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

State v Rabakoko [2007] FJMC 30; Criminal Case No 1189 of 2007 (7 December 2007)

IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT
AT SUVA

Criminal Case No. 1189 of 2007

STATE

V

SEMISI RABAKOKO

Before Ajmal Gulab Khan Esq
Resident Magistrate

Date of Hearing: 26/11/07
Date of Judgment: 07/12/07

Prosecution: IP. Talakubu
Accused: In Person.

JUDGMENT

The accused has been charged with Robbery with Violence contrary to section 293 1(b) of the Penal Code.

Particulars are on 1st July 2007 he robbed the BP Service Station at Reservoir Road and stole cash $500, Nokia mobile $300, assorted cigarettes $29.20 to total value of $829 and immediately before the robbery used personal violence on cashier Mereia Brown.

The cashier of B.P.’s Service Station was on duty at 8am at Reservoir road. She was in the shop and a Bowser assistant was on duty. Group of youths came and one asked for chewing gums. The other one opened a locked door by force. They threw stones and bottles to break the glass door open. Two youths pushed aside the cashier. One grabbed her head and pushed it downwards so she was in a kneeling position. The Bowser assistant ran up the road after he was thrown at with bottles and stones.

The robbers could not open the cash register. They stole mobile, cigarettes and fled with the cash register towards the Suva Cemetery opposite the Service Station.

The cashier rang police. Within minutes the mobile patrol arrived and conducted a search. The cashier had noticed some youths drinking earlier at the cemetery. They smelt of liquor when came to rob. She identified the accused as the person who stole some chocolates and cigarettes that day. She saw him for the 1st time that day. She recollected he had a black t-shirt on with ¾ pants. He came with others from the cemetery side of the road.

The arresting officer went towards Princess Road. He saw a youth trying to evade his car. He ran towards the bushy track. He arrested him. He was the accused. Accused hit him and resisted. Finally he managed to overpower him. Accused threw $22 at constable during arrest. He identified him as the accused. He said he had a black t-shirt on at the time.

He handed him to constable Laisenia at the police station. Constable conducted a caution interview. At trial the accused contested it’s voluntariness but I found it admissible after a voir dire trial. In his caution interview the accused described how he went drinking at Reservoir Road cemetery with 5 others.

He lied about his real name to the police till he was identified by a constable who lives in the same village as the accused. However, he was not charged for giving a false name. But it does put his credibility in suspect.

In defence accused denied everything. He gave an un-sworn statement from dock. He said they drank at the cemetery and others left for service station to steal. He said they finished drinking in the early hours.

He said he was shocked to see the robbery and didn’t know anyone of them except one. He saw them bring the cash register and share the money. Accused also received his share. He said saw police and ran to hide.

I have considered whole of the evidence before court.

The cashier was positive in that accused was the one who stole the cigarettes and some chocolates. She described his clothes which was confirmed by the arresting officer. The accused also gave a correct account of the drinking and his part of the loot. He was seen coming from cemetery side of Reservoir Road with others. When arrested he had the money shared in his possession.

Obviously, no one would have shared the loot if he had not done his share of work during the robbery. The accused also tried to hide when confronted by the arresting officer. If he had nothing to hide, why would he run and hide in the bushy slopes which was known as a popular hiding area for robbers, by the arresting officer.

I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has been properly identified as one of the gang of robbers. He accompanied them and robbed the cashier after threatening her. He shared the loot and fled the scene when he saw police. He was part of the gang with common intent but lied to save himself in court.

I put little weight to his un-sworn statement. His caution interview gives greater details and is more the truth than his evidence in Court.

The accused is found guilty as charged.

Dated this the 7th day of December 2007.

Ajmal Gulab Khan
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE