IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LABASA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. HAC 046 of 2018

STATE

V

JOSESE BALE

Counsel:	Mrs. A. Vavadakua for the State
		Miss K. Boseiwaqa (L.A.C.) for the Accused

Date of Hearing	:	16 April 2019
Date of Sentence	: 	18 April 2019

SENTENCE

1.	The  accused has  entered a plea of  guilty  in  this Court  to the 	following count:

Statement of Offence

	MURDER: Contrary to section 237 of the Crimes Act 2009.

Particulars of Offence

	JOSESE BALE on the 10th day of June 2018 at Dreketi Village, 	in Taveuni in the Northern Division murder ADI EMA 	MARAMANIKAISA WAIEKE GOLEA.
2.	A relevant set of facts was read to the accused and on 	agreement to those facts he was convicted of the charge.

3.	The facts are that the accused and his wife (the deceased) lived 	in the deceased’s village in Somosomo, Taveuni with three 	children of the marriage (Aged 15, 12 and 11.) Another child 	aged 17 was away at a boarding school. 

4. 	On the 10th June 2018, the mother and her three children had 	gone to a celebratory lunch at a neighbour’s house. The father 	(accused) stayed home drinking alcohol which he had been 	doing since the evening before. 

5. 	After the lunch the mother (deceased) returned home and a 	heated argument broke out between her and the accused. 

6. 	When the 11 year old son returned home at 2pm he heard the 	argument still going and saw his father fetch his pig hunting 	knife. Being alarmed, the boy ran to the neighbour to get his 12 	year old brother and the two boys ran back home to see their 	father with the knife in his hands standing over their mother. 	The room was covered in blood. 

7. 	The boys screamed and begged their father to stop. The accused 	chased the boys out of the house.

8.	The accused had earlier broken down the door of their bedroom 	in which the deceased had locked herself. He then used the 	knife to stab her body 16 times. He slashed her face near the 	eye and stabbed her chest rupturing her lungs. He stabbed her 	stomach and heels. It was after this frenzied attack that the 	boys saw their mother motionless lying in a pool of blood. 

9. 	The accused then called out to neighbours asking them to call 	the Police. He approached a good friend of his wife telling her he 	had just killed his wife and asking her to look after the children  	because he was not sure how long he would be away for. 

10. 	The villagers rushed the deceased to the local hospital but her 	situation was hopeless. She was pronounced dead by a medical 	officer at 1603h on that day (10 June ’18).

11. 	A post mortem examination report concluded that the cause of   	death was excessive loss of blood caused by multiple stab and 	slash wounds.

12. 	The accused is 39 years old and had been a farmer earning less 	than $100 per week. The family had no other income.

13. 	In mitigation, his Counsel stresses his remorse and his plea of     	guilty. He is said to have acted in provocation of rumours of an   	affair his wife was having. 

14. 	He has one previous conviction for assault in 2010.

15. 	The mandatory penalty for murder is life imprisonment and is 	indeed the sentence that I pass.

16. 	Section 237 of the Crimes Act however does give the Court the 	power to set a minimum term to be served before the convict 	can apply for pardon.

17. 	In assessing the minimum term, the Court does not follow the 	usual sentencing procedures by allowing for time spent in 	remand. (See the dicta of Calanchini P. in Priya Darshani 	(AAU0064of 2014). It is not for this court to usurp the function 	of the Mercy Commission if and when it is assessing a 	prisoner’s application for pardon. 

18. 	This Court is not convinced by the plea of great remorse. When 	the horrific facts were read to the accused it was remarkable 	that the accused remained stoic and stony Faced. 

19.	Of value to the accused is his early (but not earliest) plea of 	guilty which plea saved his boys from what would have been a 	devastating experience to relive the trauma by giving evidence.

20. 	It is the fate of the children that has exercised the mind of this 	sentencing court more than anything else. They have each 	dictated victim impact reports to a social worker and they make 	poignant and pathetic reading. The children obviously loved 	their mother very much; each refers to her loving guidance both 	morally and educationally and each says that he/she cannot 	stop thinking about her. 

21. 	The accused’s first thoughts after the murderous act was of his 	children and their welfare when he sought shelter for them in 	the village, but this thoughtful act is far outweighed by the loss 	of both parents to those children; a loss that has been suddenly 	precipitated by this crime. Nevertheless there has to be some 	hope extended to the accused that he may one day see his 	children marry and produce children of their own.

22. 	The Court imposes a minimum term of 16 years to be served 	before he is eligible to make application for parole. The 	minimum would have been more were it not for the guilty plea 	and the consequent tragedy of his deprivation of his children’s’ 	teenage years and their deprivation of his loving care. 

Orders:

1.	The accused is sentenced to life imprisonment
2.	He is to serve a minimum term of 16 years.

P.K. Madigan
Judge

At Labasa
18 April 2019