![]() |
[Home]
[Databases]
[WorldLII]
[Search]
[Feedback]
[Report an error]
[F.A.Q.]
Supreme Court of Vanuatu |
[Recent Decisions] [Noteup] [Download] [Help]
IN
THE SUPREME
COURT
OF THE
REPUBLIC OF
VANUATU
(Criminal
Jurisdiction)
Criminal Case No. 08 of 2004
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
–v-
LESLY JOHN
Coram: Justice
Treston
Mr. Csiba for Public
Prosecutor
Mr. Bartels for
Accused
Date of Sentence: 01
September 2004
SENTENCE
You appear for sentence
today on a charge of rape, which carries with it the possibility of life
imprisonment. You have pleaded guilty
and credit will be given to you for that
in due course. Since you pleaded guilty you have been in custody and that will
also be taken
into account in due
course.
This occurred as alleged
sometime ago in fact when on 17 December 2002, you and the victim, who are both
from South East Ambrym, had
gone to a village for a wedding. The victim's
parents had gone home but she remained and you and she were dancing together.
You decided
you wanted to go outside and you forcibly pulled her by the hand
although she said she did not wish to go. Once outside, you asked
the victim to
have sex with you. She said no but you pushed her and she fell down and you
removed your trousers. Sexual intercourse
then took place and she felt some pain
and after sometime you bit her right arm above her breast. She was bleeding from
her vaginal
area the next day, which led to the incident being noticed, but I
place no significance upon that because it seems she may have not
had sexual
intercourse before.
When
interviewed by the police, you admitted having sexual intercourse with her. You
stated that you had had a significant amount
to drink which was unusual for you.
You conceded that when you asked her to have sex with you, she said no but you
said you went
ahead nevertheless and you said that the bite occurred because it
was simply a reaction by you as a result of what had happened.
She of course had
her clothes removed by you before you had intercourse with her. She said that
she had fears when you were holding
her by the hand and taking her
outside.
The Prosecutor submits
that because of your present age you should be sentenced as an adult. There has
been some investigation carried
out as to your actual age, which for one reason
or another has never been documented by the appropriate authorities. It is now
common
ground that you are now either 17 or 18 years of age which places you at
15 or 16 years of age when the incident and the crime occurred
but it is clear
that there is no bar to you being sentenced as an adult today in this
Court.
The Prosecution in summary
submits to me that as there was a degree of force used in that the victim was
held firmly by the hand and
forced outside and then, on your own admission,
pushed in one way or another onto the ground, that you should be sentenced to 5
years
imprisonment.
Your counsel,
to the contrary, seeks to persuade me that a course other than imprisonment
should be followed. I am reminded that you
were brought here to Port Vila as a
result of the matter more than 12 months ago from your own island and have
remained here since
then on bail conditions until your remand in custody on your
plea of guilty. I am reminded that you have stayed out of trouble. You
are a
first offender and your counsel stresses that on your behalf there has been what
is called a Pre-sentence Psychological Report
prepared by Kylie Powers who has a
BA in Psychology and a post-graduate diploma in Family Therapy Psychology.
Although your counsel
accepts that the report is not necessarily totally in your
favour I am grateful for the report and it gives me some insight into
your
circumstances. It refers to the fact that you are the youngest child in a family
of 5 boys and 1 girl and have had close relationship
with your family. It seems
that prior to you being brought to Vila and prior to your incarceration it was
in fact your responsibility
to care for your parents. In addition in doing that,
it seems you assisted with harvesting of coconuts and the preparation of Kava,
although not on a paid employment basis. You told the psychologist that you had
been in a relationship with the victim for about
six weeks prior to the offence.
There is reference to the alcohol that you had imbibed that evening and the fact
that you accepted
that the victim probably did not agree to have sex until after
you and she had formalized your relationship, even by way of marriage.
The
report highlights the fact that you continued despite the objection of the
victim to the activity. The report refers to fact
that this was your first
sexual and intimate relationship and that you are said to show immaturity,
naiveté and lack of skills
and knowledge in relation to such a
relationship. The assessment really is that you fall in a moderate to low risk
group for sexual
recidivism and there are matters that could assist you by way
of discussion and counselling with senior members of the community.
Unfortunately, as counsel has conceded, there are no formal treatment programmes
for sex offenders here in this country. Although
the report writer has not
qualified herself by way of experience to justify what weight the Court might
put on the report, I am grateful
for it
nevertheless.
Your lawyer stresses
before me, with reference to the appropriate authorities, that there were no
significant aggravating features
here apart from the force that you used to take
the victim outside and to push her onto the ground. I am asked to accept that
you
were forthright and cooperative with the police and that you would have
taken part in a custom settlement under the legislation had
you been able to do
so on your own island. I am asked to consider suspending any sentence of
imprisonment because of your age and
because you are a pubescent adolescent
rather than a man. I am reminded that there could possibly be counsellors
available through
the auspices of the Vanuatu Women's Counsel to assist you with
counselling. It is said by your counsel that the separation from your
family,
the incarceration for the first time and the very experience that you have
undergone would be sufficient to justify the Court
in suspending any sentence of
imprisonment.
When I consider the
question of sentence I must of course take into account the maximum potential
sentence that I have referred to
which is life imprisonment. I must hold you
accountable for the harm done not only to the victim but also to the community
generally.
I need to underline the responsibility that you as a person must have
as a result of the offending. Any sentence must denounce your
conduct and deter
you in particular and other like minded offenders from carrying out that sort of
activity. I need to protect the
community of course but I also need to take into
account your rehabilitation. Although I am not given specific details about the
effect of the crime upon the victim, reading between the lines of her statement
indicates that it has certainly inevitably had some
effect on her. I need to
adopt the least restrictive outcome from your point of view that is
appropriate.
There are some
aggravating features of course including the force that you used in taking the
victim from the dance and in pushing
her onto the grounds despite her telling
you in clear language that she did not want any part in this activity. In saying
that it
seems to have been opportunistic offending rather than premeditated and
as for mitigating factors of course I take into account your
age and I have
already documented that. I give you credit of course for your plea of guilty and
take into account your previous good
character because you are a first
offender.
Significantly however,
there has been no real expression of remorse by you for what happened and to an
extent you are only considering
your position rather than that of the victim.
That may well be because of what was set out in the psychologist's report with
reference
to your inexperience, immaturity and naiveté, but I must
balance aggravating and mitigating factors, one against the
other.
In the decision of
Public
Prosecutor v
Ali
August [2000] VUSC 73; CC14 of 2000 in
this Court the Learned Chief Justice referred to the offence of rape in this
terms:
" The offence of rape is always a serious crime. Other than in wholly exceptional circumstances rape calls for an immediate custodial sentence. This was certainly so in the present case. A custodial sentence is necessary for a variety of reasons. First of all to mark the gravity of the offence. Secondly to emphasis public disapproval. Thirdly to serve as a warning to others. Fourthly to punish the offender, and last by no means least, to protect women"
I
have in fact referred to some of those aspects in my remarks already. The Chief
Justice went on to say:
"For rape committed by an adult without any aggravating or mitigating features a figure of 5 years should be taken as a starting point in a contested case."
Your
counsel seeks to persuade me that you are anything but an adult and that I ought
to deal with you somewhat
differently.
The
August
Case also referred to certain aggravating features and the only one that is
relevant to your case is the force used which was not
at the high end of the
scale. In that case the Chief Justice also said this
"If the Defendant pleads guilty, the sentence should be reduced by one third depending on the circumstances, including the likelihood of a finding of not guilty had the matter being contested."
He also said previous good
character is of a minor relevance. I bear in mind for sentence the principles,
which I have set out as
well as the relevance of those to this jurisdiction as
set out in the Chief Justice's decision. On an arithmetical basis, if I took
the
starting point as 5 years, which it would be for a defended case and reduced it
by one third I would be left with a result of
just under 3 1/2 years. From that
I must deduct the period of six weeks for the time you have already been in
custody and that would
bring the sentence to 3 years 2 and 1/2 months. In fact I
give you a further deduction for your youth, inexperience and naiveté
and
thus I consider that the appropriate sentence is three years
imprisonment.
I consider but
reject the prospect of a suspended sentence because in view of all the factors
that I have referred to, despite your
age etc, I think that that would be
inappropriate. To suspend a sentence in a matter such as this would send out a
completely wrong
message to the inhabitants of this Republic and particularly I
must take into account that women in this country must be protected.
I am
certainly not using you as a scapegoat in way whatsoever for the sins of others
and for the reasons that I have been careful
to point out I have been as
generous as I consider that I am able in your particular circumstances. I agree
that, if it is at all
possible, you should receive counselling within the
prison, if that can be arranged through your counsel, and you may well be able
to enlist the assistance of the Vanuatu Women's Counsel and the male counsellors
which they have access to. That is because I agree
that your rehabilitation is
important but that cannot overshadow what I consider is the appropriate
sentence. I trust and I am sure
that when you are released, you will not be
before the Courts again.
So the
bottom line is that you are today sentenced to three years imprisonment and you
have 14 days to appeal that decision if you
are not satisfied with
it.
A warrant will be prepared and
you will be returned to custody to serve your sentence very
shortly.
I am grateful for the
assistance which counsel have given to this Court in the
matter.
Dated
at PORT VILA, this
01st
day of September 2004
BY THE COURT
P.
I.
TRESTON
Judge
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback|
Report an error
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/cases/VUSC/2004/44.html