Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Fiji

State v Vakanawakoro [2011] FJHC 735; HAC179.2010 (21 October 2011)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO.: HAC 179 OF 2010

BETWEEN:

THE STATE

AND:

JOSEVA VAKANAWAKORO

Counsel: Ms. L. Tabuakuro for the State
Accused In Person

Date of Summing Up: 20th October 2011

Date of Judgment: 21st October 2011

JUDGMENT

1. Trial against the Accused above named commenced on the 17th and concluded on the 20th October 2011. All three assessors unanimously found the Accused guilty on both Counts namely Aggravated Robbery and Theft punishable under Sections 311 (1) (a) and 291 of the Crimes Decree respectively.
   
2. I adjourned overnight to consider my judgment.
   
3. I direct myself in accordance with law and the evidence which I discussed in my summing up to the Assessors.
   
4. There are two charges against the Accused. The first Count was Aggravated Robbery punishable under section 311 (1) (a) of the Crimes Decree.
   
5. The second Count was Theft punishable under section 291 of the Crimes Decree. In both Counts the Prosecution should prove all elements beyond reasonable doubt.
   
6. Considering the agreed facts and the evidence before this Court, it appears that both parties have agreed that all elements except the identity of the Accused are proved.
   
7. The only factor need to be proved is that this Accused committed the said offences. The 1st witness for the Prosecution Ms. Sulueti Raluve, who was an eye witness gave evidence and said that this Accused was there together with another person. She had not seen the accused persons taking money or phone from the virtual complainant but she had seen these two came entered the office of Krishneel Nand thereafter they drove away the vehicle in question. This witness initially described the features of the Accused persons to the police within 20 minutes from the incident thereafter she had identified this Accused in an identification parade. Further she had identified the Accused in this Court also. Considering the nature of the evidence and her demeanour I do not find she is a witness who is giving evidence on an agenda. Considering all I accept the evidence of this witness.
   
8. Considering the defence evidence of alibi in the light of the eye witness's evidence I find those evidence are unacceptable.
   
9. Considering all the evidence before this Court I find the Prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.
   
10. I find the verdict of the assessors were not perverse. It was opened to them to reach such a conclusion on the evidence. I accept their verdict.
    
11. After carefully considering all I find the Accused is guilty on both Counts.
    
12. Accordingly I convict the Accused Joseva Vakanawakoro for Aggravated Robbery and Theft punishable under section 311 (1) (a) and 291 of the Crimes Decree respectively.
    

S Thurairaja
Judge

At Suva

Solicitors
Office of the Director of Public Prosecution for State
Accused In Person