appeared not properly attired (with betelnut in his mouth) during the middle of a testimony, by Prosecution Witness and the Court refused to grant Leave of Court because as a Legal Practitioner he needed to have a current Practicing Certificate (which he did not have).

Note: Bail was allowed to the defendants but they each absconded so the Court could not release them again because the Court had its discretion not to release such persons (again) on bail.

I certify this to be the exact minutes of Court Proceedings.

JEREMIAH SINGOMAT

Senior District Court Magistrate